Mods, Hacks, custom scripting and little hidden Secrets of CS

So the story behind this thread stems from sitting in front of the PC last Saturday night in hand a few Jack D's & Coke with the ChronoSculpt icon screaming "open me!".

firstly I will state this is an amazing product with HUGE potential and I thank everyone behind it but...

I was annoyed with the grid colour so I decided to open her open and damn I found a few gems.

changing the grid colour was easy then I noticed a few other files and folders that intrigued oneself an example would be the insert_command("Subdivide") Hmm so it has a subd option lets take her for a little spin ... so a 10 minute tweak ended up being a 4 hour mod'athon.

in short the open architecture is there for everyone to see and there is plenty of coders out there better than myself but I implemented icons for brushes and at the moment I have created a tool pallet that works similar to ZB but I urge you to have gander you will not be disappointed...

Last edited:


Almost newbie
This is cool stuff!

EDIT: And, I really like the combo of Icons+Text. I'm not a huge fan of just Icons or just Text... the combo is just... sexy! :)
shhh Cage don't let matt here you say that :) agreed it's early days in development and I am sure lw3dg could design something way more elegant than me but it highlights that the UI is there for the taking
Last edited:


Almost newbie

Well... I would prefer that LW3DG focus on the development and workflow side of things (not just for CS) and keep things to Text, while third party, like yourself, do things like this. I'm not an owner of CS btw, and I have to add that if I have to choose between Icons and Text, my choice is Text (even if an Icon-version of any app have tooltips).
as it stands Chronosculpt for the UI is "pixel perfect " and please LW3DG do not think it is a reflection on yourselves , I was merely trying to see if I could implement icons in the sidebar

Text with Icons can be good as it's more easy for the eye to snap up the location of the button.

while text only buttons can be hard to differentiate from each other...
this blurred image might show it >


no, it's not the Jack Daniel's...
Last edited:


Electron wrangler

Text with Icons can be good as it's more easy for the eye to snap up the location of the button.

while text only buttons can be hard to differentiate from each other...

Having gfx "hints" is particularly useful with uses like different types of sculpting "brushes", because short text words/phrases just don't convey nuances nearly as well as common gfx bases with different actions applied to them corresponding to the brush action. "Dent" versus "Push" can be quite ambiguous, where the shape characteristics of indentations are more easily distinguished visually.

Text works okay with a bunch of reasonably distinct commands, where abbreviation can work, but as cmds increase, finding easily-distinguishable (visually and conceptually) names becomes increasingly difficult. Localization adds further problems: Some languages offer more nuanced options (English is quite rich in that regard), where others might require longer terms to usefully distinguish, making short but useful terms more of a problem.

Any modern engine allows either or both, and any rewrite of LW's GUI engine needs both as well. It's a decision best left to user preference in most cases. Always better to have an option and not need/use it, versus not having the option at all, when it comes to icon vs text labels. Further, any new engine should easily support changing based on groups'/sections' settings, not just as a whole. Some types of actions are best reflected by icons, others best through text, so having per-group, or better, per-button/widget ability to choose is important. CS's engine appears to have it right, which is at least a promising sign.

Ryan Roye

Currently, Chronosculpt is a simple program in terms of interface because the number of functions it performs (from the user's perspective) isn't expansive. To me, icons with buttons make much more sense in programs with fewer functions. Chronosculpt falls into that category now, but I don't know how much they intend to expand it in the future. I lean towards a text interface personally.
Last edited:


Axes grinder- Dongle #99
I too lean towards Text over icons.

This goes to show that there's variability in users. There's no 'right' way, there's just a best fit for every individual. And as jweide says, the correct stance is ALWAYS flexibility. I know it takes a bit more coding to allow USERS (aka CU$TOMER$) the choice of various types of interactivity, but in the long run I think it pays off in both maintenance and user satisfaction.

It's up to Product Management to decide where to draw the line about coding expense and user flexibility-- some flexibility probably is NEVER used by ANYONE. For instance, I have NEVER reconfigured Photoshop's interface at all, beyond scooting panels around (you can reassign hotkeys and menus), which I do constantly in LW. --I'm not sure why, perhaps PShop's defaults are Just That Good.

It would be possible to code UI flexibility right down to the button level, allowing users a MIX of text/text+icons/icons. But is it worth assigning a coder to it for a week? A month? Personally, I'd prefer a more robust and deep scripting capability, which would have the side benefit of ALLOWING even more UI flexibility (users could CODE their own tools/UIs).

But coders aren't fungible, so .... etc etc....
Top Bottom