PDA

View Full Version : NEW INTERFACE DESIGN: What are Best Practices/ Best Examples?



robertoortiz
08-09-2016, 07:31 AM
Hey guys,
In order to help the conversation I wanted to post a thread to inspire the developers.
In my humble opinion the current interface of Lightwave is due for a mayor overhaul.
So in the era of real time tools what do you guys consider to be the bleeding edge of interface design.
And Please do post examples.


I am looking forward to your posts.

-R

stiff paper
08-09-2016, 08:46 AM
Hey,

In order to help the conversation I wanted to post a reply to inspire you consider that maybe your opinion is just your opinion and nothing more.
In my humble opinion your opinions are usually unjustified nonsense and you're repeatedly pompous and arrogant enough to think your latest thought is so important that you'll just fly in --having taken part in zero discussions in the forum in living memory-- dump your brilliant thought in a thread of its own and watch everybody give thanks for your munificence.

LW's interface is just fine.
Nobody but an idiot would ever want "Bleeding edge" interface design within a thousand miles of anything that has to be used every day to do productive work.
What do you think has a "Good" interface?
Max? I think Max has the worst, most badly designed, ill thought out, nonsensical, arbitrary and inconsistent interface I've ever seen on an otherwise useful tool.
Modo? Modo is in second place, nipping at Max's heels. Utterly dreadful, over-engineered, badly thought out, anti-intuitive rubbish that uses three fourths of the screen for menus and leaves you a miniscule patch in the center to work in. And sideways text? Yeesh. Get out of here.
Maya's interface is better, especially with the newest update. However, it still uses up far, far too much of the screen with buttons, menus and icons, again leaving you with a small patch of useful work area.

I'll just say WORK AREA again and add "See that? That's where you do the work. Don't fill the screen with a bunch of crap that I don't need to see all the time." By this measure LightWave has the best interface design of any 3D suite by a very long way.

If I were to ask for anything specific to do with LW's interface it's that a dropdown menu be added that contains a list of "Window layouts" that you can load, save and jump between. Nuke has this. It's nice. That way everybody can arrange the interface how they like for different tasks. And that's all I'd ask for.

If the LW Group adds a lot of the tools and functionality (in many areas) that LW currently lacks then nobody will mention the interface ever again. Because it works.

robertoortiz
08-09-2016, 08:56 AM
Here are some cool bleeding edge interfaces.

Pixar's Presto
133964
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnFSVx7NhmM


DreamWorks Premo
133965
133966
133967
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N16Qsj6kAhw

Norka
08-09-2016, 09:23 AM
Dear LW3DG

Please ignore this dude, and do not, under any circumstances, change the LW interface, at all. It is perfect.

~Norka

SBowie
08-09-2016, 09:31 AM
Hey,

In order to help the conversation I wanted to post a reply to inspire you consider that maybe your opinion is just your opinion and nothing more.
In my humble opinion your opinions are usually unjustified nonsense and you're repeatedly pompous and arrogant enough to ...Hey yourself. :)

How about taking a little time to find ways to express your view of matters without being unnecessarily contentious or making snide personal remarks. No doubt others will return the courtesy. Thanks.

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 09:39 AM
There're HUNDREDS of places the LW UI can be improved-- it reeks of 1990's practices. That #4 says not I can only assume is satire, because nobody is that blind.

Here's a couple:

in situ parameter input-- input dialogs are rather 1988.

Better handling of multiple selections.

Smoother bezier adjustments in the GE, with better handles.

Better, more efficient layout of panels - the Render Globals panel is a travesty.

I could LITERALLY go on for days, and have both here and in the feature request facility of LWG.

Dan Ritchie
08-09-2016, 09:44 AM
It's not so much about how and where you place the buttons. it's about the interactivity, being able to interact quickly with objects on screen and the level of control you have directly over the items, properties and qualities, without having to go to buttons.
For example, it's better to be able to model/paint/move/animate an object directly and interactively.

Kryslin
08-09-2016, 09:52 AM
For the most part, LW's interface is just fine. There are a few shortcomings, and some strangeness, but all in all, it's minimalist approach works well.

LW has lots and lots of workspace, with the menus and tabs taking up just a little but of space (for me, anyway) along the left, bottom, and top of the screen. This, IMHO, is a good thing.

One shortcoming is the large area of used space on the bottom of both layout and modeler (moreso layout than modeler); Why not use that as a docking area for minimized windows (surface editor, image editor, Numeric Panel, Presets Windows, et alia...)? The current setup has them minimizing to the lower left corner, hiding information, and needing to be moved. Another shortcoming is the inability of the font used with tabs and buttons to be resized; this causes all sort of illegibility (With labels on buttons and tabs reduced to "Setu...", "Deta...","Util..." and so on). I understand that this is an issue with the underlying interface SDK, so who knows, maybe it has been replaced along with some of the underlying architecture...?

Some of the longer scrolling lists to need to be addressed; perhaps a search function could be added? Scrolling through a list of 2K items looking for a specific null to change the motion settings on is rather tedious (even a small RHiggit2 rig has a lot of items).

Doubling clicking on nulls, lights and cameras to change their names would be nice.

I, personally, would like the option to have toolbars with icons, but it's not a necessary thing.

I'll ad to this if I can think of anything else...

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 09:53 AM
It's not so much about how and where you place the buttons. <SNIP>
But it's that TOO. :beerchug:


Here's one thing LW does right: having the hotkeys visible AT ALL TIMES (assuming you haven't actually hidden the menus) increases dramatically the speed at which hotkeys are memorized, leading to faster operation in general.

pinkmouse
08-09-2016, 11:28 AM
...I, personally, would like the option to have toolbars with icons...

Noooooooooo!!!

:D

Spinland
08-09-2016, 11:31 AM
One word: trueSpace. Now excuse me while I run for my life. ;D

ActionBob
08-09-2016, 11:42 AM
Two words: Scenery Animator (Amiga version).

Oedo 808
08-09-2016, 11:44 AM
Burn the heretics!

And try not to breathe in the crazy :jester:

ActionBob
08-09-2016, 11:49 AM
In all seriousness, I like the LW interface. It really doesn't "influence" me on way or the other because the tools I use most often are hot-keyed. I love the open space that allows you to easily see the geometry you are working on.

I am currently learning Houdini and while I appreciate its power, the interface is a little too cluttered with all the tabs, icons and info panels on the side. However, this is kind of a sacrifice you make when everything is done in one window of the app. Now I may get a shoe thrown at me, but that is where I "kind" of like 3D Coats room idea. Different rooms for different tasks. As an app with lots of options, you really do need different rooms to not get overwhelmed by all the options. Too many choices in your face is a bad thing.

Choice is not, but that stuff doesn't always need to be in your face like a bunch of flashing gif animations from 90's webpages; which seems to be the norm in many "modern" 3D apps.

As an interesting aside, Houdini allows for the import of 3D VR paintings done in TiltBrush for the HTC Vive (which I am fortunate to own). I see VR as the ultimate 3D authoring space - where your menu items and tools are at your fingertips at the push of a button. When those items are not needed, it is just you, your brush and creation in room scale VR - pretty damn cool and I can't wait for the maturation of this tech.

-Adrian

Kryslin
08-09-2016, 11:50 AM
Noooooooooo!!!

:D

I see the smiley, so I'll be nice. :)

I did say -option-.

I've been a Rhino user longer than I've been a Lightwave User, and in some instances, I like the toolbars & icons. For most of Lightwave, though, the current buttons work well enough.

I won't mention the console interface - Lord knows how often I've messed up Lightwave by trying to type ZEA...

ActionBob
08-09-2016, 11:55 AM
Burn the heretics!

And try not to breathe in the crazy :jester:

Breath DEEP!!! :-)

Spinland
08-09-2016, 11:56 AM
Breath DEEP!!! :-)

I love the smell of crazy in the morning. :2guns:

Dan Ritchie
08-09-2016, 12:18 PM
So what's your least favorite interface? Blender? Maya? After FX?

pinkmouse
08-09-2016, 12:20 PM
Caligari... :D

Kaptive
08-09-2016, 12:21 PM
The only thing I'd change is to increase customisation, dockable perhaps. But primarily, it's the focus issues that want sorting out so you don't have to hunt for a buried panel.
But overall, I'd want it to appear the same in principle. No icons, text all the way, nice and clean... button spacing is just fine, the font is clear, all good.

Chris S. (Fez)
08-09-2016, 12:31 PM
I would like the interface to be more compatible with Ultra HD Monitors (such as controls to gracefully increase font size etc.).

Spinland
08-09-2016, 12:53 PM
Seriously, personally I'm good as is for the most part. I customized the shite out of my menu tabs so everything is where I expect it to be and I'm quite content. If I had one idea it would be, as said upstream, letting the menu panels be retractable so when I want I could have nothing but pure, uncluttered workspace until I need a button.

- - - Updated - - -

My favorite GUI? Rhino 4. Go figure, huh? Out of the box I've always found it to be clean and intuitive and I love the default mouse behavior.

stiff paper
08-09-2016, 01:28 PM
@SBowie
Yes. Very sorry for my misbehavior. It was neither polite nor clever. My only defense is momentary insanity prompted by the OP having been popping in here once every six months to hit a pose and soapbox in exactly the same way for the past several years. I know it's no excuse. I am hostile and ornery. Again, I apologise.

@JEric
He seems pretty clear it's about interface design, as in pretty visuals. He's even posted some nice pictures. Most of your examples seem to be more about functionality rather than how "modern" it all looks. I would never argue that improvements aren't needed in functionality.

What's amazing is that he's posted pictures of Dreamworks Premo, which I invite everybody to look at. It has the odd splash of color, something that LW currently shies away from but has had in the past and may again in the future, but other than that it's all plain gray (just like LW), text in buttons (just like LW), a handful of tiny icons for things like move and magnify (just like LW) and it even has tabs that function just like LW's. That's because it's a professional tool used by people who have work to do, and not a toy.

So, to recap: OP complains that LW's interface needs to change to be more "modern" and then shows examples of interfaces that are just like LW's current interface and have not a single thing in common with Maya, 3ds Max et al.

Does shrugging make a sound? Imagine that sound now. Really loud.

Prince Charming
08-09-2016, 01:40 PM
@SBowie
My only defense is momentary insanity prompted by the OP having been popping in here once every six months to hit a pose and soapbox in exactly the same way for the past several years. I know it's no excuse. I am hostile and ornery. Again, I apologise.



LOL, I feel your pain... I am convinced he does this on direct behalf of the US governemt. LMFAO!

As far as the interface... I dont have a huge problem with the way it looks, but the functionality is probably the worst of any program I have used. I would settle for docking panels and not having to scroll for 5 min with long lists in certain spots.

SBowie
08-09-2016, 01:57 PM
I am hostile and ornery. Again, I apologise.Thanks. I'd not suggest that the topic has not already been mulled over many, many times in these forums over the years, but then again, the same could be said of much that passes here - including criticisms and pet peeves. If we tolerate the latter, only fair to extend the same courtesy the other way, methinks. Anyway, who knows - perhaps someone will submit some wonderful stroke of brilliance that leads us all to peace and harmony in a grand group epiphany of sublime light.

vncnt
08-09-2016, 02:02 PM
Just a few UI related ideas.

- A unified interface that acts like a dockable resizeable multi-track sequencer, combining marker/region management with features from: timeline, graph editor, scene editor, motion mixer, morph mixer. Smooth zoom and pan.
- A search feature that works on every list, for instance by typing on the keyboard (no "search" field needed).
- Navigation buttons that work on every list: top, bottom, page up/down, ...
- A layout manager that can save and reload custom interface presets (dialog locations and size), up to 3 screens.
- User defined stacking of dialogs, accessable via tabs.
- A modeless preview window. The current external preview window needs to be closed before continuing with animation. Oh, and while weīre there, the AVI-sound codec is fantastic, I just wish it could also be used for regular F10 renders. In v2015 AVI-sound is only available for previews.
- A faster method to use OpenGL preview rendering without manually turning off all kinds of overlay graphics that the target audience never should see anyway.
- A first implementation of (multi-touch) touch screens. Yes, they exist. Also for Windows10 desktop pcīs, and they work great for many (but not all) type of interactions.
- A marker (vector) pen, stored per frame, renderable.
- Multiple preview windows for stills + zoom by scroll wheel.

stiff paper
08-09-2016, 02:22 PM
133974

prometheus
08-09-2016, 02:31 PM
I was thinking of posting truespace interface ..just for reference and inspiration?
Or why not go blender style all the way :)

I think my ideal UI would be somewhere a mix of Lightwave as it is today, combined with some modo looks, and some shelf tool graphics and panels as houdini has, plust houdiniīs searchable options.
Modos verticle text labels makes me nauseous, same thing with blender here, I donīt like that.

the biggest annyoyance I have with the UI for the moment and has been for ages, it is no full scalable windows, and that you always have close and restart the program for the UI changes to happen, and also the fact that you can not dock the window modules.
Then there is more to that with how items are listed in long lists without any option to set how they are listed or search for the tools, houdini is superior with itīs tab key and just start typing your letters of the first tool you need, or hover over the categories, geometry, output etc..or view all..which brings up a text and icon table of all the tools, and the good thing is that I do not have to hold any key down, as with lightwave modeler shift ctrl and mouse or middle or left buttons, once I hit tab in houdini..the list stays open till I click outside or select something.

vncnt
08-09-2016, 02:50 PM
To give you an idea about one of my favorite interfaces that has a build-in sequencer.

This is the Propellerhead Reason 9 interface, a virtual sound studio:
133972
There are many music devices with their own interface (as in real life) that can be plugged into the audio or cv or gate streams by pressing the TAB key: the rack will flip to the other side that has (3D-animated) cables. The devices can receive midi data from external control surfaces, presets from/to file, store note data in tracks, have a switch to bypass, and to turn it on or off.
There is a Device/Patch Browser with search facilities, a (undockable) Mixer, a (undockable) Device Rack. The Sequencer has its own toolbar (incl. snap), has a Block mode (to define repeatable pieces that can be used in the Song mode to draw these library pieces into the timeline) and each intrument track can be expanded, set to Solo, can be Muted. Each instrument has an editable label. Each recording is handle as a block, can be layered. The Sequencer handles both midi recordings (note/cv/automation data) and sound recordings. The timeline works with BPM (not frames/fields per second in PAL or ntsc) and understands bars.

This is is an example of the latest Reason feature: the pitch editor:
133973
Notice how well it integrates into the existing sequencer infrastructure: device tracks can still be selected, the original waveform is still visible and it places pieces of the waveform in note form. Each piece is editable: pitch, amplitude, length (constant pitch/formant), vibration intensity, cuts, transitions. While the tempo, current time, zoom/pan, play/record/fast forward/rewind buttons are still available.

Many of these UI concepts can be applied in 3D software too.

Just like Lightwave, Reason is relative inexpensive and it may not conform to "industry standards" in other software packages (like VST plugin support). But it does have a unique UI approach.

VonBon
08-09-2016, 03:09 PM
Collapsing items in a list based on grouping and hierarchy
would be a great improvement.

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 03:37 PM
... the topic has not already been mulled over many, many times in these forums over the years.....
Besides, Steve, the state of the art on UI/UX changes continuously, so the conversation changes. ;)

True, it may be at the same pace as the Catholic liturgy, but...... :ohmy:

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 03:51 PM
So what's your least favorite interface? Blender? Maya? After FX?

Just lately I've been more and more dissatisfied with After Effects: I'm not sure why, since its UI has been static for a long time. It seems to get in my way more now-- it's not HELPING me, it's more hindering...

POUR MOI, software should act like a competent assistant, handing you tools when you need them and staying unobtrusive when you need to do it yourself. This is why I went 'round and 'round with Micheal of DB&W about the g.d. requirement of turning on the colors in the "Create Null" dialog--look, if I'm trying to adjust a color, ipso facto I want it "on". Forcing a click when something is obvious is hinderance, just turning it on is assisting.

Similarly, you USED to have to turn on a, for example, DVD player before hitting PLAY. Now most are smart enough to know that, if you're hitting play, you want the damn thing to turn itself on.

Mostly I concern myself with the small things that make the user experience smooth-- they may not be big and flash, but you use them hundreds of times a day.

It's EASIER to notice the inconsistencies that make you stumble over and over and over and over. The node editor's "fit all" command not jibing with "a/A" in all the rest of the LW UI, for example.

hrgiger
08-09-2016, 04:03 PM
If someone believes the LW interface is fine as is, you really need to get out more.

Spinland
08-09-2016, 04:53 PM
If someone believes the LW interface is fine as is, you really need to get out more.

Wow, really? Do you know anything about, for example, my workflow? How easily I get to what I need when I need it, how I've customized it to fit my style...anything like that? I have a metric shite ton of respect for your contributions to the community and to this forum, but really? You want to go there?

SBowie
08-09-2016, 05:00 PM
It's been that kind of a day, hasn't it. Group hug ...

Norka
08-09-2016, 05:40 PM
Okay, after a little more thought, maybe a couple tiny tweaks to a few items here and there, but nothing significant to the overall look and feel. As I said in a (very) similar thread, the Statistics window could use some subtle tweakage to make it a little faster (and more accurate) to use. And I would really love to be able to hold down a key and see UVs in any Modeler viewport when hovering over it.

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 06:05 PM
Here's the deal: over the years/versions the devs have not adhered to consistent principles as guidelines for "how do we implement these features?". These are abstract, big picture principles like: discoverability, transparency, findability, consistency.

This is why one must play horrible games of "CSI: Lightwave" when you are trying to figure out someone else's scenes, or even one's own when a month or more has passed.

The lack of consistency makes it harder to learn the app, as it is full of gotchas and purely idiosyncratic design choices.

The lack of transparency is why you have to search all over the UI to check what all may be happening.

Adhering to PRINCIPLES makes everyone's life easier in the long run, but it takes discipline.

Professionals software artisans like jweide can expand on this.

Spinland
08-09-2016, 06:10 PM
Okay, jeric, fair enough. Nothing is perfect but there can be designs that are better than others depending on the aim and the clientele. I'm not going to jump off a cliff and say the current one is fine, blah blah. I won't. I will say my mindset is a military one: adapt and overcome. That is certainly not going to be helpful in this thread, but neither is making hyperbolic insults about anyone who's doing fine with the status quo.

If they change things in such a way that I discover I like it better, cool beans. Beyond that I think my work here is done. ;D

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 06:46 PM
My insults haven't achieved hyperbolic trajectories yet, I believe. I think that was someone else. Or, at least by my standards.

While in general I'm extremely comfortable with the LW workflow, exposure to other 3d software recently has shown me that there are certainly features and workflow that are very desirable, and the entire other apps have a consistency of presentation that make them a lot more logical to extend one's efforts within.... that is, they are predictable in their format in a way that makes guessing how the next feature works easier.

In this case I'm talking about C4d, Unity, and Blender. Unity is a paragon of clarity, and the documentation is amazing. IMO, documentation is PART of the user interface.

{{I think this clarity is due to adhereing to overriding principles of software design, principles that LW has not followed. In some senses, LW has seemed to "grow like Topsy", without firm hands on the tiller. Features were just added without great thought of how they worked, nor great explanation of how they should be used ::cough::IKB::cough::.

Additionally, there are CHRONIC shortcomings in the scripting languages (what's up with that? How many DECADES do we have to plead "Expose everything!!!"?) , and, I'm told, in the UI toolkit for drawing the interface.}}

For instance, the interface that is SHARED by Bullet, FFX, Instancing, and HV (?) is, perforce, consistent within those subsystems, but is A) imo a very poor design, and B) inconsistent with the rest of the application.


TO leave on a positive note: I much prefer LW/LWM's mini-sliders over the Adobe implementation of the same concept, although I do like that numeric fields in Adobe apps use the arrow keys and shift+arrow keys to reduce mouse interaction.

(apologies for the jumpy editing)

Spinland
08-09-2016, 06:51 PM
My insults haven't achieved hyperbolic trajectories yet, I believe. I think that was someone else. Or, at least by my standards.

Heh. Totally my bad: I was summarizing comments aggregated from several past posts and methinks none were from you. No doubt they were borne of frustration and I get that, but sometimes I let my Puckish impulse to poke the bear take over.

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 07:04 PM
No worries: you've been a sterling forum citizen.

::behind hand:: But we gotta tell Cardboard to ease off the caffeine...... ;) ;) ;)

++++++++++++++
OT: oh, and a BIT more color in the UI would be welcome. Fortunately, Matt is well suited to improving that aspect.

oooo, OOOOO, ooo! AND, imo, the space allocated for object names is LUDICROUSLY inadequate. #aflw But, from memory, an Object+Layer name I recently used was "VR_room2_v007:Rear_door_right", and then the GE tagged on the channel name, so like add ".Position.X" to text that needs to fit in the first column of the GE. This has been a longstanding problem, especially since it's often the (think LWM current object name button) the rightmost text that is most critical to the modeler/animator.

++++++++++++++

I would like the interface to be more compatible with Ultra HD Monitors (such as controls to gracefully increase font size etc.).
+1, and heavy on the 'grace'.

Spinland
08-09-2016, 07:06 PM
I'll add my admiration for the Unity interface. I did a lot of work with that as part of one of my last projects before I quit my day job, and it was indeed a delight to work with.

hrgiger
08-09-2016, 08:35 PM
Wow, really? Do you know anything about, for example, my workflow? How easily I get to what I need when I need it, how I've customized it to fit my style...anything like that? I have a metric shite ton of respect for your contributions to the community and to this forum, but really? You want to go there?

Well I wasn't even referring to you, hadn't read the whole thread, just saw a few of the initial posts saying that the LW interface is perfect and don't change a thing. I can't say enough how strongly I disagree. It lacks any real customization (adding and removing buttons is not 'customizing' imo), incredibly inflexible, and for the most part, lifeless. Is it awful? No, I think they've done well enough with the current UI they have but its in need of a modern interface that allows you to work truly the way you want to with a focus on the task at hand. The look of the interface has changed a lot since version 6 when I started using it but only cosmetically. Functionally, its pretty much the same interface.

robertoortiz
08-09-2016, 09:56 PM
Here are some links on Dreamworks Premo animation system
http://blog.digitaltutors.com/siggraph-news-dreamworks-premo-may-future-animation/
I hope showing how the high end studios organize their workflow can aid the conversation.

Snosrap
08-09-2016, 10:20 PM
They way the interface looks isn't really an issue - it's the way it works that is problematic. One simple example, renaming layers in Modeler - a total joke.

jeric_synergy
08-09-2016, 11:23 PM
They way the interface looks isn't really an issue - it's the way it works that is problematic. One simple example, renaming layers in Modeler - a total joke.
See my many references to "in situ" editing of parameters.

js33
08-09-2016, 11:29 PM
They way the interface looks isn't really an issue - it's the way it works that is problematic. One simple example, renaming layers in Modeler - a total joke.

I don't find that problematic. How about renaming and reordering objects in Layout? It would be good to be able to easily reorder layout objects by dragging up or down the list and be able to group and color code layers for easy readability. I know you can kind of do that in the scene editor but it would be better do be able to do it in the object panel.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 12:16 AM
I know you can kind of do that in the scene editor but it would be better do be able to do it in the object panel.
?? That doesn't make sense to me: the object panel is for focused operations on ONE object, while the Scene Editor is a (not great) overview of the entire scene.

Perhaps we're using different definitions of "object panel".

( you may know this, but I already typed it....)
FWIW: When the Scene Editor is in ITEM SEQUENCE mode, you can re-order items by draggin them, but IT IS VERY VERY FUSSY. There's a RHYTHM you have to get right, and I often fumble it a couple times before succeeding. You have to click on the object name, {beat}, drag to the LEFT until the vertical line appears, and very carefully drag the line up to where you want it. If you fail, you'll mis-parent something. You're good when the miniscule yellow circle appears. 2 minutes effort says you can't re-order the camera (probably because the SE is in Item Sequence mode).

see jpg for the elusive yellow circle:
133977

Whoever coded this has a very steady hand. :censored: :2guns:

Spinland
08-10-2016, 02:39 AM
Well I wasn't even referring to you, hadn't read the whole thread, just saw a few of the initial posts saying that the LW interface is perfect and don't change a thing. I can't say enough how strongly I disagree. It lacks any real customization (adding and removing buttons is not 'customizing' imo), incredibly inflexible, and for the most part, lifeless. Is it awful? No, I think they've done well enough with the current UI they have but its in need of a modern interface that allows you to work truly the way you want to with a focus on the task at hand. The look of the interface has changed a lot since version 6 when I started using it but only cosmetically. Functionally, its pretty much the same interface.

Fair enough. Sorry for jumping to conclusions. I think I was in a rather touchy mood from other issues here I'd as soon let flow under the bridge. All the best to you, as always, sir. :D

js33
08-10-2016, 02:42 AM
?? That doesn't make sense to me: the object panel is for focused operations on ONE object, while the Scene Editor is a (not great) overview of the entire scene.

Perhaps we're using different definitions of "object panel".



Yes but imagine you have a scene where you have 50 objects and you want to group objects together for the purpose of turning on and off unseen by camera, Object dissolve (transparency), etc...of say 5 of those objects, then turn those back on and the next group off, etc... I just find it would be handy to be able to do that in the object panel. But after loading many objects as you model and then add layers later the list gets all out of order and you have no control over grouping. You wind up having to hunt through the list to find the objects you want which takes more time if you have to do this a lot.

hrgiger
08-10-2016, 02:49 AM
They way the interface looks isn't really an issue - it's the way it works that is problematic. One simple example, renaming layers in Modeler - a total joke.

Well modeler layer system itself is lacking. No way to change object per layer draw modes(wireframe, shaded, etc), no way to lock layers to prevent from selecting items, no way to group layers....

stiff paper
08-10-2016, 03:23 AM
I originally mocked up this image a long, long time ago. It was way before the regime change in LW's development. I don't remember exactly when. Since the "schism" back in... 2002 (?) LW development had been crap: nowhere near enough, nowhere near keeping up, the wrong things, badly done. For those that don't remember, LW development now is so much better it's not even funny. Is it slow? Yes, okay, it is. Glacially so. Not enough resources. Not enough money. Still, what's added now is useful, it works, and it's generally integrated well.

133978

This image shows something that's such an easy thing to program it makes me despair that it wasn't fixed back in 2003. All it would take is a simple yet flexible set of rules governing width, height, number of columns, and so on. No more hideous eight foot tall scrolling lists. Easy.

And now, my point: this is an interface functionality change, it leaves the look of the interface completely unchanged. It just makes what's already there better to use. There are a lot of things like this that should have been addressed ten years ago, and they mostly have nothing to do with the interface's visual appearance.

We should start being very specific when we use the phrase "Interface design" and make it clear whether we're asking for a functionality change or an appearance change. They're really not the same thing.

@JEric
I am not overcaffeinated. When somebody makes a pronouncement that starts by saying they're going to "Help the conversation" and that they're also going to "Inspire the developers" and then follow that by an insistence that they're "Humble" then I get antsy. Especially when it's part of an endlessly repeating set of behaviors on their part. If he ever read the forum he'd know that the interface has been talked through 1700 times previously, his examples of modern interfaces were already posted back when they were actual news, and therefore his "encouragement" is tedious repetition. Then again, if he ever actually read the forum he'd never have made the post.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 09:13 AM
Yes but imagine you have a scene where you have 50 objects and you want to group objects together for the purpose of turning on and off unseen by camera, Object dissolve (transparency), etc...of say 5 of those objects, then turn those back on and the next group off, etc... I just find it would be handy to be able to do that in the object panel. But after loading many objects as you model and then add layers later the list gets all out of order and you have no control over grouping. You wind up having to hunt through the list to find the objects you want which takes more time if you have to do this a lot.
js33, have you seen Ryan Royes (most excellent) rant&education about the Assign Tools?

Also, Mark Warner does a lot of coloring, grouping in his videos (highly recommended)

One thing I do find incredibly lame about the SE, even though there are hidden gems, the reliance on poorly layed out menus makes it suck the big one quite frequently. LW devs! Quit relying on menus! They suck! THEY ARE SLOW. --Lots of mouse interactions w/the SE are extremely fussy. EXTREMELY. And I suspect (wo looking) that SE operations are not revealed to LScript Commander* and are not scriptable. ::sigh:: Hope I'm wrong on that.

ALSO, you can always strongarm nulls into acting as defacto folders, which eases mass selection. Also, OBJECT/ITEM Selection Sets do exist.


EDIT: *they are not.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 09:20 AM
BACK ON TOPIC:

Since the title was "Best Practices?", I'd like to say again: DROPDOWN MENUS SUCK, they are slow and inhibit productivity.

Before you go all #notalldropdowns on me: there are some situations where they are acceptable, but FAR FEWER than used in the current LW interface.

BUT at the least, their actions should be scriptable so that users can work ways around them. Burying stuff five layers down with zero recourse is dumb.

gamedesign1
08-10-2016, 10:31 AM
I find it interesting how people like very different types of interface from each other.
I personally like LW's interface because of how minimal it is and you are not bombarded with irrelevant information and lists everywhere.
I would like the option to be able to snap panels into place though like the numeric panel etc. Sometimes I like to call up the numeric panel when I need it and sometimes I like to have always there. Depends on what I'm doing and what mood I'm in :p. I just think that the key to a good interface is having options to be as minimal or as informative as you want. Mostly I like clean spaces to work.
I think we all tend to defend what we have got use to over the years to some extent.

I do love talking about interfaces though, I find it interesting how the mind can accept certain visual methods better than others.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 10:46 AM
It must be frustrating for the devs to implement something that nobody seems to like. ("Vizier" anyone?)

ITEM LISTS (or whatever) are rarely mentioned, for instance: they have a TON of (obvious) flaws, but they are there for people hunting items-- they have filters and whatnot. BUT, they're so poorly/unintuitively done, I think people give up on them in disgust.

Other things are straight misses, that LWG should have plagiarized from other apps decades ago. I think "pickbox" is one of them? "Pickwhip" is definitely one, although Adobe might have a patent.

gamedesign1
08-10-2016, 11:57 AM
It must be frustrating for the devs to implement something that nobody seems to like. ("Vizier" anyone?)

ITEM LISTS (or whatever) are rarely mentioned, for instance: they have a TON of (obvious) flaws, but they are there for people hunting items-- they have filters and whatnot. BUT, they're so poorly/unintuitively done, I think people give up on them in disgust.

Other things are straight misses, that LWG should have plagiarized from other apps decades ago. I think "pickbox" is one of them? "Pickwhip" is definitely one, although Adobe might have a patent.

I would love to design a 3D app :)

js33
08-10-2016, 12:53 PM
I originally mocked up this image a long, long time ago. It was way before the regime change in LW's development. I don't remember exactly when. Since the "schism" back in... 2002 (?) LW development had been crap: nowhere near enough, nowhere near keeping up, the wrong things, badly done. For those that don't remember, LW development now is so much better it's not even funny. Is it slow? Yes, okay, it is. Glacially so. Not enough resources. Not enough money. Still, what's added now is useful, it works, and it's generally integrated well.

133978

This image shows something that's such an easy thing to program it makes me despair that it wasn't fixed back in 2003. All it would take is a simple yet flexible set of rules governing width, height, number of columns, and so on. No more hideous eight foot tall scrolling lists. Easy.

And now, my point: this is an interface functionality change, it leaves the look of the interface completely unchanged. It just makes what's already there better to use. There are a lot of things like this that should have been addressed ten years ago, and they mostly have nothing to do with the interface's visual appearance.

We should start being very specific when we use the phrase "Interface design" and make it clear whether we're asking for a functionality change or an appearance change. They're really not the same thing.

@JEric
I am not overcaffeinated. When somebody makes a pronouncement that starts by saying they're going to "Help the conversation" and that they're also going to "Inspire the developers" and then follow that by an insistence that they're "Humble" then I get antsy. Especially when it's part of an endlessly repeating set of behaviors on their part. If he ever read the forum he'd know that the interface has been talked through 1700 times previously, his examples of modern interfaces were already posted back when they were actual news, and therefore his "encouragement" is tedious repetition. Then again, if he ever actually read the forum he'd never have made the post.

That would probably be a 5-10 minute fix to have column lists rather than one long scrolling list without a scrollbar. If the list just had a scroll bar it would be better then you could drag up and down fast without having to wait for the long list to scroll on its own.

Schwyhart
08-10-2016, 12:55 PM
I do wish the Scene Editor could organize better, move layers faster. I'm still learning it, but this has been my biggest hurdle so far.
A few other things that frustrate me is that polygon selections are highlighted as edges, Selecting rig controls can be difficult (although I just started fiddling with this so it's probably user error), and older tools that just confuse me as to why they're still there. Other than that, I actually really REALLY like the interface. Also, the node editor is the best I've used out of LW, MODO, & Maya. It just makes sense to my brain.

js33
08-10-2016, 01:02 PM
js33, have you seen Ryan Royes (most excellent) rant&education about the Assign Tools?

Also, Mark Warner does a lot of coloring, grouping in his videos (highly recommended)



Thanks I'll check them out.

Also I'm just curious why someone, as you said yourself, who no longer uses Lightwave is still constantly on the LW forum talking about LW interface minutia and lots of other things?

Do you still use it as a hobby if you are not making money or are you hoping the new version will prompt you back into it?
It just seems odd to spend so much time on something you are no longer using. Seems it would make more sense to spend your time on things that will profit you rather than ones that aren't.

Snosrap
08-10-2016, 02:52 PM
Well modeler layer system itself is lacking. No way to change object per layer draw modes(wireframe, shaded, etc), no way to lock layers to prevent from selecting items, no way to group layers.... Exactly.:i_agree:

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 04:20 PM
Do you still use it as a hobby if you are not making money or are you hoping the new version will prompt you back into it?
Hobby. I "use" LW all the time, I'm just not getting paid for it lately, although I'd be happy to be. More interested in VR now, but at the same time I'm 'wayyyy faster/competent in LW than anything else, that if I need something in Unity I'll be building it in LWM.

Really, if I got my dream job, it would be UI design, which is where I hope VR takes me.

js33
08-10-2016, 04:30 PM
Hobby. I "use" LW all the time, I'm just not getting paid for it lately, although I'd be happy to be. More interested in VR now, but at the same time I'm 'wayyyy faster/competent in LW than anything else, that if I need something in Unity I'll be building it in LWM.

Really, if I got my dream job, it would be UI design, which is where I hope VR takes me.

OK cool. I still get the paid job once in a while but I also do video editing and after effects.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 04:35 PM
OK cool. I still get the paid job once in a while but I also do video editing and after effects.
Also, habit: I used to be on first name basis w/Allen and Stuart but didn't follow them to Modo.

I do some AE stuff, now and again. I just find UI discussions stimulating. I don't think a lot of my suggestions are off the mark.

The very first suggestion I can remember getting adopted , in the Toaster era, was a "SAVE ALL OBJECTS" button. --Hard to believe it didn't come that way.

Not sure, but the little triangle that lights up when you are on a keyframe in the frame counter I believe is mine-- Matt accepted that one, I think. Very gratifying. ;)

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 04:39 PM
One of the problems w/the LW interface is sometimes there's very little synergy between features: e.g. Item Lists have selection sets, and the Scene Editor has selections sets, and THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.

That is really silly.

Here's a RW example: there's a Chinese company that color anodizes (?) their wrench sets. GREAT IDEA! But they use a different color scheme for their socket sets. INCREDIBLY STUPID!

See? User Interface Design is everywhere.

js33
08-10-2016, 04:55 PM
Oh yeah Interface design is a complete discipline to itself and people that are good at it are usually highly paid. Some even make more than head programmers.
Do you have C/C++ programming experience/knowledge? I have done some C programming but not in a while.

Yes there are a lot of inconsistencies in the LW interface that just grew out over time. It would be nice to see an overhaul and more order to things.

One thing I would like to see is one window for all the panels. It could be a list with triangle twirl downs to open up each panel. Then when you open the list the last ones you used could still be open. This way you could knock out all the settings in one place instead of having to open 20 different panels. It could be like Maya's attribute editor. At first I didn't like it but its just a lot more convenient than 20 different popup panels. It could also be dockable to the side like Maya's attribute editor so it is always available.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 05:28 PM
If you've got AE you've got C4dL, see how they address the same thing.

js33
08-10-2016, 05:32 PM
If you've got AE you've got C4dL, see how they address the same thing.

I know C4D has some mograph but I haven't really looked at in depth.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 05:57 PM
I was referring to the Overview/Detailed view options. C4D has an outliner-like panel, akin but faintly to the LW SE, plus by default below Attribute Managers that are more specific. I don't know Maya enough to draw the analogs.

One big picture issue w/LW is the number of places you have to check to determine what is affecting a given item. I think that is handled much better in other apps. Some clever design-fu with SE, which has its own virtues, might expose all the various influences that can affect an item, but it's crowded in there.

js33
08-10-2016, 06:12 PM
I was referring to the Overview/Detailed view options. C4D has an outliner-like panel, akin but faintly to the LW SE, plus by default below Attribute Managers that are more specific. I don't know Maya enough to draw the analogs.

One big picture issue w/LW is the number of places you have to check to determine what is affecting a given item. I think that is handled much better in other apps. Some clever design-fu with SE, which has its own virtues, might expose all the various influences that can affect an item, but it's crowded in there.

Yeah that's what I'm saying is all the attributes should be in one place rather than spread out in various popup panels. Like you said the SE tried to do that but is limited. I would like to see all the panel attributes in one place.

jeric_synergy
08-10-2016, 06:32 PM
Indeed: really, just HINTS would be adequate: small notations/icons in the SE as hints to where look would be good. --Well, better than nothing. Like a little M for motion constraints, etc.

prometheus
08-10-2016, 06:48 PM
what is the most popular UI mockup software today? if anyone knows? Or is illustrator the standard mockup program?
I got me an old copy of concept office draw..which has some interesting desing functions, at leat for making buttons, menu item mockups without starting from scratch in illustrator.

About expanding and collapsing menus, I canīt even figure out if it is possible to expand and collapse the blender menus all at once, seems to only be working by single menu by menu.

js33
08-10-2016, 07:25 PM
I think most people use Photoshop to start mockups then as the design starts to take shape they move it a more formal UI design program.

I think if Lightwave replaced the keyframe area with After effects timeline where you could display all your keys for objects, camera(s), dissolve envelopes, etc.. and then replace all the various popup panels with one side panel attributes like Maya. Then both of these could be collapsed or expanded as needed I think that would work well.
Then you could add or take away items as needed, etc...

prometheus
08-10-2016, 07:50 PM
I think most people use Photoshop to start mockups then as the design starts to take shape they move it a more formal UI design program.

I think if Lightwave replaced the keyframe area with After effects timeline where you could display all your keys for objects, camera(s), dissolve envelopes, etc.. and then replace all the various popup panels with one side panel attributes like Maya. Then both of these could be collapsed or expanded as needed I think that would work well.
Then you could add or take away items as needed, etc...

well a matter of taste and what you got I guess, but if I were to start with UI design mockups, photoshop makes no sense for me, you got way more control over lines, buttons, menuīs ..and in a more non destructional way in illustrator, changing colors, shadow etc, line arrow ending tools, and library pallettes in a better way, also the ability to connect lines with other shapes and organize in a way photoshop canīt...concept draw can also do this with dynamic bindings between elements, but that is more if you wanīt to mockup huds up elements I guess.

Regarding timeline, well I think lightwaveīs timeline is one of the better ones in terms of how it looks and is placed, simple and nice, so I prefer it where it is, but preferably with an option to expand pop up either by dragging as you say ...and as it works with after effects and get acess to all items in expanding lists if you wanīt.

I suspect they need to decide where they should go..if continue with the old UI api...or go with a new CS style in order to make that happen, I really have not big objections about the general look otherwise with main bar and the menu bar in the left side, I just really woul like to have docking, and scaling of the windows and expand collapse menuīs..but trying to keep the main original UI intact...If you wanīt to customize it to a different style, that is needed with instance changes ala blender.

I also think they eventually need to introduce shelves when the program getīs more and more complex with much more bullet items and other effects items, then it makes more sense to use a shelf that can be scrolled..ala houdini, and allowing for drag and drop of the shelp as you want to organize them, otherwise we will end up with tabs on the left side compressed under more..then drop down list, as such they are not directly visable or organizable really.

Shelves would also be benefital for all the content assets, where I can add my own rock pieces, tree species, and just drag and drop without having to open a file requester for each item.

Prince Charming
08-10-2016, 07:53 PM
I think most people use Photoshop to start mockups then as the design starts to take shape they move it a more formal UI design program.

I think if Lightwave replaced the keyframe area with After effects timeline where you could display all your keys for objects, camera(s), dissolve envelopes, etc.. and then replace all the various popup panels with one side panel attributes like Maya. Then both of these could be collapsed or expanded as needed I think that would work well.
Then you could add or take away items as needed, etc...

But they still need a way to deal with the plugins that are needed in 10 places in order to render out a scene. Backdrop,volume,dynamics,instancing,motion,displac ement, and there are about 10 more probably. All those plugs need to be accessible from one place for each object and the scene . It should be done in both the SE and schematic view giving access to all those plugs in one place, and when you click on it it opens up the options for that particular plug in a DOCKED window.

This would be the ultimate updated UI for me... a very beefed up schematic view, with lists of all plugs on each object in a drop down list under that object (Plugs can be added from there as well), and a scene root object in the schematic view that would contain all the scene level plugs if added. Same setup could be done in the SE as well.

prometheus
08-10-2016, 07:59 PM
But they still need a way to deal with the plugins that are needed in 10 places in order to render out a scene. Backdrop,volume,dynamics,instancing,motion,displac ement, and there are about 10 more probably. All those plugs need to be accessible from one place for each object and the scene . It should be done in both the SE and schematic view giving access to all those plugs in one place, and when you click on it it opens up the options for that particular plug in a DOCKED window.

This would be the ultimate updated UI for me... a very beefed up schematic view, with lists of all plugs on each object in a drop down list under that object, and a scene root object in the schematic view that would contain all the scene level plugs if added. Same setup could be done in the SE as well.

Agree completely with that, schematics is one area they really could beef up and make it powerful.
The Nodu UI I am still not happy about..after working with blender and houdini nodes..at least when it comes to navigation and zooming and organizing them, and general color and aa rubberband look.

js33
08-10-2016, 08:03 PM
Yes I was thinking of plugins too. Those could be another option in the attributes side window. The point is to put everything related in the same place so one does not have to look in 20 places to edit things. There are many examples in more modern software.

pming
08-10-2016, 11:13 PM
Hiya

[SNIP ORIGINAL POST]

*shrug* It's an interface. I like XSI, Silo and trueSpace (yes, I actually *like* trueSpaces interface!...could use some modernization, but I still like it! So there! Nnnyaaa! ;) ).

Oh. I also liked CORE's. .. .. .. 'nuff said.

prometheus
08-11-2016, 04:38 AM
I really like the node colors and grid and design of the nodes in blender, aa lines and the same home button zooms in just as it does in other viewports, same goes for houdini with itīs home button, the zoom level seem to be around at least 5x larger than how much you can zoom in lightwave.
small touches like fixing the rubberband aa, and make the it possible to zoom in much more, add an option for background grid to snap and order nodes better, alt-left click in nodes to move around isnīt feeling right for me, prefer the middle mouse move.

I also prefer the middle mouse scroll zoom in blender as opposed to using the zoom icon in the node editor of lightwave.
So yes..I would say that node navigation and UI feel is smoother in blender in my opinion.
The team should/if they already hasnīt ...fire up blender and see whatīs the fuzz with that.

gamedesign1
08-11-2016, 06:18 AM
The only thing I'd change is to increase customisation, dockable perhaps. But primarily, it's the focus issues that want sorting out so you don't have to hunt for a buried panel.
But overall, I'd want it to appear the same in principle. No icons, text all the way, nice and clean... button spacing is just fine, the font is clear, all good.

+1 :)

gamedesign1
08-11-2016, 06:23 AM
Well I wasn't even referring to you, hadn't read the whole thread, just saw a few of the initial posts saying that the LW interface is perfect and don't change a thing. I can't say enough how strongly I disagree. It lacks any real customization (adding and removing buttons is not 'customizing' imo), incredibly inflexible, and for the most part, lifeless. Is it awful? No, I think they've done well enough with the current UI they have but its in need of a modern interface that allows you to work truly the way you want to with a focus on the task at hand. The look of the interface has changed a lot since version 6 when I started using it but only cosmetically. Functionally, its pretty much the same interface.

If they added Blender's way of adding and removing interface panels I would be very happy with that :)

gamedesign1
08-11-2016, 06:45 AM
?? That doesn't make sense to me: the object panel is for focused operations on ONE object, while the Scene Editor is a (not great) overview of the entire scene.

Perhaps we're using different definitions of "object panel".

( you may know this, but I already typed it....)
FWIW: When the Scene Editor is in ITEM SEQUENCE mode, you can re-order items by draggin them, but IT IS VERY VERY FUSSY. There's a RHYTHM you have to get right, and I often fumble it a couple times before succeeding. You have to click on the object name, {beat}, drag to the LEFT until the vertical line appears, and very carefully drag the line up to where you want it. If you fail, you'll mis-parent something. You're good when the miniscule yellow circle appears. 2 minutes effort says you can't re-order the camera (probably because the SE is in Item Sequence mode).

see jpg for the elusive yellow circle:
133977

Whoever coded this has a very steady hand. :censored: :2guns:

I quite offten find myself using the old Scene Editor because the dragging and dropping is much better in that. but of course it doesn't allow me to do things like "select children" for when I have things grouped to a null

prometheus
08-11-2016, 07:02 AM
If they added Blender's way of adding and removing interface panels I would be very happy with that :)


some of it perhaps, but not sure, it took me quite a while to get the hang of getting rid of panels, and ripping it of and trying to close them got me a mess instead with more windows than I wanted..and difficult to get rid of them or close.

[/QUOTE]
Originally Posted by Kaptive View Post
The only thing I'd change is to increase customisation, dockable perhaps. But primarily, it's the focus issues that want sorting out so you don't have to hunt for a buried panel.
But overall, I'd want it to appear the same in principle. No icons, text all the way, nice and clean... button spacing is just fine, the font is clear, all good.[/QUOTE]


I Agree to some extent, but I actually think they should redesign button spacing, colors is however best up to user to set...but I do not agree on text all the way, I think it should be additional to activate icons, but mainly as they are now with text..but I also mentioned that eventually there well be so many tools in there for certain task, that it becomes hard to locate it in a fast way, thus I would like to see a shelf panel which you can close and open at any time, with icons and text to showcase the tool, drag and drop customizable and drag and drop activation of the tool, donīt get scared about that..it will hardly interfere if yo choose to not use it, a shelf menu can be scrollable so you wonīt have to look for it in different tabs or menus.

gamedesign1
08-11-2016, 09:05 AM
some of it perhaps, but not sure, it took me quite a while to get the hang of getting rid of panels, and ripping it of and trying to close them got me a mess instead with more windows than I wanted..and difficult to get rid of them or close.

Yeah I agree its not perfect by a long shot. I had the same problem with it (still do when I am not thinking).
What I mainly meant is that you can easily create any configuration of panels that you want. Making it very easy to customize, but it definitely needs better control of it. I think its almost there though with a bit of tweaking.

Spinland
08-11-2016, 10:05 AM
Some honest soul searching. My pooh-poohing the idea of the LW interface being fundamentally flawed is a product of my attitude that you just accomplish the mission with the tools you have and shut yer pie hole. That might work well back when but it makes my qualifications to participate in meaningful dialog for improvement more than questionable. I retract any potentially critical statements I may have made regarding those who want things changed. :beerchug:

jeric_synergy
08-11-2016, 10:06 AM
I quite offten find myself using the old Scene Editor because the dragging and dropping is much better in that.
Yup: they got a lot of things right in the OSE-- the NSE is a powerful but mixed bag.

I especially dislike the dropdown menus: they are IMO overly fussy and slow, and just to add insult to injury, unscriptable. I mean, menus are slow, menus with submenus are slowX3.

The same revision that gave us the NSE gave us the spreadsheet with the ridiculously tiny checkboxes: the coder really needs a talking to.

gamedesign1
08-11-2016, 11:33 AM
Yup: they got a lot of things right in the OSE-- the NSE is a powerful but mixed bag.

I especially dislike the dropdown menus: they are IMO overly fussy and slow, and just to add insult to injury, unscriptable. I mean, menus are slow, menus with submenus are slowX3.

The same revision that gave us the NSE gave us the spreadsheet with the ridiculously tiny checkboxes: the coder really needs a talking to.

I really hate the grid of checkboxes in the NSE. Its just not very easy to see what you need when you are in a hurry. My mind likes to remember visual layouts, so I find when all the pages in the editor are almost identical with just rows and rows of checkboxes it just slows me down. This might be just how my type of mind works though :)

Spinland
08-11-2016, 11:43 AM
Okay, my first tiny workflow related gripe with the current interface. I know, I know, but I decided to pull out all the stops.

When I'm running the graph editor for a pile of animation curves and make changes in the regular GUI I'd think it so cool if the GE auto-updated. I know I can manually refresh it but we're talking druthers here so there it is. ;D

jeric_synergy
08-11-2016, 11:52 AM
My needs are so pathetic I've never run into that. --Is there a setting in the GE:OPTIONS that allow that? Similar to "Track Selected Items" in that it updates?

Spinland
08-11-2016, 11:56 AM
I've not found it for all I've looked. If such exists I would cheerfully ship a case of great craft beer to the informer.

js33
08-11-2016, 05:27 PM
Okay, my first tiny workflow related gripe with the current interface. I know, I know, but I decided to pull out all the stops.

When I'm running the graph editor for a pile of animation curves and make changes in the regular GUI I'd think it so cool if the GE auto-updated. I know I can manually refresh it but we're talking druthers here so there it is. ;D

When I move an object in the viewport it auto updates the curve in my GE. Maybe you are talking about something else?

Spinland
08-11-2016, 06:10 PM
Indeed. Not the curves, rather the channels displayed in the GE. It doesn't auto refresh when different objects or such items are selected. Like I said, it'd be cool. Not a show stopper.

jeric_synergy
08-11-2016, 06:37 PM
Indeed. Not the curves, rather the channels displayed in the GE. It doesn't auto refresh when different objects or such items are selected. Like I said, it'd be cool. Not a show stopper.

??? I just threw some keyframes on a light and a camera and with Track Item Selection on, the GE updated with the main UI selection. Note it did nothing until there were some keyframes beyond frame zero. (Probably because I also have FILTER STATIC CHANNELS on.)

It even added multiple Lights in the Channel bin when they were selected.

Spinland
08-11-2016, 07:49 PM
You guys are great, and so now I take back my one weak attempt at poking the UI: I was simply ignorant of that track selected option so that minor annoyance is gone.

After how many years? Heh. Probably still scads of other stuff in there I've not discovered. What a maroon. ;D

Thanks for the insight.

jeric_synergy
08-11-2016, 08:03 PM
You guys are great, and so now I take back my one weak attempt at poking the UI:
Leave it to the unpaid professionals, son. ;)

js33
08-11-2016, 09:54 PM
I've not found it for all I've looked. If such exists I would cheerfully ship a case of great craft beer to the informer.

You owe Jeric a case of great craft beer.:D

jeric_synergy
08-11-2016, 11:14 PM
You owe Jeric a case of great craft beer.:D
OMG, I almost missed that!!! I like a dark stout. :D

Pony up, buddy! :beerchug:

jeric_synergy
08-11-2016, 11:16 PM
If they added Blender's way of adding and removing interface panels I would be very happy with that :)
Those UI's are tough to get right: while I haven't really spent enough time w/Blender to weigh in, I'll say I've struggled with similar functionality in After Effects.

Spinland
08-12-2016, 05:02 AM
You owe Jeric a case of great craft beer.:D

Abso-damn-lutely. Maybe I need to ponder a road trip. :beerchug:

gamedesign1
08-12-2016, 05:18 AM
??? I just threw some keyframes on a light and a camera and with Track Item Selection on, the GE updated with the main UI selection. Note it did nothing until there were some keyframes beyond frame zero. (Probably because I also have FILTER STATIC CHANNELS on.)

It even added multiple Lights in the Channel bin when they were selected.

Nice one! Its amazing how much I still find out about Lightwave after so many years of using it :)

gamedesign1
08-12-2016, 05:22 AM
Just for fun I decided to start making an interface that I would like to see in a 3D app :)
So yesterday I through a few things together, trying to bring in the best of different apps.
I'm not sure how much time I will spend on it as it's pretty pointless really as no one is going to build an app using :p lol
Just thought it would be interesting to give it a go.

133999

Spinland
08-12-2016, 05:27 AM
Leave it to the unpaid professionals, son. ;)

No kidding; I don't even play one on TV. :jester:

prometheus
08-12-2016, 07:09 AM
Just for fun I decided to start making an interface that I would like to see in a 3D app :)
So yesterday I through a few things together, trying to bring in the best of different apps.
I'm not sure how much time I will spend on it as it's pretty pointless really as no one is going to build an app using :p lol
Just thought it would be interesting to give it a go.

133999

cool :)
I was playing with some of that too yesterday..may post later today.

so you adapted the blender properties, wrench and the display icon, and I was just about to change that in a blender mockup to text labels, so whatīs the story for wrench and not a gear? :)
I am a bit split on those icons, they save space, and if you use it a lot it will be no issue, though for those new to it or not using it often enough..it is a nightmare, I think I would actually prefer text labels in those cases with
object display, surface, world, texture, modifier etc...
But Icons I would like to see in the window display type instead of drop down menu, why? because it will add a faster workflow, and those types of icons is very hard to confuse with something else or not understand.
I also see you have listed items with different icons...Consider make them different colors too, which you do not have.

you do have set it up as both text and icons though..which blender doesnīt have I think...so that is a good approach.

Then the default black text on grey background is difficult for the human eye to separate, thus I prefer the slight blue tone sat, with black text..I will show samples on that, but in principle that is what makes modo look softer and easier to distingish both black and white text from a slight greyblue background rather than non saturated grey.

Oh..concept draw is great for adding buttons or items or menus, there is a lot of templates already finished to use, or you can add your own vector grapichs the library by drag and drop, menu fields also have controls so you can change corner radius by a slider control point directly on the object shape.

yeah..you donīt want to spend too much time on it, since it is not up to you and you are not payed for it, then we now that it will most likely take one version more of lightwave before major UI changes is on the agenda.
But for future suggestion and consideration it may serve as a concept for them to look at.

gamedesign1
08-12-2016, 08:18 AM
cool :)
I was playing with some of that too yesterday..may post later today.

so you adapted the blender properties, wrench and the display icon, and I was just about to change that in a blender mockup to text labels, so whatīs the story for wrench and not a gear? :)
I am a bit split on those icons, they save space, and if you use it a lot it will be no issue, though for those new to it or not using it often enough..it is a nightmare, I think I would actually prefer text labels in those cases with
object display, surface, world, texture, modifier etc...
But Icons I would like to see in the window display type instead of drop down menu, why? because it will add a faster workflow, and those types of icons is very hard to confuse with something else or not understand.
I also see you have listed items with different icons...Consider make them different colors too, which you do not have.

you do have set it up as both text and icons though..which blender doesnīt have I think...so that is a good approach.

Then the default black text on grey background is difficult for the human eye to separate, thus I prefer the slight blue tone sat, with black text..I will show samples on that, but in principle that is what makes modo look softer and easier to distingish both black and white text from a slight greyblue background rather than non saturated grey.

Oh..concept draw is great for adding buttons or items or menus, there is a lot of templates already finished to use, or you can add your own vector grapichs the library by drag and drop, menu fields also have controls so you can change corner radius by a slider control point directly on the object shape.

yeah..you donīt want to spend too much time on it, since it is not up to you and you are not payed for it, then we now that it will most likely take one version more of lightwave before major UI changes is on the agenda.
But for future suggestion and consideration it may serve as a concept for them to look at.

I wasn't actually focussing on icons really I just wanted to have some place holders so I could work on the layout. But yeah I do agree with you on some of what you say :) i sometimes prefer text over icon but I was mainly thinking about toolbar space on smaller panels.

I am not going to focus colours and design at this stage, i am just going to use LightWave's theme at the moment.
I am tempted to build it in javascript or Air so you can interact with it.

js33
08-12-2016, 01:17 PM
That's funny I was doing the same thing yesterday. Here are some screenshots of my rough mockups of what I would like to see in Layout.
Basically all I want is a dockable panel on the right like Maya's Attributes. Initially it will have Properties and Effects panels. But you could add or remove things as you want. The panel would be visible/hidden with one click. Then on the timeline I would like to see a small popup with AE type layers for quickly adjusting keyframes for multiple items. Then you could have a full AE type scene editor/dope sheet combo with a popup GE. The LW GE could largely remain the same but I would overhaul the Scene Editor/Dope Sheet to make adjusting keys easier and easier to see what is happening in the scene. Also editing would be much faster than what we have now.

Then of course we would also need a dockable panel for Plugins.

The main idea here is to have more things immediately accessible and make editing quick rather than having to click all around for different popup panels.

Just one quick example. Say you have 5 objects you want to put dissolve envelopes on. Right now you have to go to the object panel, click on the object you want, set the dissolve envelope. You can of course copy it if you want to apply the same one but now you have to go the next object, click the dissolve envelope, paste it, close the GE, etc...

With the popup animation panel you could make one initial dissolve env and then just select all the objects in the list you want to copy it to and then just paste it to all of them at once.

I honestly think users of other software think LW is not as powerful because so much of the functionality is hidden away that most people never see it on a casual look.

I think if they would change just what I mentioned it would make editing in LW layout a lot faster. Of course in order to do this they would probably have to change to something like Qt for the interface.

134008134007134009134010134011134012134013

Ztreem
08-12-2016, 04:30 PM
Just one quick example. Say you have 5 objects you want to put dissolve envelopes on. Right now you have to go to the object panel, click on the object you want, set the dissolve envelope. You can of course copy it if you want to apply the same one but now you have to go the next object, click the dissolve envelope, paste it, close the GE, etc...



This is just one way to make it faster an easier to edit. Enable the dissolve envelope thru the scene editor for all the objects then open the graph editor and filter on *.D* and all dissolve curves is shown at once. Now its easy to edit all curves the same or copy and paste. If I want several dissolve curves to be the same. I usually make one curve then make all the others use channel follower, that way I only need to edit one curve if I need to do changes later.

If only the enable envelope was multi-selected aware it would be much quicker.

With this I don't say that a new interface with easier workflows are welcome. I just wanted to help with a workflow optimizer for given task.:D

js33
08-12-2016, 05:49 PM
This is just one way to make it faster an easier to edit. Enable the dissolve envelope thru the scene editor for all the objects then open the graph editor and filter on *.D* and all dissolve curves is shown at once. Now its easy to edit all curves the same or copy and paste. If I want several dissolve curves to be the same. I usually make one curve then make all the others use channel follower, that way I only need to edit one curve if I need to do changes later.

If only the enable envelope was multi-selected aware it would be much quicker.

With this I don't say that a new interface with easier workflows are welcome. I just wanted to help with a workflow optimizer for given task.:D

I like the channel follower idea. Never thought of using it for dissolve env. But then again you still have to go put Channel Follower on each object. But I agree once it's set up making changes would be faster.

But see that's the point I would like them to make things quicker, easier and not have to use esoteric hidden things to do simple things. Even using the scene editor is tedious. Compare to After Effects where most things are right in front of you and not hidden unless you are using expressions.

jeric_synergy
08-12-2016, 06:00 PM
I believe Ryan Roye pointed out the weaknesses in assigning things akin to Channel Follower or Motion Modifiers to multiple items in his discussion of the Assign Tools. (I think: apologies if wrong.)

It's my belief that it never even crossed the minds of the original devs that animation involved doing things multiple times to multiple items. They certainly left out most facilities for do so in the first, oh, seven versions.

No excuse for the last several versions though.

js33
08-12-2016, 06:07 PM
I believe Ryan Roye pointed out the weaknesses in assigning things akin to Channel Follower or Motion Modifiers to multiple items in his discussion of the Assign Tools. (I think: apologies if wrong.)

It's my belief that it never even crossed the minds of the original devs that animation involved doing things multiple times to multiple items. They certainly left out most facilities for do so in the first, oh, seven versions.

No excuse for the last several versions though.

And that right there is the biggest weakness of LW in my opinion. The more complex a scene gets, the time it takes to edit grows exponentially and comes down to a lot of unnecessary grunt work that can be avoided with some changes.

djwaterman
08-12-2016, 08:33 PM
Ryan Roye's RR tool "mass Motion" might be of use here.

http://www.liberty3d.com/store/tools/rr-tools/

Any way these are good tools. Does anyone know where he hosts the original set of Free RR tools these days? I have both the Pro and free ones installed, but I didn't see any reference to the free ones at Liberty 3D.

js33
08-12-2016, 08:54 PM
Well instead of relying on 3rd parties to address short comings the LW3DG should address the big ones and make the program faster to edit.

jeric_synergy
08-13-2016, 12:39 AM
There's a plugin called STATIC CHANNEL that would be fanTASTIC if you could assign it to all 9 channels in one go.

Basically it would turn a LW item into an After Effects style "no stopwatch" layer--- you could place it anywhere at any frame, and it would never move. Perfect for set dressing where you might do a bunch of fiddling with non-animating objects.

I've been assured that assigning it automagically to all 9 channels is impossible. So, there's a weakness in the scripting language right there.

js33
08-13-2016, 01:15 AM
What's the advantage to using that as opposed to just setting a keyframe and locking it in the GE?

LW can natively keyframe all 9 channels at once so I don't see why scripting couldn't. Are you talking about Lscript or Python?

jeric_synergy
08-13-2016, 01:38 AM
Because if you habitually have AUTOKEYFRAME on, any adjustment to an object will create a new keyframe. STATIC CHANNEL guarantees that there will only ever be ONE keyframe on a given channel.

AFAICS, "Locking Keys" in the GE only prevents adjustment of that key in the GE, not creation of new keys in any manner, and specifically via AUTOKEY.

STATIC CHANNEL (or the notional STATIC ITEM, which would be all channels) allows you to adjust an item no matter where you happen to be viewing the scene in time. I've deleted thousands of keyframes when I needed to tweek something for placement, but wasn't on Frame Zero.

Incidentally, that's how STATIC CHANNEL works: it checks the channel, sees if a non-frame-zero key frame has been generated when you change frames, and if it has, copies the value to the frame-zero keyframe and deletes the non-keyframe-zero key. Shorter: there's only ever ONE keyframe, and it's at frame-zero.

I forget who wrote STATIC CHANNEL, but he's forgotten more about scripting than I'll ever know, so I'll take his word on it. Although, perhaps a Motion Modifier instead of a Channel Modifier would make a difference. One could apply STATIC CHANNEL to every channel, but to me, that's quite laborious.

The interesting thing is: channel modifiers CAN be LScripts!!! I'm not sure, but I think the deal is they get invoked/evaluated whenever the user changes the current frame.

FWIW, I'd much prefer if LW were like After Effects and you had to specifically indicate that an item will be animated. In my 'work' at least, the majority of items don't get animated at all.

js33
08-13-2016, 03:07 AM
Because if you habitually have AUTOKEYFRAME on, any adjustment to an object will create a new keyframe. STATIC CHANNEL guarantees that there will only ever be ONE keyframe on a given channel.

AFAICS, "Locking Keys" in the GE only prevents adjustment of that key in the GE, not creation of new keys in any manner, and specifically via AUTOKEY.

STATIC CHANNEL (or the notional STATIC ITEM, which would be all channels) allows you to adjust an item no matter where you happen to be viewing the scene in time. I've deleted thousands of keyframes when I needed to tweek something for placement, but wasn't on Frame Zero.

Incidentally, that's how STATIC CHANNEL works: it checks the channel, sees if a non-frame-zero key frame has been generated when you change frames, and if it has, copies the value to the frame-zero keyframe and deletes the non-keyframe-zero key. Shorter: there's only ever ONE keyframe, and it's at frame-zero.



OK I see it's like a setup assistant in that you can move things around no matter what frame you are on and it always only changes keyframe on 0 and deletes any other frame keys. I guess that could be useful but I guess without it I would just make sure I'm on frame 0 for those items and leave autokey on.

vncnt
08-13-2016, 07:23 AM
Or at least protect channels at frame 0.

jeric_synergy
08-13-2016, 08:29 AM
Or at least protect channels at frame 0.

Whut?

prometheus
08-16-2016, 05:33 AM
AS far as UI functionality workflow...

Is there anyone else out there who often accidently click on and activate envelopes when you just want to slide a value?
Now modo has their check box for that to the left and not anyhwere near the sliders, thus you will not make that mistake, also...modo has a tick mark for group edit the value or constrain the values to be uniformly slided at once, and with blender you just have to select all three values and drag uniformly...I am a bit frustrated over that things like this hasnīt got any attention though the years.

If some simple UI changes are to be made two improved functions like this ..would make it much nicer to work with.

js33
08-16-2016, 07:22 AM
Yeah but if you just hold the shift key and click the env button it goes away.

prometheus
08-16-2016, 07:31 AM
Yeah but if you just hold the shift key and click the env button it goes away.

yes I know that, but it really doesnīt give me a relief on that annoyance, you do not want the graph editor popping up while tweaking other things...I just go Arggh..Every time I do that, and courses the UI design of it.

js33
08-16-2016, 07:36 AM
Well I agree there could be many improvements on workflow and smaller things as well. I may install Qt and make a real mockup of what a better interface would be to me but right now I need to make some $$ so that is on hold. Unless of course NT would pay for a new design.

kadri
08-16-2016, 10:13 AM
Sometimes it is small things.
In Terragen you can copy and paste XYZ (or anything) coordinates in one go.
I miss that when i work in Lightwave.

Dan Ritchie
08-16-2016, 10:45 AM
LW get's a number of things right.

Navigation is a dream, compared to some other program
numeric entry is right in front of you, instead of on an annoying sidebar/telescoping stupid thing.
everything is labeled

could use tooltips

robertoortiz
08-16-2016, 10:45 AM
Sometimes it is small things.
In Terragen you can copy and paste XYZ (or anything) coordinates in one go.
I miss that when i work in Lightwave.

That is actually A HUUUUGE dealbreaker for LW work in character animation.

prometheus
08-16-2016, 10:59 AM
LW get's a number of things right.

Navigation is a dream, compared to some other program
numeric entry is right in front of you, instead of on an annoying sidebar/telescoping stupid thing.
everything is labeled

could use tooltips


agree only on this, navigation? only in terms how viewports can be organized, but for navigation..I prefer blender or maya mouse ctrl and orbit functions( though I course the way you set up viewports in blender and also how to switch select wich of them is what.)

As for numeric panels, no I do not like them (function) compared to blender select all and change all at once, you always have to enter same value 3 times where in blender or modo you check lock, and as mentioned, envelope buttons some millimeters next to sliders are bound to cause accidental activation and pop up the graph editor, canīt for the life of me understand why they implemented it that way..and canīt understand why it has taken so long with the ui for it not to be able do lock the values uniformly as blender, modo, houdini does.

I donīt follow you with that annoying sidebar/telescoping stupid thing, whereīs that in what program?

Dan Ritchie
08-16-2016, 05:52 PM
agree only on this, navigation? only in terms how viewports can be organized, but for navigation..I prefer blender or maya mouse ctrl and orbit functions( though I course the way you set up viewports in blender and also how to switch select wich of them is what.)

I donīt follow you with that annoying sidebar/telescoping stupid thing, whereīs that in what program?

Of course LW can orbit in perspective mode
Telescoping is what turned me off of Maya in the first place.

js33
08-16-2016, 06:56 PM
When you say telescoping are you referring to the attribute editor panel on the right side that can collapse expand items with the twirling triangles? I actually wish LW had this so we can consolidate all the various popup panels in one place. Also they would always be available for continual editing rather than having the screen cluttered with various panels or constantly having to open and close them. The attribute panel can be hidden or available with one click.

jeric_synergy
08-16-2016, 07:37 PM
The app I use that uses "telescoping", or, as I prefer, "twirly-downs"*, is Adobe AE, and I get sick of the damn things pretty fast. It's bad enough in the Timeline, but there at least you can restrict it to KEYED channels via the Über key. TMK, there's no equivalent restriction** in the FX control panel, and you can spend a lot of time scrolling up/down or collapsing/uncollapsing subsections. --Feh. FEH, I say!

*official Adobe nomenclature="twirly".
** if there is, please let me know.

prometheus
08-17-2016, 05:03 AM
Of course LW can orbit in perspective mode
Telescoping is what turned me off of Maya in the first place.

I said I Prefer the way maya and blender works with orbit functions...I didnīt say lightwave doesnīt have one.

Telescoping? It was a long time I tried maya, so I really canīt get a picture of what you mean.

Photogram
08-17-2016, 08:01 AM
Hi here is my interface Mockup for Lightwave Next ;)

134081

I was inspired by the Unity interface. I found some similarities with Lightwave and like it because Unity is as clean as Lightwave interface.

One thing i like in Unity is it's file browser and web browser integrated. This is i wish to illustrate on the right side of the lightwave interface. This window can be dockable or floating window.
I alway work like this because i use only one big screen and this is usefull for managing all the project elements. Actually the browser i use on the right side is Directory Opus! That software is a way more better than windows.

So everything is dockable and can float arround. Even float windows can be merged together.

Schematic view and render view can float and i hope i can make a viewport floating as well.

Glad to hears your comments :hey:

prometheus
08-17-2016, 09:44 AM
Hi here is my interface Mockup for Lightwave Next ;)

134081

I was inspired by the Unity interface. I found some similarities with Lightwave and like it because Unity is as clean as Lightwave interface.

One thing i like in Unity is it's file browser and web browser integrated. This is i wish to illustrate on the right side of the lightwave interface. This window can be dockable or floating window.
I alway work like this because i use only one big screen and this is usefull for managing all the project elements. Actually the browser i use on the right side is Directory Opus! That software is a way more better than windows.

So everything is dockable and can float arround. Even float windows can be merged together.

Schematic view and render view can float and i hope i can make a viewport floating as well.

Glad to hears your comments :hey:

yes..that is sort of what I would want too, at least for docking, and the after effects graph style panel, what I do not like..though, that is the completely discording colors in the menuīs to the right, it hurts, if you would soften up icons and colors etc, it would perhaps be nicer as concept menu.

Photogram
08-17-2016, 11:45 AM
what I do not like..though, that is the completely discording colors in the menuīs to the right, it hurts, if you would soften up icons and colors etc, it would perhaps be nicer as concept menu.

Here's a more finished version :)

134089

prometheus
08-17-2016, 11:51 AM
Here's a more finished version :)

134087

Itīs a bit better.

Photogram
08-17-2016, 12:05 PM
Itīs a bit better.

And the browser act like a real one so we have to drag n drop files on the lightwave interface side to load one or many images, objects and maybe someday multiple scenes but i'm not sure it's gonna happen.

Snosrap
08-17-2016, 08:14 PM
Let's leave the interface design to the professionals - okay fellas. :)

js33
08-17-2016, 08:20 PM
Let's leave the interface design to the professionals - okay fellas. :)

There's nothing wrong with people expressing their ideas. LW could take a lot of cues from various existing software. The main thing I would like is to do away with all the popup windows and have them consolidated on a side panel for quick and continuous access. When a scene gets complex having to open numerous popup panels many many times gets vary time consuming and slows you down.

Snosrap
08-17-2016, 08:39 PM
There's nothing wrong with people expressing their ideas. LW could take a lot of cues from various existing software. The main thing I would like is to do away with all the popup windows and have them consolidated on a side panel for quick and continuous access. When a scene gets complex having to open numerous popup panels many many times gets vary time consuming and slows you down.

Yep - just some tongue in cheek humor there.

js33
08-17-2016, 10:33 PM
I guess we are a bunch of clowns in here.:D

prometheus
08-18-2016, 02:03 PM
There's nothing wrong with people expressing their ideas. LW could take a lot of cues from various existing software. The main thing I would like is to do away with all the popup windows and have them consolidated on a side panel for quick and continuous access. When a scene gets complex having to open numerous popup panels many many times gets vary time consuming and slows you down.

I agree on both.

Yes. I see nothing wrong for people to suggest UI design, shapes or colors...if it doesnīt fall within the taste of anyone or the lightwave groups intention..so be it.
Concerning the popup menuīs, two ways..or should I say three ways, I suspect we can have them both as popup, ripped panels which can be docked anywhere and with any other panel..and floating if you choose to, or rip back consolidate them to scalable side panels

Oh..I take everything seriously here on the boards, but I laugh secretely when no one knows about it.

Michael

js33
08-18-2016, 05:59 PM
I don't see why it would be hard for the LW3DG to adopt Adobe style interface of dockable and/or floating panels. This technology is not new. Adobe has had it for a long time.

gamedesign1
08-18-2016, 06:57 PM
I don't see why it would be hard for the LW3DG to adopt Adobe style interface of dockable and/or floating panels. This technology is not new. Adobe has had it for a long time.

I agree

erikals
08-18-2016, 08:31 PM
afaik, LWG is using QuickTroll now, so yes, tweaking / making the Ui should be much easier.

some videos...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIGFoshc9Zw

erikals
08-18-2016, 08:33 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O80H4I4CTHw

Schwyhart
08-18-2016, 08:35 PM
I think FCPX has a pretty good GUI. There are things that LW could take from it.
The Inspector, the new rotate/scale/translate gizmo for 3D text is one of the best I've seen.

erikals
08-18-2016, 08:46 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j8zOV6WtqQ

erikals
08-18-2016, 09:16 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrTgDDNC158

js33
08-18-2016, 10:31 PM
^ This is what needs to change in LW. Having all those popup panels is very archaic, silly, annoying, slow to work with, etc...As you were sort of doing by minimizing each panel and grouping them together is exactly what LW needs, i.e., LW needs Maya's attribute editor in a dockable, configurable panel.

erikals
08-19-2016, 12:26 AM
...slow to work with
in Modeler the numeric popup for example is often Very welcome, as it's much better compared to dragging the mouse to the very edge of the screen.

yes please, both please.

Rayek
08-19-2016, 01:01 AM
...and while we are at it, please add an option to scale the GUI seamlessly. The only 3d application which gets it right is Blender:

1) a simple preference option to switch between native and retina screen modes;
2) a PPI slider which scales the entire GUI - in real-time!
3) all property panels can be individually scaled by <CTRL> middle-mouse button drag up and down.

It is super flexible, and I know of no other application that allows for this much freedom in regards to GUI scaling.

And agreed, all those individual pop-up panels are a nightmare. Even on my two large screens. Terrible.

prometheus
08-19-2016, 06:18 AM
in Modeler the numeric popup for example is often Very welcome, as it's much better compared to dragging the mouse to the very edge of the screen.

yes please, both please.

aree with that, sometimes I prefer full model views, and numeric tab only, and sometimes I prefer working on the model with vertex panel open and numerics, depends on model task/object.


...and while we are at it, please add an option to scale the GUI seamlessly. The only 3d application which gets it right is Blender:

1) a simple preference option to switch between native and retina screen modes;
2) a PPI slider which scales the entire GUI - in real-time!
3) all property panels can be individually scaled by <CTRL> middle-mouse button drag up and down.

It is super flexible, and I know of no other application that allows for this much freedom in regards to GUI scaling.

And agreed, all those individual pop-up panels are a nightmare. Even on my two large screens. Terrible.

yes I like it to some degree and concure mostly there, except for the viewports that can not be scaled seemlessly as you do in lightwave, unless setting up a UI with each window ripped of for each viewport..but I think that is to messy to do ..so I keep them as they are in blender.

I was messing with changing UI theme in blender yesterday, and that I just love, how easy you change the colors for each item, and there is so much you can change compared to lightwave, and you see it directly and can have shadows on some items, so gettig a nice UI color scheme and customize is sweetö in blender, then things like icons you can not change, and thatīs where some of blenders UI functionallity getīs a bit screwed up, with icons that are hard to recognize what they do, and they would have been better of with text labels, that would probably have needed more space and a different panel setup.

Rayek
08-19-2016, 11:26 AM
yes I like it to some degree and concure mostly there, except for the viewports that can not be scaled seemlessly as you do in lightwave, unless setting up a UI with each window ripped of for each viewport..but I think that is to messy to do ..so I keep them as they are in blender.

One of the strengths of Blender's GUI are workspaces: it is easy to create custom workspace layouts which emulate the viewport layouts in Lightwave.

One of the key differences with Layout is that Blender's screen layouts remember the state of the camera views: which means it is possible to work on two or more parts of a scene by just switching screen layout.

Btw, with "scaling" I meant that Blender's entire GUI can be seamlessly made bigger and smaller.



I was messing with changing UI theme in blender yesterday, and that I just love, how easy you change the colors for each item, and there is so much you can change compared to lightwave, and you see it directly and can have shadows on some items, so gettig a nice UI color scheme and customize is sweetö in blender, then things like icons you can not change, and thatīs where some of blenders UI functionallity getīs a bit screwed up, with icons that are hard to recognize what they do, and they would have been better of with text labels, that would probably have needed more space and a different panel setup.

Yes, I wish Lightwave would be more configurable like that. Blender takes theme customization to an insane level.

But the one thing I like about Lightwave's GUI is how easy it is to create custom tool sets and tabs which hide and show tools depending on the task at hand. In Blender this is just not possible, and while the workspace layouts work great, each workspace displays the same tools. And it is not possible to hide specific tools or sub panels/ This is, to me, the biggest weakness of BLender's GUI, and Lightwave's biggest GUI advantage.

prometheus
08-19-2016, 11:35 AM
But the one thing I like about Lightwave's GUI is how easy it is to create custom tool sets and tabs which hide and show tools depending on the task at hand. In Blender this is just not possible, and while the workspace layouts work great, each workspace displays the same tools. And it is not possible to hide specific tools or sub panels/ This is, to me, the biggest weakness of BLender's GUI, and Lightwave's biggest GUI advantage.

Exactly agree on that, apart from that I prefer the UI viewport and scalable option in lightwave than Blenders non scalable viewports (unless setting up windows manually) then I ran in to that issue I think yesterday, I wanted to add bevel tools and some other tools in the UI panels and customize that, but it seems itīs not possible, but I am unsure about it.

Anyway..for lightwave I can set that up pretty much in what tabs or menuīs I want, so itīs a plus for lightwave on that.

Michael

Rayek
08-19-2016, 11:54 AM
The only way to remove sub-panels and tools in Blender is with python scripting. It is quite simple to do this, BUT it removes these from ALL layouts.
And it is not possible to customize the tools DEPENDING on the workspace. There is no event attached to a workspace switch either, which rules out Python.

jeric_synergy
08-19-2016, 12:18 PM
The only way to remove sub-panels and tools in Blender is with python scripting. It is quite simple to do this, BUT it removes these from ALL layouts.
And it is not possible to customize the tools DEPENDING on the workspace. There is no event attached to a workspace switch either, which rules out Python.
Rayek, when you say "tools", what do you mean precisely? Do you mean the, ummm, uhhhh, Blender panel definition of what in any given type of panel/window?

If panel definition can be redefined on the fly (via scripting, triggered by hotkey) this wouldn't seem to be an insurmountable obstacle.

jeric_synergy
08-19-2016, 12:31 PM
I don't see why it would be hard for the LW3DG to adopt Adobe style interface of dockable and/or floating panels. This technology is not new. Adobe has had it for a long time.
Adobe may have patents on those UI methods.

js33
08-19-2016, 02:06 PM
Adobe may have patents on those UI methods.

I'm sure they do on their exact panels but I don't think you can patent something so generic like a dockable panel with twirly triangles.

erikals
08-19-2016, 03:25 PM
i don't believe Maya holds many rights, as they are using the QuickTroll user interface, just like LightWave.

js33
08-19-2016, 04:42 PM
Why is Qt called QuickTroll? How did it acquire that nickname?

Snosrap
08-19-2016, 09:39 PM
i don't believe Maya holds many rights, as they are using the QuickTroll user interface, just like LightWave.

I think the only parts of LW that are using Qt are some of the new tools that have on screen controls. The general overall UI is definitely not Qt. The toolkit used in LW is proprietary, hence the issues.

js33
08-19-2016, 09:55 PM
I think the only parts of LW that are using Qt are some of the new tools that have on screen controls. The general overall UI is definitely not Qt. The toolkit used in LW is proprietary, hence the issues.

That's why they need to dump the old stuff and use Qt for everything.

erikals
08-20-2016, 12:03 AM
yes, i'm quite sure you're right about that one Snosrap.


That's why they need to dump the old stuff and use Qt for everything.

:dito:

a bit on QuickTroll and Maya >
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?147655-QuickTroll-and-Maya