Hello, I'm new here, don't know if I'm posting it right, but here it goes:

Will the rest of these options get love? Really would love see a perhaps more useful select method when in Object-mode

Another missing feature for the UV Editor Box Select Tool that I noticed is that there are 2 ways of box selecting:

• Box select any UVs with B
• Box select pinned UVs with Ctrl + B

I recently noticed that the Spin Tool is having some issues, especially in combination with some features that were added to Blender afterwards:

• Dragging anywhere in the viewport will also execute the tool but this still needs to be tied to the "Drag Fallback Action" panel. The Spin Tool and Spin Duplicates Tool are the only ones that lack this feature inclusion even though it is necessary here.
• When using the Gizmo on the Spin Duplicates Tool it will instead use the Spin operation without the "Use Duplicated" checkmark. This makes the Gizmo useless.
• Ideally IMO the 2 Tools should be merged with more checkmarks provided in the Tool Settings like "Use Duplicates", "Auto Merge" and "Flip Normals".

I am struggeling with how to get started with Blender and my biggest hangup right now is the hot keys.. I tried this, industry compatable keymap.. as I would LOVE for blender to work with all of the Maya hotkeys.. but I found a few probelms with it:

• blender has so many modes, that you end up changing and deleting keyboard shortcuts you might need in another mode
• the alt_LMB,RMB,MMB nav worked great in objct mode.. but started behaving unpredictably in other modes..

For the record, people are complaining about a lack of undo or history in this thread.
https://blenderartists.org/t/3d-cursor-an-old-concept-that-need-to-go/1242247/164

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.