Hi All, Slight improvement on the image Campbell posted: http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=24767
IMO check boxes can cause extra clutter if not used judiciously, using toggle buttons instead means that the area used to indicate True/False coincides with the label and is more space efficient. Also, using toggle buttons means you can align them with other UI elements, more clearly showing that they are related. I'm not suggesting they should be used all over the place, but certainly they have their uses. Thanks, Andrew On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasma...@gmail.com>wrote: > Many valid & interesting points made in the last few replies but could > we steer this back onto improving our existing UI? > (not the dreaded `defaults` discussion) > > There are enough simple problems we should deal with, > > Example of one - > > Andrew Hale made this example recently, > http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=24723 > > This brings up the point that check-box buttons (on the right) dont > get grouped nicely, > Yet, I'm Told Matt Ebb wanted the check-boxes to be preferred. > > Anyone interested to knock up a drawing of how the layout of the left > could work with check-boxes better? > > - (C'mon guys!, less talk, more action, or I go back and hide in the > python api :D ) > > > On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Mike Erwin <significant....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > There are many ways to make blender less aggravating for new users, > > but as has been said, anything this powerful will have some kind of > > learning curve. It's a hassle, it's to be expected, and it's worth it! > > If you read a few paragraphs, I promise to make a point or three. > > > > Photoshop for example -- when I started with version 4, it was a bit > > overwhelming. Over the years and versions I picked up skills like > > painting, layers & color channels just by using the software. The > > biggest jumps came when I picked up a book to get a new perspective on > > issues (the power of selection & masking for example). And how to use > > the pen tool, which for some reason I never could figure out on my > > own. > > > > Same goes for driving a car! It has only a few controls of course, but > > even so there is no expectation that you'll be an expert driver the > > first time out. By the time you get behind the wheel, you've probably > > observed hundreds of hours by being driven around during childhood. > > And there is probably someone beside you saying "that's the > > accelerator, that's the brake, don't touch those." When the windshield > > wipers are swinging back and forth when you meant to use the turn > > signal, you could say "f*** this, I'll just walk from now on!" Or you > > could say "oops, wrong lever", remember that for next time, and keep > > driving. To reward your patience, you get a free open-source car with > > a lifetime supply of free gas. > > > > Same for any musical instrument. The first time you pick it up, it's > > going to sound pretty bad. If you never play again because music is > > hard, well... ok. This metaphor is a bit loose, since blender has > > competitors. It's like blender = guitar and [other 3D software] = > > piano. They both make music if you know how to move your fingers the > > right way! And they both take practice to get to that point. If you > > already know the piano, and expect those skills to transfer to the > > guitar, get ready for a shock. But if you don't know either, might as > > well go for the one that's portable and let's face it, way more cool. > > > > Ok, now it's blender's turn -- without the silly metaphors. Blender > > 2.1 was my first encounter. I played around with it a little while, > > found the interface confusing (and kind of ugly compared to the rest > > of MacOS), and quickly went back to PiXELS 3D. Next encounter was > > blender 2.3 -- got the book this time (which was awesome), learned a > > tiny bit more but soon went back to Lightwave (which also had a book). > > A few years ago I had to digitally recreate a football stadium from > > its plans and by visiting the site. After a slow and painful start > > using Sketchup, I gave blender 2.48 a shot and actually liked it! But > > by then I was serious about learning and got the Essential Blender > > book, which helped more than anything. After that I would just search > > for specific things and always found someone who had run across the > > same issue and written about it. The interface in late 2.4x was very > > different and very nice. After a custom layout, color scheme and style > > it looked awesome and worked well. And yes, I switched it to LMB > > select. > > > > I have no specific gripes with the current interface, but as I stick > > mostly to low-poly modeling there is plenty I don't ever see. 2.6 is > > also very different and (mostly) very nice; I've even switched back to > > RMB select! My own default layout discards the timeline, and shows > > "object data" instead of "render" on the properties panel, but > > otherwise is standard. That works for me, but I wouldn't dare force it > > on everyone. Having the "render image" button there on the screen is > > essential for the brief time before you know what F12 does. The > > spacebar addon is great, don't know why it's not part of the default > > setup. > > > > Any changes need to be well thought out and explained -- more than "I > > think X is better than Y so obviously everyone would like X." Why is X > > better? Prove it or demonstrate it or otherwise make a solid case. > > > > Many people do like to learn by trial & error, so make sure the errors > > are harmless, obvious, and reversible. I haven't kept up with the undo > > system recently, so maybe this has been fixed... but it used to fill > > up with system-initiated snapshots, so undo kind of lost meaning. > > Whenever you pressed [button], blender would do 5 things, 3 of them > > undo-able. So you press [button], say "oops", undo, then wonder why > > the stuff on screen doesn't look exactly the same as before you > > pressed [button]. > > > > Reasonable default values and ranges for things are easy to implement > > and make things just a little nicer for new users. No idea how well > > this is done throughout blender, it might already be perfect. Same for > > basic interaction settings like turntable mode becoming default (a > > good move, even though I usually use trackball). Making "rotate around > > selection" default? My initial impression is "yes, of course!" but > > like I said above, we still need to answer "why?" in some convincing > > way. > > > > Remember Ubuntu had its "papercuts" project to fix many of the rough > > edges and little annoyances for desktop Linux. This thread (and > > similar ones before) sounds like a call to do the same sort of thing > > for blender. Of course their path led to the Unity desktop... a great > > example that making things simpler for new users can also make it > > infuriating for people that know what they're doing. The designers of > > Unity have the best intentions -- they're just not right. > > > > In the end, blender's UI is for people who use blender, not for people > > who don't. There were things about blender that kept me in this second > > category for so many years, so I fully understand the original point > > of this thread. Of course we want new people to use blender. Some > > things have changed for today's potential users -- the sleek/modern UI > > appearance is one less barrier -- but how you get things done once > > inside is different from other apps. I got past this, so it's hard for > > me to single out what is or isn't difficult for a newcomer. I'm in the > > semi-new-user category: comfortable with general usage and a limited > > set of the available tools. So more important to me (and I imagine > > others in this boat) is how to grow, the path to becoming "more > > expert". Nothing inside of blender is keeping me from doing this, from > > my particular point on the learning curve. We also need experts on the > > high end to show us what can be done with this great software in the > > right hands. I don't think today's top users would walk away from > > blender if we add some new options or change defaults, as long as it > > doesn't mess up their flow. So let's do this in a way that doesn't > > mess up their flow. > > > > I'm interested to see what new options come out of this discussion, > > and which of these are chosen for defaults. But I'd also like to keep > > the overall number of options small, with meaningful differences > > between them. One shining example of an interface that keeps things > > simple, has limited options, all while remaining powerful for experts > > is MacOS (8.6 and 10.6 being the finest). MacOS 10.0 had some serious > > UI gaps, just like blender 2.5 at first, but both are growing up > > nicely. Brainstorming 1000 options is great, let's make sure only the > > best ones make it into a release, and are implemented based on these > > discussions and properly tuned after some hands-on time. > > > > Also, +5 on monkey head in default scene! > > > > Mike Erwin > > musician, naturalist, pixel pusher, hacker extraordinaire > > > > > > > >> On Friday 20 January 2012, Jorge Rodriguez wrote: > >>> I'd like Blender to be learnable without people having to go watch > >>> tutorials. > > > >> Not possible (IMO). Blender, like any other 3D software, is far too > complex to > >> be picked up on the fly. > >> > >> I can't understand why reading docs or watching tutorials is so awful. > If > >> somebody opens Blender and feels lost (as did I many years ago), what's > so > >> hard about clicking on the help menu, choosing the first entry and > starting > >> to read? While the manual also needs work, the introductory chapters > should > >> be enough to get anybody started. If not, the community provides free > help. > >> That's how open source projects work. > >> > >> If somebody can't do that, I don't think he/she has enough drive to > learn a 3D > >> software anyway. > >> > >> As a user, I'm very grateful for Blender and also for the documentation > we do > >> have. People really should use it. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Sanne > > _______________________________________________ > > Bf-committers mailing list > > Bf-committers@blender.org > > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > > > > -- > - Campbell > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
