Re: [Bf-committers] About the location of the Operator panel...
I would be inclined to have an option to automatically launch a F6 popup widget at mouse position, because it doesn't get any closer than that. And I agree with Knapp: we should be able to move and close it, because quite often we need to rotate the view and review the result before accepting the operation. Right now it feels a bit silly having to rotate view, press F6, zoom view, press F6, etc... :D Maybe it could be an addon. Regards. On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Knapp magick.c...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Gaia gaia.cl...@machinimatrix.org wrote: Hi, all; I asked myself: Why does the operator panel appear in the tool shelf although the operator has been called from the properties sidebar ? At least on a large display that can be really far far away :) I have an idea for the case where an operator is called by click on a button from within a Panel: Add a panel option to specify where the operator panel shall show up: - Bottom of Tool Shelf (default) - Bottom of Properties sidebar - Bottom of current window (tool shelf or properties bar, ...) - Directly Below current panel (maybe not a good idea) If the operator was not called from within a panel, then fallback to defaults. Regardless of where it appears, the operator panel disappears when the next operator is called. Benefits: - Operator options can appear very near to where the operator was called, thus get much more awareness - less moving around on large screens to change operator options. Drawbacks: - operator panel no longer appears at one fixed location However letting the operator panel appear close to our current focus of work could possibly be more beneficial than relying on operator options to always appear in the lower left corner of the screen. What do you think about that ? -gaia- If it functions like the F6 button then it needs to be made so you can grab the header and move it and it remembers where it was. I know it currently opens where the mouse is. It currently works but is a bit annoying because it is always self closing. -- Douglas E Knapp Creative Commons Film Group, Helping people make open source movies with open source software! http://douglas.bespin.org/CommonsFilmGroup/phpBB3/index.php Massage in Gelsenkirchen-Buer: http://douglas.bespin.org/tcm/ztab1.htm Please link to me and trade links with me! Open Source Sci-Fi mmoRPG Game project. http://sf-journey-creations.wikispot.org/Front_Page http://code.google.com/p/perspectiveproject/ ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] UV editor behaviour on selecting UV islands
Hi Hadrien, If I understood it right, there is TPP to help you with that: https://sites.google.com/site/bartiuscrouch/scripts/texture_paint_plus You only have to select the UV element and press F-key P.S.: Suggestions should go to Bf-funboard Regards. On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Hadrien Brissaud hadris...@gmail.comwrote: Hello, I have a suggestion to make concerning the UV editor. It is a tough one to explain, so I'll try my best to write it very clearly : Often I find myself in need of selecting a UV island in one click and go back to the 3D view in order to identify it (see where it is exactly on my model) and unwrap it correctly. However, selecting a UV island is only possible when synchronization between the UV editor and the edit mode mesh selection is active (use_uv_select_sync) - in this case, for the mesh to appear in the UV editor, it has to be selected in the 3D view : that defeats my purpose of finding the UV island by selecting it (because... everything is already selected !). Hence I suggest these three things : 1/ drop the specific edit-mode-style icons when synch is on. Add an island selection mode. Basically make the selection modes the same than when synch is off. 2/ do not hide the entire mesh in the UV editor when synch is on, instead show it - I may be mistaken, is there a purpose to not showing it at all, as it is currently the case ? 3/ add an entry to the shift-G menu (select similar) : UV island. Thank you, Hadrien ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Google Summer of Code 2013
Hi, I would be willing to be a stakeholder for Texture Painting, Sculpting and/or UV edit, specially on the gui/usability side. Antony Riakiotakis and Nicholas Bishop already did some awesome work in terms of tools, but there is still a big lack in terms of usability (and tools in a lesser degree) that makes me (and I hate to say it) have to rely on other software when time and/or complexity on a project is of the essence. I see amazing stuff in Blender each new release, but that stuff seems to be always forgotten. So, whenever the time and interest comes, here I am. And who the hell are you? you might ask, well, briefly, I'm just a guy with 10+ years of experience on those fields I'm interested in see improved O:) Regards. On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: Hi, We usually can manage topics via open movie funding quite well too. And since there's nothing tangible really for a next movie project, I rather check on what existing (bigger) blender projects would need now. I also don't think they'd come with real surprises though... we have a lot of known issues. It's not so much that we need ideas, what we need is stakeholders - people who need development for a real world use case. -Ton- Ton Roosendaal Blender Foundation t...@blender.orgwww.blender.org Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A 1018AD Amsterdam The Netherlands On 19 Mar, 2013, at 16:25, Tom M wrote: On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Ton Roosendaal t...@blender.org wrote: For GSoC 2013 I would like to introduce a special focus: we could organize a stronger connection between the stakholders (users) and students/mentors. Speficially I'd like to invite teams/studios to think of useful targets, to define projects they really need (and will use), and to get involved as artist-buddies for the students. Ton, it would be good if you, brecht, Campbell and Sergey (and others) can brainstorm for what things would be useful for the next film. Ie what parts of the film (rendering, compositing, animating, modeling, texturing, cloth, physics and other simulations etc.) will be most labor and time intensive and then create a wishlist based on that. I'm sure there are probably useful papers from siggraph and other conferences that might be worth suggesting based on that. LetterRip ___ 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 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Sculpting UI issue
I think a good approach to solve this would be to leave a bit more black space on the top and place the names there with a grey color, that way there is no need for the rough grey box, and all text will be readable. A sample with the first one: http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=28430 On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Thomas Dinges blen...@dingto.org wrote: As comparison 2.62: http://www.pasteall.org/pic/28428 Ok, the Nudge and Fill/Deepen and maybe the Smooth one is a *bit* different to read. But thats it. +1 to revert to that or have a slight transparent background. Am 14.03.2012 22:14, schrieb Thomas Dinges: Hi everyone, I just noticed that: http://www.pasteall.org/pic/28427 Who added the grey text boxes? I find the look we had in 2.62 better actually. Sure, the text is a bit more readable with a background, but then I'd prefer a more transparent one. Also the current boxes differ in (text)size. Can this please be fixed? Thanks! Regards, Thomas -- Thomas Dinges Blender Developer, Artist and Musician www.dingto.org ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Rotate/Pan during Circle Select
Maybe I'm missing something, but i think it would make sense to change this and use Shift (like deselect on edit mode) or Ctrl (like on sculpt mask) and leave MMB for the view operations. On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Ryan King rk...@panoptic.com wrote: I was talking with a user coming from another 3D package who was bummed about our Circle Select mode requiring you to cancel / rotate / re-enter the mode. My first thought was that it would require an unpopular remapping of MMB (since MMB is used to deselect verts, it cannot be used to Rotate/Pan). So as a workaround I was prepared to tell him to simply use the Keypad navigation - only to find it doesn't work in this mode. Is the implementation of Circle Select Mode somehow tangled that it would be a major challenge to add the ability to use the Numpad while in that mode? Thank you very much, - rking ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] remove face flip tool?
I work with low poly stuff frequently, and I used face flip a lot, but it often gave frustrating results using it on groups of faces, so in the end I tended to use it on individual pairs, or multiple (but separated) pairs. So, I think if you add support for rotating multiple edges at once, it would be probably ok to leave it out. Anyway, to help you decide, it would be probably better to post a poll over BA.org and get the input of a wider range of users. Regards. On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:52 PM, GSR gsr@infernal-iceberg.com wrote: Hi, ideasma...@gmail.com (2012-03-03 at 0018.56 +1100): As I understand it this tool swaps the direction of the edge between 2 or more selected triangles. Is this tool worth adding back? - Its very similar to edge flip, the main advantage AFAIK is that in some cases its easier to select a bunch of triangle pairs - rather then the edge in-between each one. Yes, it's worth adding back, very useful when fixing low poly models so every triangle counts, as quads to triangles gives the wrong split half of the times. GSR ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Display modes for 3D-View from user perspective
Maybe I'm missing some facts, but the way I see it, to make it as simple as possible, giving at the same time some versatility, overall changes could be: - Textured Solid option (could be) out from display/shading, as it can be selected in the viewport's shading menu (as seen on the mockup) - All viewport texture shading modes (except GLSL*) would still depend on what is selected on display/shading panel. * Meaning Textured GLSL would override whatever is selected in display/shading and viceversa; if GLSL is selected in display/shading, the other viewport tex shading modes would override GLSL mode. Now, having those new viewport shading options, there might be a point where having the display/shading panel doesn't make sense anymore, but I think it doesn't hurt to leave it as it is at the moment, it might be a bit confusing, but you wouldn't even need to go there anyway, since you could alternate the most common tex shading options from the viewport menu or (ALT/SHIFT/Z) shortcuts. Or is TT meant to be lit the old way, using OpenGL predefined lights with multitexture? Yep, textured would be the same old textured, but I made a mistake on the mockup, to avoid confusion and clutter, it should be like this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2294713/textureshadingmodes2.png So if you were currently in shadeless mode, Textured would be present again. Regards. On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote: A short look at you screenshot/mochup gave me a good impression. I would really like to see it simplified that way. The only thing that isn't quite clear to me would be the difference between Textured-Textured and Textured-Shadeless. I would assume that both are the same? Or is TT meant to be lit the old way, using OpenGL predefined lights with multitexture? Currently we have this possible choices (Modes: GS=GLSL, MT=Multitexturing, ST=Singletexturing; Option: TeS=Textured solid): Drawmode | Mode | TeS | Rendered as: --|--|-| Bounding | GS | | BoundingBox Bounding | GS | x | BoundingBox Bounding | MT | | BoundingBox Bounding | MT | x | BoundingBox Bounding | ST | | BoundingBox Bounding | ST | x | BoundingBox Wireframe | GS | | Wire Wireframe | GS | x | Wire Wireframe | MT | | Wire Wireframe | MT | x | Wire Wireframe | ST | | Wire Wireframe | ST | x | Wire Solid | GS | | Solid-Shading Solid | GS | x | Solid-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) Solid | MT | | Solid-Shading Solid | MT | x | Solid-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) Solid | ST | | Solid-Shading Solid | ST | x | Solid-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) Texture | GS | | GLSL-Shading + GLSL-Texturing / Nodes Texture | GS | x | GLSL-Shading + GLSL-Texturing / Nodes Texture | MT | | OpenGL-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) Texture | MT | x | OpenGL-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) Texture | ST | | OpenGL-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) Texture | ST | x | OpenGL-Shading + Single Texture (active UV only) That are a whole lot of possible combinations (24), but only a hand full (6) of actually implemented display modes. What about Multitexturing? I never saw a single mode supporting it inside the 3D-View. Additionally i think that the last mode OpenGL-Shading + Single-Texturing (always active UV only) is pretty much useless in practice. Greetings from Tobias Oelgarte Am 24.11.2011 17:46, schrieb Julio Iglesias: I agree, it is a mess right now. Personally I would love something like this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2294713/textureshadingmodes.png As for key mapping, imho, it would be nice to use SHIFT+Z to switch between all texture shading options (texture, tex solid, shaderless, and GLSL) Also, ALT+Z would switch between wireframe and whatever Texture Shading mode is currently selected. Same goes for Z switching between wireframe and any solid shading is selected. Regards. On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello, I noticed some recent changes on how blender renders the content inside the 3D-View and at first i thought that it would be a bug in the current revisions. So I opened a bug report after some curious postings inside blendpolis.de (a well known German community website/forum for blender) regarding this recent change. One of the first problems was to figure out how to get a shadeless textured view onto a model. Even after several tries nobody found a solution. Inside the bug report Brecht mentioned that this change was intentional and not a bug. To achieve the essential view for texturing/painting the user will now have to move all lights to a separate layer and he is forced to hide this layer. Only then you will get
Re: [Bf-committers] Display modes for 3D-View from user perspective
I agree, it is a mess right now. Personally I would love something like this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2294713/textureshadingmodes.png As for key mapping, imho, it would be nice to use SHIFT+Z to switch between all texture shading options (texture, tex solid, shaderless, and GLSL) Also, ALT+Z would switch between wireframe and whatever Texture Shading mode is currently selected. Same goes for Z switching between wireframe and any solid shading is selected. Regards. On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello, I noticed some recent changes on how blender renders the content inside the 3D-View and at first i thought that it would be a bug in the current revisions. So I opened a bug report after some curious postings inside blendpolis.de (a well known German community website/forum for blender) regarding this recent change. One of the first problems was to figure out how to get a shadeless textured view onto a model. Even after several tries nobody found a solution. Inside the bug report Brecht mentioned that this change was intentional and not a bug. To achieve the essential view for texturing/painting the user will now have to move all lights to a separate layer and he is forced to hide this layer. Only then you will get back to usual shadeless view for texturing. So far the current situation. As I was continuing my work on a model it just felt wrong. I have lights spread out on multiple layers and I need this shadeless textured mode for projection painting. So what i had to do now? I had to disable all light layers (Shift+Click) to be able to continue the texturing and for a simple test render i had to enable all this layers again. The problem is, that i have to continue all steps over and over again, which simply isn't fun anymore. So I was soon forced to step back and to use an older version, in which i can just switch from solid to textured for painting/texturing and from there to GLSL to get a rough preview. I think that the current solution is neither suited for beginners (even long time users are confused or annoyed) and the additional draw types (e.g. solid shaded textured view or plain OpenGL-Lights Multitexture) seem pretty useless to me, i came up with two ideas to make the best out of it. Option #1: Add an additional checkbox under Textured Solid, to disable all lights and enforce the shadeless, textured mode. It would at least provide a convenient way to switch between texturing (as a working step) and the GLSL preview. Option #2 (I would prefer it over #1): Remove this options and reduce the display modes to the following set of options: 1. Bounding Box (not affected by anything currently found under the GLSL/Multitexture/Singletexture option inside the 3D-View properties) 2. Wireframe (as previous mode not affected) 3. Solid view (Keep it solid, no textures, the typical view for modeling) 4. Only Textures, no Shading. (the typical view for texturing/unwrapping) 5. Only Shading, no Textures. (uses GLSL for lighting, but does not utilize textures or nodes, fast/rough preview for lighting in scenes, could be useful for sculpting) 6. Full GLSL (fast preview) Any other combination did not make much sense to me in the usual workflow. Why not reduce the display modes to this set of options, instead spreading them over multiple locations (3d-view toolbar, 3d-view properties under Display) or making them even depend on (in)visible lights/layers? Best wishes from Tobias Oelgarte ___ 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
