- User Since
- Feb 13 2010, 12:16 AM (496 w, 3 d)
Apr 22 2019
That's sad! Thanks anyway!
I've tried to solve another problem and seems that this isn't a bug (in a traditional meaning). After installing the latest Nvidia drivers Blender doesn't crashes anymore.
BUT I see "No compatible GPUs found" message still.
No crash BUT! picture
Apr 20 2019
Apr 16 2019
Hello! The freshest Win64 build crashes when I switch "Screen Space Reflections" ON. It happens when the viewport EEVEE is active.
The system: AMD Ryzen 7 1800x. Win7 Pro, Graph. card - Geforce GTS 450, 16Gb memory.
Dec 3 2013
I've didn't write anything that tells "it's wrong" about those (upper side I suppose) horizontal tabs. Probably you were misguided by my weird English by some way :)
(plz, make a sketch of your mockup or my comment will be just for you, Brecht and some ppl who possibly 've seen it. Maybe you'll need it further)
Horizontal tabs are good. Obviously they need some "partially hiding" algorithm for cases when an area is being stretched. Plus arrows for scrolling.
Every clever feature is cool when it's properly designed and fits all other neighboring features. Obvious :)
Dec 2 2013
domonauts will punish you for this :D
Generally it's good... Vertical and horizontal tabs together are good.
But if I'll criticize your example:
M, S, R - are way too big. Need to be smaller, like one of these squares. Three buttons as sectors of a circle can be good. Or three vertical sectors of a square.
Or it must be removable - nobody needs this forever (OK, people without keyboards need it actually... but it's another story).
Addons take different width... What's your idea about it?
Nov 25 2013
@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht),
Thanks! I got it! Sorry for the off-topic.
Yeah, of course any bad design of an addon is a matter of it's author.
Nov 24 2013
@Antonio Vazquez (antoniov), pinning tabs is a good idea. If you need something to be in the place without "jumping" there from another tab, I think it's ideal.
Nov 23 2013
I've worked in Modo for some time (made few sets of renders for our project). All I've got about Modo's interface... It's "slow". The organization is great but
if I compare it to Blender's current UI (no shortcuts, no contrib addons enabled) then Blender has about 1.5 times faster access (it's my inner feeling of that).
I've remembered all often used commands in Blender and now need no time to search them. Modo is great at 1st time because you understand most of the commands as you see them. After I've remembered Modo's commands positions I've realized that these big icons only take a lot of space and tabs are needed to make this newbie friendly UI possible to not take too much screen space.
The idea to place commands in different tabs is great!
Now I'll dare to reference other 3d app. It starts from "L" ;) They have a great idea of letting users add their own tabs and associate any commands to newly created tabs. It works smoothly from "Preferences" (another name there). You click to create a new tab, then select it, select a command from a list of commands. When two items - new tab and a command are selected you press "Add command".
So for ex. if you want your own "transform-modify-reduce" tab (with a set of commands that you need especially) and it fits your own daily workflow then you get it and all will be placed exactly according to the idea of your layout. It's the main profit of this way to organize UI.
Any addons that will be enabled can be automatically added to Addons tab.
Flexibility is the main Blender's feature. That's why I'm talking about this idea.
Nov 22 2013
@Paweł Łyczkowski (plyczkowski),
Sorry, I've didn't noticed your 1st message! How could I? :)) Sometimes my head jokes with me )
I've looked at the 1st mockup - I think it can be good if sections will be expandable.
For example: my interests in this panel belongs only to Shade and UV parts. I don't use other icons because I remember the most
of shortcuts for them or create my own (for Bridge and Bevel and some others). But sometimes I could use these icons so an expandable version could be the best option.
I'll pass the 2nd mockup.
Icon only toolshelf is great when you've placed all icons manually, by yourself. So only if it's configurable. It's working perfect in AutoCad. Users delete unnecessary icons and left only those they want to use often. Panels are floating and you can dock it anywhere - vertically or horizontally (it will be super-perfect for Blender but I guess it's hard to embed in the current UI).
Everything other is accessible through menus or via shortcuts.
If addons will be as popups - this can block a scene (usually not a whole space and actually with semi-transparent panels now it's not that bad)
if addons will take space in properties - it will be a constant jumping from tools to addons. Although many addons acts in Object and Edit modes.
yes, "individually" can be the best solution here. I've realized. I guess that something (pardon my code terms illiteracy) isn't well prepared for this yet or it could be already fixed a year ago... not sure though...
Nov 21 2013
@Jonathan Williamson (carter2422),
on that picture you've shown that having a lot lot of icons is a holy mess (I guess you've meant that!). I agree here almost on 100%.
Actually.. personally I need only 2-3 clickable commands presently: set smooth, set flat and some others. This leads me to the idea that the layout must be highly configurable. This feature set usability was proven in Acad and Rhino (at least).
If a user doesn't need these "extrude", "move", "rip" and etc. to be presented visually then it can be removed. We have shortcuts :)
Nov 20 2013
Yes, seems that it's fixed now!