Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
in all fairness how long did it take any of us to go into the preferences and learn you could turn that off? He's saying to turn it off by default so new users wont get overwhelmed, like many of us did when we first fired up the UI and said "what the hell am I looking at (and where are my $*&#@ camera controls?)"
I guess that's just me then. One of the first things I do when I install new software is to dig through the options/preferences.
i guess im strange too because the first thing i do whith a new app is before i even open iti watch tutorials and read articles and then tinker
ive been using blender since about a week or so after it was first released so i was used to the older interfaces and how to do things
i still am not 100% on the 2.5+ interface so any new changes would make the learning curve even steeper
Well there were no videos for most of Blender's life. In the early days, the Blender foundation made it's money selling a manual... so it was free but one had to learn it mostly on their own unless they bought the manual. Even the typical internet resources one takes so casually didn't exist then.
Ton Roosendal's (creator of Blender) response to all the discussions on UI changes can be found here:
http://code.blender.org/index.php/2013/10/redefining-blender/
Thank you very much for posting this Eva, I've been waiting for Ton to weigh in on this. :)
...but they are not intuitive, especially for new users. For one, I dislike having all the camera controls on hotkeys rather than being able to use your pointing device like other 3D apps do. One of the reasons I threw in the towel when I was still working on my notebook is because it did not have a numeric key pad. It took holding down two extra keys just to toggle it form the main keyboard. In no way could I use the Alt or CTRL key again to actually execute many of the commands.
Relying on hotkeyes for basic functions like this is archaic. Having to remember a full hotkey map when starting out is daunting to say the least, and part of why Blender gets such a bad rap from new users. The learning curve for modelling and surface creation is hard enough. Adding a steep one to this just to become accustomed to the UI is what makes Blender frustrating and overwhelming for many. Andrew has it right, to hold on to a clunky and incomprehensible UI is what cripples Blender not just for new users but developers alike. The UI needs a total redo if Blender is to grow and gain acceptance. It is is a powerful tool, but it is hamstrung by an archaic, overly complex, and cryptic UI that has too many basic functions hidden from the user.
As a new user gotta agree totally with that. I'm using Blender also on a laptop that has no number pad, and also trying to learn a new program with so many features trying to remember lots of shortcuts as well...it's not good. I've never been one for using shortcuts other than for undo and copy and paste anyway - I'd rather point and click at something.
One can get a usb numeric keypad for notebooks, although I realize that might not work for some.
Something I gathererd from Ton's response was that he was somewhat of two minds regarding the target audience. In one instance he said that the software was by being open source targeted at being available to all, including in design but then in other instances he said that it was targeted to (and I paraphrase, only to try best to summarize what I gathered from his statements) artists rather then dilettantes, people who have or would put the effort in to become efficient at a tool that was aimed at being as efficient as possible rather then as easy to get started in. Now that is just my interpretation of what he was saying.
Something else he touched on and I had seen back a while ago when the topic of interface re: Blender came up, the amount of time spent on the interface itself vs keeping the tool moving along with the technology in an environment where the developers time is limited, in constant demand, and being pulled in many directions. I see comments always about the 'Devs' doing what they want rather then what the community wants and though it was only hinted at in this discussion it did come up years ago that many of the development hours are put in free, and those that aren't are more often then not highly underpaid. In that type of environment, one is going to be much more flexible in letting devs work on something that interests them or... (fill in the blank.) This also contributes to the 'ego' some people see. If someone is doing something for free and they perceive the response from people getting said service for free is 'I want xxx, stop doing yyy...' rather then 'thank you' .. well, again... fill in the blank. This is why the response from the Blender devs is often 'well you can contribute.' Now people have also commented occasionally that they did try to get involved in the project but found the code to be too convoluted, with too many branching structures that didn't make sense to them, etc... (I haven't looked at it as that's not my area of coding) but, those comments are actually few comparatively, which leads me to believe that it's not an outpouring of people trying to get involved in actually coding. Furthermore, it's somewhat a specialty area. If the core team found a way to simplify getting involved (*) for people who are coders but not from that specific background, I'm guessing others might get involved.. I would for one, at least some. The problem is, making it easier for others to contribute takes time/effort away from the main project... so, no easy answers.
* This is the reason I have pushed for abstracting the interface. It would open up interface design to the larger community and relieve the core development team from having to do as much work in that area. Ton was very clear early in his discussion that the interface was 'core' to the tool itself and could not be abstracted (which is against modern design principles, think html/css/javascript/server side...) He did seem to relent later however a bit in his response by mentioning the potential eventual development of tools for UI development, which I interpret as he may be relenting somewhat in this area. Again, it's a matter of balancing too few hours with too many goals, priorities have to be made.
I guess in summary, I'm grateful for everything the developers have done and think Blender is outstanding in what it does for being both open source and free.
And while I'm at it, thank you DAZ for making DS free again. :)
great response from Ton, which brings up some very valid counterpoints. I want to be optimistic about his closing paragraph:
So! UI changes will happen yes. It’s a matter of improving issues gradually, tackling them one by one. A matter of finding the right people and the right moment to handle this. But we never forget the real target – to make a tool for 3D artists who want to tell stories, make compelling artwork, 3d designs, animation films or games. And – to have a lot of fun together!
and this exchange between users and developers is exactly what's is not happening with a lot of other software.
...basically I have a lifetime of experience as an artist in the traditional media. Severe arthritis had pretty much taken that away which is why I turned to 3D CG. Picking up a pencil, or brush and using it is fairly intuitive. Dealing with Blender's current UI is not. That doesn't make me any less an artist as Ton would infer just because I would like an easier to grasp UI so I could get on with the task of creating art (and let's not get tangled up in the ages old debate of what is and what isn't art as that is not relevant here).
Conceptually I think Blender is great. It is stable, powerful, and versatile. However, having to devote a great deal of time just trying to decipher the UI before one can even begin working on a simple project is why many turn to other software. To reach the level of "Power User" Mr Roosendaal mentions about, one has to first be able to understand the basics, much of which in Blender are "out of plain sight".
What Andrew put forth in his series of videos is the concern that Blender isn't reaching out artists who (like myself) want to use it because of it's UI. I'm sorry, but the notion of continuing to develop for the current power users while shunning improvements that would attract new ones to the fold does make it seem like an "exclusive" club. There needs to be a point where attention is shifted to cleaning up the interface and making it more intuitive. Andrew feels that time is now and I, along with a number of others, agree.
Basically, a powerful and excellent software tool like Blender should not have to be this difficult to use.
I do not write code, I do not script. That is beyond my area of expertise so I cannot jump in as a UI developer. What I can do however, is support others like Andrew who have the experience, insight, and skillset.
I really want to use Blender as it is far more advanced (and in some cases more stable) than many of the other "affordable" modelling programmes out there. However, in it's current state I find it is not the tool for this 3D artist and storyteller as dealing with its clunky and cumbersome UI pretty much takes any notion of "fun" out of the equation.
the biggest complaint about blender, by new and potentially new users is the interface, The worst part of this is plenty of longtime Blender users who have become comfortable with the interface don't want it changed as they feel it panders to users who simply can't grasp how customizable blender is to begin with. I've been using Blender for months and my experience so far is that customization is not really a simple feature for new users, the default settings are probably the best that Blender has to offer in the way of showing tools needed to start rudimentary modeling, but even so it can still be highly intimidating for new and potentially new users. Customization in Blnder is great for experienced users who are familiar with their needs but to anyone else it's like getting dumped on an alien planet with a map in an alien language as your guide and without video tutorials (some really good, some outright useless despite their best intention) expect to spend a considerable amount of time cursing at your screen.
There are Blender users who are happy keeping this software visually as-is and trying to turn it into an elitist club. Fortunately these users don't appear to be the majority. A similar uproar was heard when Daz Studio 4 interface overhaul was defiantly geared towards attracting potential users who shied away from DS3 because they felt that interface was intimidating, Daz was good enough to provide the darkside interface after enough users made it clear they did not like where Studio's UI had gone.
...this is why I don't understand all the resistance as the old UI setup could still be offered as an option. As Andrew mentioned all the hotkeys will still be there for those more used to using them.
I worked in the first version of MS Word and early versions of Excel and adapted to the changes with each new update. Didn't care for some (in particular the "ribbon" concept in 2010 which displays more info than needed), but realise to continue working in the business world I have to deal with the changes and move forward.
Personally, I feel the arguments against streamlining the UI and making it more intuitive are archaic thinking ("let's not embrace this newfangled thing called electricity because oil lamps, gas lights, coal furnaces, and wood stoves work just fine for us").
Blender's UI is far more cumbersome than it needs to be, mainly because it never was fully developed, but as Andrew mentioned, just pieced together with every new feature that was added. In effect the UI is nothing more than a disorganised collection of different modules. Customisation is an advanced process that should not be thrown in the face of a new user the first day he or she opens an application. The primary functions should be there and readily accessible with the more advanced features in the background. This way the slope of the learning curve is reduced and the individual user can feel they are going somewhere and see results rather than stumbling around in the dark.
It may have a "comfort factor" for a certain small segment of users who have been with the progamme since it's early days, but that is no reason to hold it back from others who would like to use it but are stymied by it's nearly incomprehensible interface. Most of the comments in support of Andrew's proposal come from those who already use Blender. That should say something.
Mr Roosendaal claims he wants users to have fun. Feeling like you don't know what you are doing most of the time, cursing at your computer, and becoming frustrated almost every turn is not "fun".
I totally agree with the proposal, especially since it would most likely open the door to more users.
Jumping into DAZ with zero experience in 3D was mostly a very easy and user friendly experience for me. The same can not be said for my experience with Blender.
I spent a couple months trying to wrap my head around the interface, the layout and the shortcut keys. I went through every tutorial I could get my hands on and even bought a book on it. It was quite possibly the most unintuitive and illogical program I have ever used. I know this is not a great comparison, but teaching myself how to use Apple Motion, Adobe After Effects, Adobe Premiere, Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro and how to write PHP involved far less head scratching all combined.
After watching that proposal I was literally cheering! If the folks in charge take even half of those suggestions I would definitely like to give it a second go around. At this point, that app has just collected dust sitting in my Applications folder.
Blender is really an interface for programmers, not artists.
You'll see the same thing happen with music software.
Musicians have trained to interface with an instrument, pressing keys, frets, strumming strings, touching their instruments, turning knobs, moving sliders. Good music software does its best to recreate the organic experience of creating music. But there's some music software out there that's made by programmers for programmers. People who simply don't have the skills or talent to play an instrument and would prefer to type commands to get the computer to make the music for them. They find that musical interface intuitive to them because they're programmers and its a programmers interface. Musicians find the interface cumbersome, intrusive, and obstructive, they are used to a much more organic interface that works with the terminology they have been trained in.
Now it's fine if the programmers want an interface they can work with and understand to make music but they'll have to accept their software will never be used by anyone but a tiny minority of the people who want to make music.
So the blender community has to decide for themselves. Do they want to be a closed community that appeals to a minority, or do they want to democratise 3D by making the tools available to anyone with an interest in 3D. If the former then they should just continue the way they are and accept that not many people are going to want to use their software. If they want to be a more open community then they have to accept that the interface will need to change to be more welcoming.
Sounds like Andrew's idea has been beaten down somewhat. I think he's spoken to people who have said, Nawwhh, you cant do that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aIA2LaB2Iw
Ton Roosendaal at the Foundation feedback meeting - ' we're not making it for people who clean toilets'
Thanks for posting, an interesting watch.
I think Andrew Price comes out of it all very well.
Andrew Price makes some great suggestions, and he comes from a very knowledgible position with respects to Blender's current capabilities. I've watched quite a few of his tutorials, so I'm pretty sure that the last thing he wants is to dumb down the interface.
Blender is primarily intended to create animation even though most users are just interested in creating stills. Check out this animated short made in Blender:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7HI1Ujx7B8
"EASY TO LEARN vs EASY TO USE"
I don't see why these two should be mutually exclusive...
yea, well if that's what Ton said he's not getting a Christmas Card from me this year.
yea, well if that's what Ton said he's not getting a Christmas Card from me this year.
So people who use Blender never clean their toilets? :gulp:
What a pretentious blow hard! The whole point of Blender was to democratize 3D art, to get the tools to create into the hands of people who wanted to create but can't afford the professional tools. Now that they've got their tools with a formidable UI that discourages new users their attitude is "I've got mine, screw you".
If this is the attitude of the gatekeepers of Blender then I say Blender can go bend itself over a cylinder primitive.
In my view, quite a few people came across as very arrogant and hostile from the Blender side when dealing with Andrew's proposal, especially with regards to making things more accessible. No wonder that communication isn't really encouraged. I am getting more and more the picture of quite a few people trying to keep a 'premium club' and, yeah, they can keep their club. I won't touch Blender with a ten-foot pole anymore - especially after some of the comments.
At any rate, I think Andrew actually had been quite brilliant all through. Compared to some other people he is able to reflect on his ideas and on his approach.
I've done janitorial work. It's not bad at all if you don't mind the hours. I guess I should be offended at Ton's remark, but I'm not. If I did get offended, I would ask for a refund on the purchase price of Blender. ;)
And there lies the distinction between truly great businessmen like Bill Gates or innovative geniuses like Steve Jobs and this guy. Ton just proved why he is not deserving of being put in the same league as truly great innovators and relative to the rest of the world...why so few people know his name or even know what Blender is. I suspect that with this type of attitude and lack of respect for potential users, Blender will eventually become an irrelevant piece of freeware. I also find it interesting that he would slam the very community that has helped Blender become anything at all. Without all the input from community testers and new users (because even the veterans were new at some point) Blender would already be vaporware.
His comment also brings to mind a render I made a while back. Ironically I tried to make this image in Blender a couple of years ago with little success. Glad DAZ and Photoshop helped make this one possible.
Here's to you Blender!
An interesting 3hr podcast of Andrew Price talking with Jonathan Williamson about Blender and it's UI.
http://www.blenderguru.com/podcast-jonathan-williamson-on-blenders-interface/
Two guys whose tutorials for Blender I think are the best. (I only pick out the free ones).
Info. Just downloaded 2.69.
...yeah the way I see it (and mentioned so on the Blender 2.66 thread) is that it went from pretty much a modelling application to trying to be the free version of 3DS and Vue Infinite, all rolled into one. Now I've been hearing talk of an expanded game engine.
The smart thing would have been to break it up into different modules Modelling and Sculpting, Surfacing and Rendering, Animation, and Game Development (kind of like how Vue is set up) rather than try to cram every possible 3D function into one single programme.
I followed Andrew's proposal and still believe he has the right ideas. According to the those "in the know" about Blender, it is claimed it would require a re-write of the entire programme from the ground up to implement Andrew's proposal. Excuse me, how many tutorials has this man written? how long has he worked with the programme? How in depth does he know this programme? I consider him as being one of those "in the know", yet his ideas apparently shook the Foundation's foundation.
Some of the responses to his ideas that I read on other forums and blogs from Blender users were so caustic, unprofessional, if not even downright childish, it made me lose a lot of respect. for the community.
Do you know Blender doesn't even have a "visible" Undo command? You have to bring up an undo history via one of the hotkey combinations (which you have to Google for to find) . Another function I couldn't find was how to select faces of a mesh .(like Hexagon can do). Camera/view adjustment is clunky as it is all keyboard driven. When working on a mesh, being able to move the camera about it freely with the cursor using my trackball, rather than incrementally with multiple keystrokes, is a smoother more efficient workflow for me.
But this is what the "veterans" prefer and feel they will lose if more "intuitive" controls and means of selecting tools or functions is introduced.
Here at Daz we had to weather major changes in the UI between 3.1 and 4.0. Yes it wasn't fun to deal with at first, but we adapted and moved ahead. Look at how many different UI schemes were developed through the history of MS Word, or Excel (and those have a much larger user base as well as an economic impact on the business world). However, the long time user can still do what they've always done with these programmes while the UI remains intuitive for the newcomer.
This is core of what Andrew was hitting at in his videos, usability and consistency, two things Blender in its current state is lacking.
I agree with others here that after Ton's comments, Blender appears to have headed towards becoming more of a "club" rather than a true "community". If you don't attract new users and grow your user base, your community doesn't grow, if your community doesn't grow it stagnates, when it stagnates it becomes "inbred".
Sad because conceptually, it is a great piece of software that I feel is being held back because of it's cumbersome UI and (as put by one Blender user) the "wall" of a learning curve to comprehend it. Another user even put it to me as if learning the UI was some kind of "Rite of Passage", That viespoint may work for the military, fraternal organisations, and street gangs, but a software tool?
...when I first encountered Blender over five years ago, it was primarily a modeling application.
"EASY TO LEARN vs EASY TO USE"
I don't see why these two should be mutually exclusive...
...+1
Sounds like the Blender rulers have created a bureaucracy dedicated to making Blender for the way they want it. No outside interference needed, thank you. Yes, I found out very quickly about the back button being hidden. Since it is not a business, they can probably get away with it. As for cleaning toilets. I've done that, also done engineering math, four semesters of college physics, programmed computers, and helped save a quite a few lives along the way. I don't need Blender, apparently they don't need me. Cosmic balance. Time to free up some hard drive.