Many valid & interesting points made in the last few replies but could we steer this back onto improving our existing UI? (not the dreaded `defaults` discussion)
There are enough simple problems we should deal with, Example of one - Andrew Hale made this example recently, http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=24723 This brings up the point that check-box buttons (on the right) dont get grouped nicely, Yet, I'm Told Matt Ebb wanted the check-boxes to be preferred. Anyone interested to knock up a drawing of how the layout of the left could work with check-boxes better? - (C'mon guys!, less talk, more action, or I go back and hide in the python api :D ) On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Mike Erwin <[email protected]> wrote: > There are many ways to make blender less aggravating for new users, > but as has been said, anything this powerful will have some kind of > learning curve. It's a hassle, it's to be expected, and it's worth it! > If you read a few paragraphs, I promise to make a point or three. > > Photoshop for example -- when I started with version 4, it was a bit > overwhelming. Over the years and versions I picked up skills like > painting, layers & color channels just by using the software. The > biggest jumps came when I picked up a book to get a new perspective on > issues (the power of selection & masking for example). And how to use > the pen tool, which for some reason I never could figure out on my > own. > > Same goes for driving a car! It has only a few controls of course, but > even so there is no expectation that you'll be an expert driver the > first time out. By the time you get behind the wheel, you've probably > observed hundreds of hours by being driven around during childhood. > And there is probably someone beside you saying "that's the > accelerator, that's the brake, don't touch those." When the windshield > wipers are swinging back and forth when you meant to use the turn > signal, you could say "f*** this, I'll just walk from now on!" Or you > could say "oops, wrong lever", remember that for next time, and keep > driving. To reward your patience, you get a free open-source car with > a lifetime supply of free gas. > > Same for any musical instrument. The first time you pick it up, it's > going to sound pretty bad. If you never play again because music is > hard, well... ok. This metaphor is a bit loose, since blender has > competitors. It's like blender = guitar and [other 3D software] = > piano. They both make music if you know how to move your fingers the > right way! And they both take practice to get to that point. If you > already know the piano, and expect those skills to transfer to the > guitar, get ready for a shock. But if you don't know either, might as > well go for the one that's portable and let's face it, way more cool. > > Ok, now it's blender's turn -- without the silly metaphors. Blender > 2.1 was my first encounter. I played around with it a little while, > found the interface confusing (and kind of ugly compared to the rest > of MacOS), and quickly went back to PiXELS 3D. Next encounter was > blender 2.3 -- got the book this time (which was awesome), learned a > tiny bit more but soon went back to Lightwave (which also had a book). > A few years ago I had to digitally recreate a football stadium from > its plans and by visiting the site. After a slow and painful start > using Sketchup, I gave blender 2.48 a shot and actually liked it! But > by then I was serious about learning and got the Essential Blender > book, which helped more than anything. After that I would just search > for specific things and always found someone who had run across the > same issue and written about it. The interface in late 2.4x was very > different and very nice. After a custom layout, color scheme and style > it looked awesome and worked well. And yes, I switched it to LMB > select. > > I have no specific gripes with the current interface, but as I stick > mostly to low-poly modeling there is plenty I don't ever see. 2.6 is > also very different and (mostly) very nice; I've even switched back to > RMB select! My own default layout discards the timeline, and shows > "object data" instead of "render" on the properties panel, but > otherwise is standard. That works for me, but I wouldn't dare force it > on everyone. Having the "render image" button there on the screen is > essential for the brief time before you know what F12 does. The > spacebar addon is great, don't know why it's not part of the default > setup. > > Any changes need to be well thought out and explained -- more than "I > think X is better than Y so obviously everyone would like X." Why is X > better? Prove it or demonstrate it or otherwise make a solid case. > > Many people do like to learn by trial & error, so make sure the errors > are harmless, obvious, and reversible. I haven't kept up with the undo > system recently, so maybe this has been fixed... but it used to fill > up with system-initiated snapshots, so undo kind of lost meaning. > Whenever you pressed [button], blender would do 5 things, 3 of them > undo-able. So you press [button], say "oops", undo, then wonder why > the stuff on screen doesn't look exactly the same as before you > pressed [button]. > > Reasonable default values and ranges for things are easy to implement > and make things just a little nicer for new users. No idea how well > this is done throughout blender, it might already be perfect. Same for > basic interaction settings like turntable mode becoming default (a > good move, even though I usually use trackball). Making "rotate around > selection" default? My initial impression is "yes, of course!" but > like I said above, we still need to answer "why?" in some convincing > way. > > Remember Ubuntu had its "papercuts" project to fix many of the rough > edges and little annoyances for desktop Linux. This thread (and > similar ones before) sounds like a call to do the same sort of thing > for blender. Of course their path led to the Unity desktop... a great > example that making things simpler for new users can also make it > infuriating for people that know what they're doing. The designers of > Unity have the best intentions -- they're just not right. > > In the end, blender's UI is for people who use blender, not for people > who don't. There were things about blender that kept me in this second > category for so many years, so I fully understand the original point > of this thread. Of course we want new people to use blender. Some > things have changed for today's potential users -- the sleek/modern UI > appearance is one less barrier -- but how you get things done once > inside is different from other apps. I got past this, so it's hard for > me to single out what is or isn't difficult for a newcomer. I'm in the > semi-new-user category: comfortable with general usage and a limited > set of the available tools. So more important to me (and I imagine > others in this boat) is how to grow, the path to becoming "more > expert". Nothing inside of blender is keeping me from doing this, from > my particular point on the learning curve. We also need experts on the > high end to show us what can be done with this great software in the > right hands. I don't think today's top users would walk away from > blender if we add some new options or change defaults, as long as it > doesn't mess up their flow. So let's do this in a way that doesn't > mess up their flow. > > I'm interested to see what new options come out of this discussion, > and which of these are chosen for defaults. But I'd also like to keep > the overall number of options small, with meaningful differences > between them. One shining example of an interface that keeps things > simple, has limited options, all while remaining powerful for experts > is MacOS (8.6 and 10.6 being the finest). MacOS 10.0 had some serious > UI gaps, just like blender 2.5 at first, but both are growing up > nicely. Brainstorming 1000 options is great, let's make sure only the > best ones make it into a release, and are implemented based on these > discussions and properly tuned after some hands-on time. > > Also, +5 on monkey head in default scene! > > Mike Erwin > musician, naturalist, pixel pusher, hacker extraordinaire > > > >> On Friday 20 January 2012, Jorge Rodriguez wrote: >>> I'd like Blender to be learnable without people having to go watch >>> tutorials. > >> Not possible (IMO). Blender, like any other 3D software, is far too complex >> to >> be picked up on the fly. >> >> I can't understand why reading docs or watching tutorials is so awful. If >> somebody opens Blender and feels lost (as did I many years ago), what's so >> hard about clicking on the help menu, choosing the first entry and starting >> to read? While the manual also needs work, the introductory chapters should >> be enough to get anybody started. If not, the community provides free help. >> That's how open source projects work. >> >> If somebody can't do that, I don't think he/she has enough drive to learn a >> 3D >> software anyway. >> >> As a user, I'm very grateful for Blender and also for the documentation we do >> have. People really should use it. >> >> Regards, >> Sanne > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers -- - Campbell _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
