I must say that the current UI for texture and material management in 2.5. is pretty confusing to me too. It is better than in 2.4x but still very prone to making the wrong decision, clicking on the wrong button, etc. So I'm glad to see this discussion.
> I think that nodes are much more simple to understand than the stack > method because you can see where the data comes from and where it goes > too. Nodes already have a simple and a detailed view that you can turn > on and off for each node. >From a UI point of view, I find directly manipulating the nodes.to get something as simple as assigning a texture or a material, is unnecessarily complex. The problemn I have with nodes is that for simple tasks, it is workflow disruptive and forces the user to stop thinking about the texturing task and switch to thinking about the data flow in the application. That said, I agree that the node system is very powerfull and should be kept. But I would see the node system as a sort of machinery that can be created/manipulated/programmed at a more abstract level through direct manipulation (click, drag and drop, select) of the objects of interest in the UI. For this to work, the node system just needs to be available for scripting. This way, it is possible to program sort of UI macros that build the noodle on the fly as the user interracts for some simple tasks. Then the noodle can be edited directly if needed. Once the nodes system is fully scriptable and can be linked to UI manipulations, then this opens up the door for users creating their own macros and designing texture and material UI concepts either based on other UIs or on new designs. Yves _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
