- User Since
- Feb 15 2017, 4:55 PM (77 w, 5 d)
Jun 11 2018
@Jean Da Costa machado (jeacom256) It is sometimes a good practice to read the post before replying to it :)
Jun 10 2018
I agree with @Sterling Roth (sterlingroth) , if it is possible, it would be nice to have the edge calculation method also, it is much cleaner from tech - aesthetics point of view -
Jun 9 2018
Can i dump all of my tokens here?
I just remembered a feature i missed a couple times while making addons, i don't know if it is possible - to be able to call a node editor as a popup.
Jun 8 2018
Jun 6 2018
Great addition @Clément Foucault (fclem)! Thanks for the hard work guys.
Jun 2 2018
On par with @cédric lepiller (pitiwazou) here. Don't underestimate the power of subtle floating widgets in the 3D view. You could port the complete settings to the viewport, much like you already do with custom armature widgets for characters.
@Jeroen Bakker (jbakker) strikes again!
May 31 2018
Guys, you might wanna check this out. This might be the first functional App Template, and with a lot of nice UI concepts for 2.8 to take inspiration from:
May 21 2018
If i can put some of my experience (and long time grief) to use here - LMB (or selection mouse button) to empty space - deselect all.
May 15 2018
Some can already be snapped to vertex, but wider support would be welcome and make them a lot more useful for precision modeling.
As it stands they are not yet very suited for hard surface modeling or situations where geometric precision or alignement is more desirable.
If it somehow integrated with a workflow similar to the outlined at T45734, it would certainly make a lot of people happy.
Great initiative on Widget Info! That's how you do it :)
May 14 2018
May 11 2018
Ok, great. Cheers!
Great addition with the interactive primitive creation! Been whining for that for half a decade now :)
May 8 2018
Yes, i presumed the problem was along those lines, thank you @Zsolt Stefan (zsoltst) . The first problem i saw in my mind when considering this was the clipping distance. There are also light calculations, material parameters and who-knows-what.
Ok Brecht, thanks for the explanation. That puts this issue into a new perspective.
Keep up the good work!
But depending on how you look at it, it does (and should) scale. If you make a 1x1x1 unit cube, and tell Blender that you'd like to work in km, that cube is now 1km x 1km x 1km. If you then change it so you work in cm, that cube is now 1cm x 1cm x 1cm. Essentially, that cube is now way smaller. That's how it's intended to work, and that's how it should work. Otherwise, it'd be impossible to work at very large or very small scales.
May 7 2018
Just to put some more light on the terminology, i have a feeling we are being confused by two different words here:
Cool :) Check the intellectual property though. Some big companies use it, although i think some open source do also. Check LibreCAD, QCAD, i believe it is safe.
I trust you on this, i don't know the technical side of the implementation.
Bingo! That is the problem!
If useful, i left a comment in the task that is now tagged as 'resolved'. Perhaps it helps.
Yes, it is unrelated to 'what measuring unit should be the default'. It is probably off topic in this task.
If you allow, a few notes on this. I've been thinking, i will layout the basic logic behind my experience on layers and groups - perhaps you can use it in your future thinking. I've used this systems in literally hundreds of files in various graphical apps. Some of them were quite complex.
@William Reynish (billreynish) Actually, @Vyacheslav (Ghostil) is right, it is a matter of UI / UX discipline - if i choose centimeters, that means that i want to see and work in centimeters - i want to input centimeters when moving, i want to read object attributes in centimeters, see them when measuring i want to eat them, sleep them and breathe them. That is how powerful that switch should be. Check the comments on that feature in Blenderartists, they all say the same thing, Blender has been a bit sloppy in this area.
P.S. - What i mean you could try to expand multi element editing to whole property editor. Show only tabs (object / mesh / modifiers...) that are common for selection and on them only common values, according to selection. A selection filter drop down on the top for expanding the list of editable values - check the PDF...
Very important feature, been missing it since forever, one of the first things i noticed missing when beginning with Blender. Triples the workflow efficiency.
May 6 2018
Collections will handle everything that layers and groups do in 2.7x
Ah, ok. Thanks for the explanation.
May 5 2018
Yeah, that is one of my biggest mysteries of Blender - how did it get through 20 years of existence without a classical grouping system? It would be awesome to see it at one point. So far i am using an addon that i made to fill the gap.
@Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche) How about doubleclik for entering / exiting edit mode? I have it in my keymap, it is fast and intuitive as an eyeblink and it could free spacebar for something else important...
Another thought, after reading some of the topics in the code quest. There is a possibility we will end up with a workflow problem here.
+1 on @Ejnar Brendsdal (ejnaren) 's suggestion. Crucial when dealing with large interior / exterior sets, repeating complex elements in large numbers and alternating and variating those scenes.
May 4 2018
Perhaps as a toggleable half - transparent overlay, not to eat up the interface for another 30 pixels?
Apr 27 2018
Tested the new random color feature - works nice, will be very useful i think. Although, it changes colors upon every major undo / redo - it seems a little bit disorienting. Perhaps sticking to one color set throughout a session?
Overlap silhouette in action. Nice!
Another thought on the constraint squares - They are probably useful for beginners and probably should be kept. But! - aside from being tweakable in size, why not totally toggleable? If they make too much clutter, you turn them off in preferences, and the constraint feature goes automatically back to SHIFT+arrow handle, just like the power users are used to? Just a thought...
And a couple suggestions on the design of the manipulators. Although not a lot of people appreciate those little squares for restricted plane transformation i am sure architecture users do - moving things across the floor or along the wall. Nice addition!
@William Reynish (billreynish) William, i am not sure this qualifies under this task, but i guess it is a UI/UX issue.
Apr 19 2018
In the 2.8 selection outline code, there is a part that calculates the surface intersection lines, i think Clement removed it from the code just a day ago. Perhaps you could try to integrate this into the line engine.
Apr 17 2018
On a larger scope, i don't know if you guys considered this approach, perhaps it makes sense:
Apr 16 2018
As i understand, the engine / draw / overlay terminology and concepts are still not clear. From the user standpoint, the haze is only thicker :)
If you are open to general user feedback, it would be nice if you layout the exact terminology when it settles in the task description so we could be more precise when giving feedback :)
Apr 14 2018
Hi @Jeroen Bakker (jbakker) , good luck with the project, it will be one of the most important ones. And best regards to the rest of the Code Quest team!
Feb 1 2018
Thanks @Pablo López Soriano (kednar) , nice, feels quite natural and distinctive. For some reason, the third one is my favorite.
Perhaps the Venn diagram idea could be put in action trial also?
@Matej Junk (MJunk) For me a bit too much color on that small size. Add and remove ones specifically become unrecognizable with the white paper added, they appear to be totally different tools. Perhaps simplifying the colors a little bit, give that blue notebook a greater role. Maybe mono-chroming those secondary symbols, and letting that paper just peek from inside of the notebook (as it is being slided in or out).
Jan 23 2018
And what about the current 2.8 icon for the collections (three horizontal lines)? That seems pretty distinguishable in the UI. Or is it more suitable for layers (sheets of foil on top of each other)?
Jan 22 2018
You got my vote for 4 or 5. Quite clever.
However, i'm not quite sure is the cardboard box enough distinguishable from the 'cube' object. Perhaps opening the lids a little bit?
Nov 1 2017
As for your 3D-cage, it looks like you've put a lot of thought into it. I'd be interested to see if there are ideas we can use.
For example - we may want to support rotation too.
Although for now I'm mainly working on basics, so might not get around to this soon.
Oct 29 2017
This is possibly another major issue. To clarify: You might want to keep different tools active in different editors, i.e. the extrude tool active in the 3D View, the transform tool active in the UV Editor. The top-bar is global though, so which tool-settings to show?
Oct 27 2017
Hi guys, hi @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton)
May 20 2017
Hi @mathieu menuet (bliblubli), can't reproduce the problem, what kind of console error do you get?
Apr 19 2017
That would be great, thanks.
The numerics in the zip file name are just for the description, the folder and module names have all been kept clear of numbers, according to your suggestions.
Apr 17 2017
Hi everyone, i updated the file in the task description.
Hi @Germano Cavalcante (mano-wii) , thanks for the review. I wasn't aware about those issues. I referenced the GPL in the manual, but i can redirect it to blender's root or a web link.
Apr 15 2017
Great, thanks. Sorry, i was unaware i had to master the vcs myself for the inclusion.
Apr 11 2017
The initial wiki page is online: https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Object/NP_Station
Apr 6 2017
Thanks @nBurn (nBurn) , i did as you suggested. I will get acquainted with the writing style and the docs should be ready soon.
Apr 5 2017
Ok mano-wii, thanks for the tips, i will try to transfer the docs from the pdf.
Apr 1 2017
Thanks mano-wii. A question on documentation - is it enough to have it as an included .pdf, or should i transferr some of it to wiki?
Mar 28 2017
Ok, i'm here if anything is needed.
Hi everyone, here's an updated version with aforementioned bl_options correction as well as an upgrade in NP Point Distance operator.
Based on some user feedback i added an optional 'hold_result' step.
Also, there is a small correction in NP Point Align behavior.
Mar 24 2017
Hey @Germano Cavalcante (mano-wii) , thanks for testing and kind words, coming from you that means a lot.
Mar 22 2017
Hi guys! With some help from @Germano Cavalcante (mano-wii) , here's the version with conditional console print. It uses a new submodule with a print function and it does seem a bit faster, thanks for the tip!
Mar 21 2017
@matali23 (matali23), thanks for the modification! That was not a small task. If it really gains speed it is a valid improvement.
The package has been released on Blender Artists with the final docs.
Mar 20 2017
Mar 18 2017
@matali23 (matali23) Ok. Just be sure to double-check, the display mini-engine has a habit to reduce the widget to null when you zoom in too much.
That could be what you experienced, it happens with the last version also.
Mar 17 2017
Hi @matali23 (matali23), thanks for testing.
Mar 4 2017
Just noticed new operator overridden float_rectangle, corrected.
Of course, any help is welcome :) I will try to keep up.
Mistake with subscribers...
Hi, i uploaded the package with a new float_box operator.