- User Since
- Feb 1 2018, 12:48 PM (54 w, 4 d)
Sat, Feb 16
I would say, no. The least options we have per object the better I think.
Fri, Feb 15
Wed, Feb 13
@carlos (c17vfx) It's an interesting proposal but this kind of menu would be a nightmare to manage.
Imagine having to click through potentially hundreds of collections and objects to change these settings. Keeping this in the outliner makes it very easy to manage.
@William Reynish (billreynish)
I absolutely agree. The eye and checkmark/excluding should be front and center to make clear what should be used the most. Good tooltips can clear up any remaining confusion.
Tue, Feb 12
They way those states relate to the other features are and presented in the UI is so hidden and confusing that very few people will find them, and if they do, it's completely non-obvious how they work,
I'm going full circle. The current way the visibility system works is the most functional for all cases. If we attempt to simplify, remove or merge any of the toggles we would need to make certain use cases still possible by introducing hidden features like locking, more options in object/collection tabs in the properties, leaving the user to do a lot more collection management & potentially more.
Mon, Feb 11
Damnit ... in a lot of cases when keeping collections or objects always hidden in the viewport, either in the current file or for linking, is to hide high res geometry that will be used for rendering but is too taxing for the viewport performance. But since the eye icon doesn't improve performance, this becomes impossible.
With view layers and checkmark setups this can still be achieved in my version of the proposal but this setup couldn't be linked over to other files and needs to be set up every time.
Neither of these solutions with 3 toggles and locking can work for these cases.
- Ideally, we could make it so it the linked visibility is set in the scene you link TO, not FROM
- We could set the linked visibility inside the Object > Collections panel
Ok how about this:
@William Reynish (billreynish) I like the proposal but I think we still need to be careful how to implement it exactly. The current visibility system is at least usable in a lot of ways but when attempting to simplify the complexity we could lose important functionality.
When thinking longer about it, I can see one big issue with the proposal as an example:
Why? To me this seems fundamentally confusing, to have two competing visibility states that only affect the viewport
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) This is a great overview on how the visibility options work but wouldn't my proposal of the 4 toggles not clearer?
I'm just wondering if we need a full wiki documentation to understand how visibility toggles work, is that the right way?
@William Reynish (billreynish) I have some questions about your proposal.
Sun, Feb 10
Yes but by making these options affect both viewport and render visibility it makes it more confusing.
@William Reynish (billreynish)
Well that sounds pretty simple. But just as food for thought:
Makes sense but there's an issue with this:
Sat, Feb 9
To give my feedback on this as well: I like it!
But I think it would be more usable as a tab in the sidebar instead of a popup. There's a reason why the Ctrl + H menu was never used, and it's because it was harder to access if you have to first hit a shortcut (or in this case click on a tiny button).
Thu, Feb 7
Can we create a new design task for this? I know this is related to the patch, but the design discussion here is getting a bit out of hand.
I'm beginning to think this should be a sub-menu when right clicking a collection in the outliner instead of a separate "Duplicate Hierarchy" option.
Somewhat like this?
More feedback notes:
Wed, Feb 6
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) The shift click seems to still not work correctly. It works when Shift clicking to hide but when Shift clicking to show it changes the screen icon to an eye without actually changing the disabled state.
If the file gets saved afterwards and reverted/reloaded the disabled state is completely gone ...
More feedback from the rest of the Spring team:
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) More feedback from using it a couple of hours:
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) I tried it out and it works just as expected except for that Ctrl clicking does only work for collections and not objects. Is this intentional since it's also not mentioned in the tooltip for objects?
Mon, Feb 4
Discussed in IRC, this is about vector displacement for baking, not for render
Tue, Jan 29
Actually this is nothing, really. Zbrush works pretty much like that, it never was an issue.
Mon, Jan 28
From my experience, I strongly prefer the face normal version. It is not that smooth, but it gives much more precise information about the placement of the cursor in the model, especially on the edges. When sculpting, that preview is much more useful than the real sculpting normal. Furthermore, I don't think the preview normal should change depending on the size of the brush when the placement in the model is the same.
Sat, Jan 26
Jan 18 2019
I have some more notes on improving the Outliner usability:
Jan 17 2019
I'm not sure. I personally got used to the way it works very quickly and would rarely use this kind of toggle to be there through Ctrl clicking the eye icon.
Just having this addition sounds good to me but it sounds like we already have this functionality: Local View.
The problem is that local view is only using the selected objects and cannot be enabled/disabled from the outliner.
Jan 15 2019
I think the best solution for the studio right now would be to have the option to export curves as meshes like already mentioned here: T51311
Jan 14 2019
Jan 11 2019
@William Reynish (billreynish)
I think I'm fine with either way. But just a heads up:
First address these issues:
@William Reynish (billreynish)
What about the mirror options in pose mode and armature edit mode? I just asked around at the studio and having these mode specific can be catastrophic for example rigging.
Having this happen accidentally is something that needs a lot of time to fix it or can even completely ruins the work if it happens unnoticed.
@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) As an extra note on your note:
Jan 10 2019
@William Reynish (billreynish)
In my experience I find it very annoying with the symmetry options set to the mode and not the objects.
I pretty much always have objects that I sculpt on that I want symmetry to be active on and others where I need to disable it again.
This is a constant back & forth of turning a setting on /off.
But even if it's a per mode setting, it's very easy to not notice that any of these options are on or off and like @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) said:
@Wo!262 (wo262) A while back there were big performance problems because both versions were visible a the same time while sculpting. So now only one is shown in Sculpt Mode. In Eevee the other one is shown (except with the wireframe overlay).
Jan 8 2019
Jan 7 2019
Dec 21 2018
Using M in the 2D viewport you can do just that. At the "bottom" of each of the levels of the menu you can move the objects to a new collection.
I think there's another helpful feature I'd like to propose:
Dec 20 2018
Alright, I can see that this change is here to stay. No more resistance and no more devils advocate on the current split. There are just a couple of things that I would suggest:
Dec 19 2018
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) I agree. That would be for the best. Perhaps there could be some more visual feedback if the setting is used or not.
The text in the top-left corner saying "Mask Hidden", similar to when you are in local view?
Or even it's own button in the header since there is so much available space in Sculpt Mode instead of having it at the bottom of the Overlays popover?
@Jacques Lucke (JacquesLucke) In some cases it's hard to see the result of what you are sculpting when areas are obscured by having them very dark.
In 2.7x i would often:
Mask -> sculpt -> remove mask to see the result -> realise I need to tweak it further or it does not look how I intended -> undo to bring the mask back -> rinse & repeat.
By having the option to toggle the visibility of the mask while still keeping it active it becomes easier to see the result while or after sculpting the changes.
Dec 18 2018
If we keep the Editors separate then I like @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) suggestion and I'd like to try to flesh the idea out a bit.
@Jacques Lucke (JacquesLucke) You can enable/disable the option with Ctrl + M. Unfortunately there's currently still a bug which delays the effect of the toggle until for example the next brush stroke. Other than that the option itself is very useful.
@William Reynish (billreynish) Let's bring up some new arguments please ... or at least reply to / build on top of the ones from before ;)
@Sam Van Hulle (sam_vh) Right now I don't really care about the question:
Dec 17 2018
@Jacques Lucke (JacquesLucke) At a random point while setting up the simple blend file the cube got the bug as well. Trying to reproduce it didn't work unfortunately.
I couldn't pinpoint it in other files as well.
Dec 14 2018
For me this works very well.
@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) Sounds like a great compromise to me! I think this will give all users what they want/need.
Dec 13 2018
@William Reynish (billreynish) One question I still have before we use this patch again: When the scene orientation is set to global, will hitting GXX switch to local or will it just do nothing like the patch did.
I still think it should always switch to an alternative orientation when hitting the key a second time, even when set to global. Otherwise only this one orientation setting is generally less useful to have active.
Why would anyone use the global orientation setting when it gives less functionality than any other orientation?
Dec 12 2018
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) I finally tried it out myself and I think it's great so far and I agree with all the feedback of @William Reynish (billreynish) and @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) I do agree that the isolating with Ctrl clicking is still very useful and hiding all the components like it currently works should also be easily accessible to the user.
Perhaps we can assign shortcuts this way:
Dec 11 2018
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) Sorry I was not able to try it out. Maybe you can send me a build. I can't really figure out what the 3 levels of outliner visibility means from the description alone.
Speed: It's much faster to directly be able to select the UV Editor, rather than first having to go to UV/Editor and then find the UV mode
Well we shouldn't decide weither to split features based on naming conventions. It's not really that straight forwards :D
Let's rather decide it based on functionality and usability.
Dec 10 2018
@William Reynish (billreynish) Right now it got split into 2 Editors but I was talking more as in what is planned (Or what I think is planned)
I think I misread one point above. I got the impression that the "New: 2D Paint" means that it becomes its own Editor as well. Would this still be part of the Image Viewer?
I'm all for everything that's said in this proposal. The syncing of the selections could cause problems when a lot of linking is involved but that's why keeping it optional and either completely on or off is a great idea.
I'd like to know more about the reasoning behind splitting the UV/Image Editor into 4 distinct Editors.
I get the reasoning behind making a Mask Editor since the masks are used in other Editors as well, but I don't see any reason for the others.
So we'll we have 3 editors that basically look the same and share similar functionality. To me this change seems very nonsensical and unintuitive.
Are all these Editors going to share the same interface and selected Image anyway, syncing up on all times in terms of panning and zooming? Then why have them separate Editors when we already had them as separate Modes.
Dec 7 2018
I'd like to know more about the reasoning behind splitting the UV/Image Editor into 2 distinct Editors.
To me this change seems very nonsensical and unintuitive. Now we have two editors that look the same and do almost the same.
When going into Edit Mode now I have to switch between 2 almost identical Editors to see and edit my UVs but when going into Texture Paint Mode the UVs get displayed in both Editors anyway?
And the UV Editor and Image Editor share the same selected texture anyway, syncing up on all times.
Dec 5 2018
Nov 28 2018
@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) I'm personally still for having the switch between global and local if global is the active orientation.
Otherwise the GXX does just nothing. It's like having a shortcut to switch to wireframe mode, except if you are in wireframe. Then the shortcut does nothing.
Doesn't it make sense that there is always a toggle? When the active orientation is global it can just change to the next orientation in the list (the other most used orientation): Local.
Just like in 2.7x when in wireframe mode and hitting Z it switches to solid mode. (The Wireframe example is not 100% applicable but you get my point)