Actually I'll have to, respectfully, disagree with that. Shape and transform node handling is fine as is (given the premise you're OK with how Maya handles it).
Given it's possible and rational for a shape to have N parent transforms, and for a transform to have N shapes, exclusive ui binding would make it awfully confusing. You also, most of the time don't care about their coupling enough, or you care so much about it it's painfully obvious, that you need to see them connected in my experience. It's also the fine distinction between DAG representation, which HG does better (or the outliner, which is getting better but is still a long shot from SI's superb explorer), and the DG you care about in the NE. The NE currently replaces the HS more so than the HG. When the NE will receive a second mode (ala HG DAG vs DG modes) then I will agree with you, and the HG should be retired as well. In its current incarnation I think things are "fine" in those regards, or at least clear enough if you know how Maya works. That they DO get messy, well, that I don't disagree with. Maya is still one of the absolute easiest apps to make a complete and absolute multidirectional clusterf*** of the scene in. On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Nick Angus <n...@altvfx.com> wrote: > Simple things like putting the shape node inside the transform node (a > la Houdini) would be a help, the fact the transform and shape node of an > object don't even have a visible connection is downright bizarre! > > Simple exercise, make a poly sphere, open the node editor, duplicate > sphere n times. It gets very messy very fast, plus all the stuff Raf > pointed out and then some... > > N > ------------------------------ > *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ > softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] on behalf of Raffaele Fragapane [ > raffsxsil...@googlemail.com] > *Sent:* 12 September 2013 09:31 > *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > > *Subject:* Re: Article on Bifrost > > It still looks absolute arse Luc-Eric, even if a lot less so than it > did before, and it generally handles arsedly too :p > The only thing it has in common with ICE (looks wise) is it has coloured > circles for ports, but handling population, context, connections, port > expansion and so on is still bad, it still doesn't edge scroll, text kerns > horribly, the distance/readability ratio and the ridiculous zooming don't > work, and dynamic attributes and aggregate ports handle like a cow on a > frozen lake. > > It's leaps and bounds better than HS + CE though and I'm looking forward > to it looking and handling better again soon :) It also has some nifty > things missing in ICE. > > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Luc-Eric Rousseau <luceri...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> which version of Maya? it looks a lot like ICE in a dark theme in 2014 >> Le 2013-09-11 18:53, "Octavian Ureche" <okt...@gmail.com> a écrit : >> >> For me the problem is not in what it does. (which is everything that >>> the hypergraph/hypershade did and more). >>> When i first heard they were going to create a node editor i said >>> hallelujah...because everyone got fed up using the connection editor for >>> linking stuff. >>> But whenever i stare at it (which is almost daily), it just screams ugly >>> to me. Which is not something that i get with ice or vex for that matter. >>> But it might just be my perception. >>> I am completely aware of what it is and what it does, and i've been >>> using it since it was introduced...i just never felt so at ease with it as >>> i feel with ice. >>> Like having a really powerful yet ugly looking car. I know it's meant to >>> be used by td's and all that, and it doesn't need to look in any way. >>> But when i look at ice, i see something that is both functional and easy >>> on the eyes. Really well thought out visually. >>> That's not something i can say about the current node editor. But i >>> completely understand that for some it might not matter. >>> >>> Octavian >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:59 AM, boeingh...@s-farm.de < >>> boeingh...@s-farm.de> wrote: >>> >>>> ** >>>> Hey, >>>> >>>> I'm just doing the advanced rigging course here at anomalia (all in >>>> maya) and have learned how great the node editor is. If you want to >>>> make connections between objects it's (like you said eric) for the >>>> entire scene. So you can build all kind of expressions who live in >>>> the scene but not in an ice-operator on an object. >>>> >>>> Especially for all kind of rigging targets, is really cool to use this >>>> editor in place of the outdated SI expression editor or ICE-Kinematics, >>>> where you never now what drives what. I would love to see something similar >>>> in SI. >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> > Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@hybride.com> hat am 11. September 2013 um >>>> 19:24 geschrieben: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I think it's an incorrect observation as the Node Editor (different >>>> > than Hypershade and the Hypergraph) allows you to pull in a lot if >>>> not >>>> > all of the nodes in the scene. Grab a polygon cube and plug it's Y >>>> > value into this other shader type stuff. It's a node editor for the >>>> > entire scene not just operators. Much more than ICE is now. >>>> > >>>> > On September-11-13 12:23:46 PM, Ponthieux, Joseph G. >>>> (LARC-E1A)[LITES] >>>> > wrote: >>>> > Or is that an incorrect observation? >>>> > >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Octavian Ureche >>> +40 732 774 313 (GMT+2) >>> Animation & Visual Effects >>> www.okto.ro >>> >> > > > -- > Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it > and let them flee like the dogs they are! > -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
