Resizing the 3d manipulators makes the handles of the scale and the move tools too big. #76462

Closed
opened 2020-05-06 03:18:39 +02:00 by Adam Smith · 11 comments

System Information
Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.18362-SP0 64 Bits
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 1070/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 442.19

Blender Version
Broken: version: 2.82 (sub 7), branch: master, commit date: 2020-02-12 16:20, hash: 77d23b0bd7
Worked: (optional)

Short description of error
I reported this as a papercut on the devtalk with some suggestions for improvements but i believe it's more than that. 2.7 had some options to adjust the handles size for the scale and the move tools but in the new 2.8 versions it's now one option that alteres everything.

The rotate tool is fine as it doens't have handles but the other two become too big for what's needed when i put the max value as you can see. the reason for that it makes grabbing the axes much eaiser and Blender has sensitivity for when you get closer to the center which i don't like.

I hope this explains the reasons for why some changes are needed at least for the size of the handles.
Thank you.

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error
wyGRrj6.mp4
Open the Preferences editor and in the viewport tab under the gizmo size panel make the value to high or max then switch between the transform tools.

PS: is there a way to disable the outer scale circle? i use click drag anywhere with the right click select.

**System Information** Operating system: Windows-10-10.0.18362-SP0 64 Bits Graphics card: GeForce GTX 1070/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 442.19 **Blender Version** Broken: version: 2.82 (sub 7), branch: master, commit date: 2020-02-12 16:20, hash: `77d23b0bd7` Worked: (optional) **Short description of error** I reported this as a papercut on the [devtalk ](https://devtalk.blender.org/t/blender-ui-paper-cuts/2596/4020?u=Adam.S) with some suggestions for improvements but i believe it's more than that. 2.7 had some options to adjust the handles size for the scale and the move tools but in the new 2.8 versions it's now one option that alteres everything. The rotate tool is fine as it doens't have handles but the other two become too big for what's needed when i put the max value as you can see. the reason for that it makes grabbing the axes much eaiser and Blender has sensitivity for when you get closer to the center which i don't like. I hope this explains the reasons for why some changes are needed at least for the size of the handles. Thank you. **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** [wyGRrj6.mp4](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F8514863/wyGRrj6.mp4) Open the Preferences editor and in the viewport tab under the gizmo size panel make the value to high or max then switch between the transform tools. PS: is there a way to disable the outer scale circle? i use click drag anywhere with the right click select.
Author

Added subscriber: @Adam.S

Added subscriber: @Adam.S

Added subscriber: @mano-wii

Added subscriber: @mano-wii

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Archived'

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Archived'
Germano Cavalcante self-assigned this 2020-05-06 19:58:20 +02:00

Thanks for the report but all of these are feature requests.
You have to contact the UI team and a developer if you want these features to be implemented.
Closing as this bug tracker is only for bugs and errors.

For user requests and feedback, please use other channels: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Communication/Contact#User_Feedback_and_Requests
For more information on why this isn't considered a bug, visit: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Not_a_bug

Thanks for the report but all of these are feature requests. You have to contact the UI team and a developer if you want these features to be implemented. Closing as this bug tracker is only for bugs and errors. For user requests and feedback, please use other channels: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Communication/Contact#User_Feedback_and_Requests For more information on why this isn't considered a bug, visit: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Not_a_bug
Author

I get it why you want to close the reoport, but how are these feature requests when most of them were already there at least in the older versions? this is a loss of functionality or more like a complete removal which doesn't make sense from a user standpoint, it's not like they are complex or hard to achieve in today's standards or even brining the old ones back.

This is the down side of open source changing things that are not necessary to change which hinders people's workflows...there are certain things that shouldn't be even touched or only improved after extensive R&D and users testing including the UI/UX, Tools...etc

And now i have to contact the UI team/developers just to bring something back or improve it when it was already implemented, because i did mention this several times on those channels and got ignored even emailed Mr.Roosendaal for something similar but he told me he's no longer developing and switched to the management side.
Very disappointed.

I get it why you want to close the reoport, but how are these feature requests when most of them were already there at least in the older versions? this is a loss of functionality or more like a complete removal which doesn't make sense from a user standpoint, it's not like they are complex or hard to achieve in today's standards or even brining the old ones back. This is the down side of open source changing things that are not necessary to change which hinders people's workflows...there are certain things that shouldn't be even touched or only improved after extensive R&D and users testing including the UI/UX, Tools...etc And now i have to contact the UI team/developers just to bring something back or improve it when it was already implemented, because i did mention this several times on those channels and got ignored even emailed Mr.Roosendaal for something similar but he told me he's no longer developing and switched to the management side. Very disappointed.

Added subscribers: @WilliamReynish, @ideasman42

Added subscribers: @WilliamReynish, @ideasman42

In #76462#925569, @Adam.S wrote:
I get it why you want to close the reoport, but how are these feature requests when most of them were already there at least in the older versions? this is a loss of functionality or more like a complete removal which doesn't make sense from a user standpoint, it's not like they are complex or hard to achieve in today's standards or even brining the old ones back.

This is the down side of open source changing things that are not necessary to change which hinders people's workflows...there are certain things that shouldn't be even touched or only improved after extensive R&D and users testing including the UI/UX, Tools...etc

And now i have to contact the UI team/developers just to bring something back or improve it when it was already implemented, because i did mention this several times on those channels and got ignored even emailed Mr.Roosendaal for something similar but he told me he's no longer developing and switched to the management side.
Very disappointed.

The gizmos system changed dramatically between 2.79 and 2.80.
Some things may no longer be compatible and thus discontinued.

@WilliamReynish, @ideasman42 any idea why this feature was removed?

> In #76462#925569, @Adam.S wrote: > I get it why you want to close the reoport, but how are these feature requests when most of them were already there at least in the older versions? this is a loss of functionality or more like a complete removal which doesn't make sense from a user standpoint, it's not like they are complex or hard to achieve in today's standards or even brining the old ones back. > > This is the down side of open source changing things that are not necessary to change which hinders people's workflows...there are certain things that shouldn't be even touched or only improved after extensive R&D and users testing including the UI/UX, Tools...etc > > And now i have to contact the UI team/developers just to bring something back or improve it when it was already implemented, because i did mention this several times on those channels and got ignored even emailed Mr.Roosendaal for something similar but he told me he's no longer developing and switched to the management side. > Very disappointed. The gizmos system changed dramatically between 2.79 and 2.80. Some things may no longer be compatible and thus discontinued. @WilliamReynish, @ideasman42 any idea why this feature was removed?
Author

I went ahead and made Features for the 3d Manipulators to work in an intuitive way. when this stuff should have been solved during the 2.8 development phase, because right now you're telling me that it's discontinued and will probably never see it for how many years because it's no longer compatible.

I went ahead and made [Features for the 3d Manipulators to work in an intuitive way.](https://blender.community/c/rightclickselect/67fbbc/) when this stuff should have been solved during the 2.8 development phase, because right now you're telling me that it's discontinued and will probably never see it for how many years because it's no longer compatible.
Author

@WilliamReynish @ideasman42 So what is the final say? there is hope for this or not.

@WilliamReynish @ideasman42 So what is the final say? there is hope for this or not.

We should probably make the gizmo scaling more sophisticated, so that the handles don’t also scale. I know animators typically like to work with very large gizmos for transforms.

We should probably make the gizmo scaling more sophisticated, so that the handles don’t also scale. I know animators typically like to work with very large gizmos for transforms.
Author

In #76462#931165, @WilliamReynish wrote:
We should probably make the gizmo scaling more sophisticated, so that the handles don’t also scale. I know animators typically like to work with very large gizmos for transforms.

Yes, please.

> In #76462#931165, @WilliamReynish wrote: > We should probably make the gizmo scaling more sophisticated, so that the handles don’t also scale. I know animators typically like to work with very large gizmos for transforms. Yes, please.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No project
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#76462
No description provided.