It’s not an argument. It’s me stating my opinion just as you did. If you would like to argue how your idea is so superior to the current design despite being copied from software that is 25 years old, take it to another forum. This is for developers to discus designs with a little bit of feedback from users sprinkled in. Post a link to the thread you start on another forum and I will be happy to join in the conversation. Otherwise, you’ve stated your opinion now move on.

In T57210#1096655, @Dan Pool (dpdp) wrote:

...or you could learn the keyboard shortcuts. They are incredibly intuitive and work like a lot of graphic design software out there. The shortcuts are the same as inkscape and gimp.

...or you could learn the keyboard shortcuts. They are incredibly intuitive and work like a lot of graphic design software out there. The shortcuts are the same as inkscape and gimp.

So I am seeing that the new option to have separate fixed aspect for base and height has been added.

In T57210#1094505, @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) wrote:

@Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche) there is now an option for fixed aspect by default.

Update: committed various improvements.

Will the primitive creation finally be fixed? Spheres, Cones and Cylinders are still made squashed by default, and require modifier key presses to make them uniform. This results in very poor usability compared to equivalents of this tool in other 3D packages.

In T57210#1077747, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

In T57210#1077473, @Wilsimar (wilBr) wrote:

vertex snap, offseting start draw point if mouse point dont exactly over vertex position.

IMPORTANT: I agree that snapping from a corner vertex should require less precision from the user. In the recorded video it shows that it is a bit hard to snap from a corner vertex

edit:
I think the snap point position should be initial draw coord's ... and mouse pointer position used for get surface/face/view coords orientation.

I'm not sure what you mean here. The tool is doing what you describe above. Please attach a sketch or similair to decribe more in detail what you mean.

In T57210#1078284, @Wilsimar (wilBr) wrote:

In T57210#1077747, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean here. The tool is doing what you describe above. Please attach a sketch or similair to decribe more in detail what you mean.

video:

He is not trying to snap to a surface of a curve, but to the vertices of a curve. There should be no discrimination between object types to snap to as long as they have some set of point which can be interpreted as vertices and vertex snap mode is enabled.

0:37 You are trying to snap to the surface of curves. Curves does not allow snapping to surface. That's why you need to change orientation from surface to default. This is a limitation when snapping objects to curves in general.

• 0:37 You are trying to snap to the surface of curves. Curves does not allow snapping to surface. That's why you need to change orientation from surface to default. This is a limitation when snapping objects to curves in general.

In T57210#1077747, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean here. The tool is doing what you describe above. Please attach a sketch or similair to decribe more in detail what you mean.

In T57210#1077473, @Wilsimar (wilBr) wrote:

@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton), thank you very much for this tool... it is excelent for rapid modeling....

I would also love to see a keyboard shortcut for Toggle Quad View. If the aim is Industry Compatibility, Maya uses Spacebar, 3DS Max is Alt-W, modo is "0" (zero) on the numeric keypad, Cinema 4D has a button at the top right of every viewport (and the command is assignable to a keyboard shortcut)...these are all one click/button solutions.

Agree. 3D cursor should be visible, since we have transform tools and GRS anytime.
But sculpt workspace can have 3d cursor switched off by default.
I miss this old tiny bro!

In T55036#1039102, @TheRedWaxPolice (TheRedWaxPolice) wrote:

@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) Any hope to re-enable the 3D Cursor tool in sculpt mode? I believe it was removed when there was no transform tools in sculpt mode. Now the 3D Cursor tool might be actually useful there.

+1
Why was it disabled? I mean, it's an overlay and can be hidden at any time. I don't understand.

@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) Any hope to re-enable the 3D Cursor tool in sculpt mode? I believe it was removed when there was no transform tools in sculpt mode. Now the 3D Cursor tool might be actually useful there.

In T57210#1024520, @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) wrote:

@Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt), checking your proposal and I don't think it's practical to closely follow grease-pencil settings.

@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton)
I agree with your assessment on this. Have you read my full proposal for this tool and the conversation between Daniel and I on devtalk? In that I've included more detail about how automatic plane axis selection could work in a way that feels natural and does not limit the use cases of the tool.
In my experiments I've found that just using the plane axis that faces the view the most limits the range of view angles for a given axis too much, but there's a very easy solution to that which I demonstrate in my posts.
My proposal is actually that automatic drawing plane selection could completely replace the Plane Axis setting without losing any functionality except for difficult-to-control and erroneous behavior.
I also propose ways to simplify the tool's options, again with the goal of eliminating confusing behavior and making the tool's behavior more consistent with itself.

@Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt), checking your proposal and I don't think it's practical to closely follow grease-pencil settings.

In T57210#1024164, @M (justastatue) wrote:

Sorry if this is notifying people unnecessarily!
I just regret not pinging @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) in my comment above.
I'd appreciate knowing your thoughts on my posts 49 and 50: https://devtalk.blender.org/t/add-object-tool-requesting-feedback/13529/49
I'm very interested in this tool and would like to help improve it, so I tried to be thorough.
Since Campbell is considering your feedback in further development of the tool, I'd like to know if what I propose in my posts is something you could get behind, or if you have any doubts.
Thanks!

Sorry if this is notifying people unnecessarily!
I just regret not pinging @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) in my comment above.
I'd appreciate knowing your thoughts on my posts 49 and 50: https://devtalk.blender.org/t/add-object-tool-requesting-feedback/13529/49
I'm very interested in this tool and would like to help improve it, so I tried to be thorough.
Since Campbell is considering your feedback in further development of the tool, I'd like to know if what I propose in my posts is something you could get behind, or if you have any doubts.
Thanks!

I've written out my thoughts regarding the tool and some of the discussion here in the devtalk feedback thread. Please give it a look: https://devtalk.blender.org/t/add-object-tool-requesting-feedback/13529/49

Hi, The add object tools really are great additions to blender, and they have soo much more potential as a precision modeling tools if they are allowed to, the current implementation completely ignores precision modeling, and so here are my thoughts on them...

In T57210#1010919, @Dan Pool (dpdp) wrote:

In T57210#1010624, @Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche) wrote:

My point is - is there really any reasonable use case for user to want to start drawing a new primitive on a plane of a world axis while not looking at least roughly (winthin 45° angle) perpendicular to that plane? :) The rule of a thumb when it comes to UI design is that if you are unsure, then the answer should always be remove it. UI clutter is the worst enemy, because it makes features appear a lot more complicated than they really are, increase learning curve unnecessarily, and in this option, also add need to do manually what should be done automatically :)

This discussion might be better moved to devTalk since there’s seems to be a good bit of back and forth. But I will back Daniel’s sentiment that consistency is King. This type of behavior of partially looking down an axis means you want to draw in a certain orientation doesn’t exist anywhere else in Blender. The dev team spent two years going through blender and making it more consistent. Going backwards now would be a mistake.

Also the use case of wanting to draw with a certain orientation is that the location may be hidden from the view position because of other objects obscuring placement. In the “other software” that you reference, if I wanted to draw a bunch of disks inside a volume I would have to create the discs and then rotate and position them. With Daniel’s solution, I could create them in place which is the way I prefer to work.

Unless all of blender is going to adopt the behavior you describe, I don’t see this being a good approach.

In T57210#1010624, @Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche) wrote:

My point is - is there really any reasonable use case for user to want to start drawing a new primitive on a plane of a world axis while not looking at least roughly (winthin 45° angle) perpendicular to that plane? :) The rule of a thumb when it comes to UI design is that if you are unsure, then the answer should always be remove it. UI clutter is the worst enemy, because it makes features appear a lot more complicated than they really are, increase learning curve unnecessarily, and in this option, also add need to do manually what should be done automatically :)

In T57210#1010254, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

In T57210#1010193, @Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche) wrote:

In T57210#1010083, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

Change menu name from Orientation to Drawing plane

Options:

• Surface
• View
• Front (X-Z)
• Side (Y-Z)
• Top (X-Y)
• Cursor

Does it really make sense to populate this menu with 3 individual world axis aligned drawing planes? I'd go for the mainstream way of having one drawing plane option that automatically switches to appropriate orientation (one of 3 world axes) depending on the view angle. There are quite a few different pieces of 3D software that share this quite common functionality. It also removes necessity to manually switch between them.

That is a really good idea. Perhaps we add an option called [closest view axis] so that the drawing plane snaps to the closest axis based on view angle.

I'm unsure if we should remove front (X-Z), side(Y-Z), Top (X-Y). Sure, they clutter the UI a bit, but there could be use cases where they are useful. I would lean towards keeping them just in case.

https://blender.community/c/rightclickselect/KRfbbc/
I made some suggestions to improve the tool a while ago. These posts from Daniel are also pretty much what I requested.
Also in my post, I requested if there'd be grid snapping. I think that'd be really helpful here.

In T57210#1010193, @Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche) wrote:

In T57210#1010083, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

Change menu name from Orientation to Drawing plane

Options:

• Surface
• View
• Front (X-Z)
• Side (Y-Z)
• Top (X-Y)
• Cursor

Does it really make sense to populate this menu with 3 individual world axis aligned drawing planes? I'd go for the mainstream way of having one drawing plane option that automatically switches to appropriate orientation (one of 3 world axes) depending on the view angle. There are quite a few different pieces of 3D software that share this quite common functionality. It also removes necessity to manually switch between them.

In T57210#1010083, @Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) wrote:

Change menu name from Orientation to Drawing plane

Options:

• Surface
• View
• Front (X-Z)
• Side (Y-Z)
• Top (X-Y)
• Cursor

@Daniel Bystedt (dbystedt) The boolean mode you suggest sounds very cool! I love the idea of being able to just cut stuff out by drawing primitives!

This is a very nice addition to the modeling tools. Great work! @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) asked me to try it out and write some feedback, so here we go. I've tried to keep suggestions to fixes that I assume are fairly easy to implement. More complicated features are noted with "IMPORTANT".

Following Vitor's question, is there any progress regarding the custom editors? It would be so great to have them.

I am using a German Microsoft Natural Keyboard in combination with a MacBook Pro. None of the function keys are recognized by Blender. I tried it with F3 first (to get the menu), but this did not work. I then went to the Keyboard bindings, just to find out that no key press of any of the F-keys is recognized. Is there a way to fix this?

Hi guys, I also have the problem that the key below ESC is not working as expected, as I am using a German QWERTZ keyboard. Is there a way to fix this? I agree with others that it would be better if Blender just used the hardware key code instead of looking for the tilde key (which doesn't work either on a German keyboard). How can I at least manually remap the key? What's the actual name of the tilde pie menu?

We can disable X,Y,Z axis of gizmo by locking rotation axis in properties of object.

One note about «Add primitive» tool.
It will be nice to have option «origin at center of base». Useful for creating things on the floor (cup) or surfaces (spikes).
Wondermesh addon have it for example (Centered by default)

Some misc mockups from the last time I was playing around in here, in case anyone wants to try improving on it.

In T54842#499873, @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) wrote:

We talked about this, and it's technically feasible within the design, but out of scope for the code quest.

The list of Common Groups realization discussion treads.
Basically, there are two approaches I would like to mention.

• Common groups realization.

It is industry standard approach (that works in dynamic context - "I want to group that object and that object", instead of static context - "I want to group all the trees")
Common Groups is a separate incorporeal (with no RTOs) hierarchical structure, that is independent from Collections static context separation.
Since it is dynamic context tool, it refers to cross-hierarchical solution - it creates its own non-cumulative hierarchy of groups, which is viewed and controlled separately from main collections-based scene setup.
Usually uses ctrl+G shortcut, which was reserved in Blender.

What about assigning the top left key (grave accent) to subd/poly mode ?
shift + ` to set as subd (adds a subd modifer)
ctrl + ` to set as poly (disable the last sub modifier)