Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
pixo

Hide tools in sculpt room

20 posts in this topic

Hello guys,

There's a special reason for the users to have 2 differents tools to do the same things ?

I'm probably wrong but i'm wondering why do we have "Hide" and "SurfHide" tools ?

Can't we just have Hide as a general tool, that would work the same for surface and voxel ?

I probably miss something.

I'm asking that cause is one of the tool that i'm using the more and i don't really like to have 2 hotkeys for the same user function.

Especially if you consider that you should that care what's surface and what is voxel,it breaks the workflow.

Another example, if you have many layers some with voxels and some with surfaces,

you'll not be able to hide through all volumes just because the hide tools are specific.

Thank you,

Pixo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no reason. It's one of the UI rework suggestion. Merge similar purpose tools from voxel and surface (and in all room btw).

You'll also notice that the move tool in voxel and surface tools are different.

If you create a preset with move in voxel for instance, you can't use the preset in surface, it automaticaly changes the model to voxel mode.

That's why at some point this was suggested (with that your hotkey issue is solved):

presets.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hide and SurfHide are completely different tools...Hide tool works on volumes,not surface,and it is associated with a bunch of cool command in voxel menu that allows you to split/delete hidden parts....stuff that are impossible using surface hide.

SurfHide is like Cell tool.

Maybe Cell tool and SurfHide sould be called the same...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter, contextual tools is the way to go. Why separate tools ? Why make two different entries that can't be used on each mode while we could have one hide tool that does both depending on the current mode ?

It's thing like that which doesn't make sense to new users. Polixo is the proof right there. Even if the tools are technically different it doesn't mean they shouldn't be unified and used depending of the mode since they both serve the same idea "to hide things".

That kind of thinking led to the huuuge list of tools which are sometimes completely redundant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its not about mode...they are compltelely different tools...Hide tool do much more stuff and is also much more heavy in processing.

Cell and Surfhide are the same tool...they are much lighter and provide like you said a simple way to hide stuff.

So those two could be called the same I don't care.

But Hide tool,you really need to "choose" to use it because it so heavy in processing.

Its like saying that move elastic,topo move,snake hook and move tool in zbrush should be unified....C'mon.

I agree with Pixo as he wrote on Mantis that Baking should be unified...that I agree.Merging,import/export those kind of stuff..

But as far as brushes go.. we coulld have 35 mores and I wouldnt care .

(look at ZB now...the amount of brushes is just insane,they would be impossible to unify)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its not about mode...they are compltelely different tools...Hide tool do much more stuff and is also much more heavy in processing.

Cell and Surfhide are the same tool...they are much lighter and provide like you said a simple way to hide stuff.

So those two could be called the same I don't care.

But Hide tool,you really need to "choose" to use it because it so heavy in processing.

Its like saying that move elastic,topo move,snake hook and move tool in zbrush should be unified....C'mon.

I agree with Pixo as he wrote on Mantis that Baking should be unified...that I agree.Merging,import/export those kind of stuff..

But as far as brushes go.. we coulld have 35 mores and I wouldnt care .

(look at ZB now...the amount of brushes is just insane,they would be impossible to unify)

Except every single brush (unless retired to lightbox) has a different twist. It's definitely not the case with all the brushes in both voxel and surface modes.

Anyway tell me what "hide tool" does that let's say carve with a sharp border alpha can't do ? (normaly you answer: it works like absolute: see maybe we could start merging functions here)

See my point here ? We have tools that have the same effect having different name and cluttering the toolbar. It's all a matter of choosing the cleanest, most predictable brushes.

Carve is the most perfect example, in voxel mode any tool can "carve" what's the point to have yet another tool that any other can replicate the effect ?

Sphere is essentialy hide tools minus the invert "restore" behaviour (same as absolute in surface mode). Why not merge both, call it any way you want and add a tickbox: 'invert restore': bam hide tool behaviour and still the functionality of sphere and hide tool.

I could go on like this a while with all the brushes, finding the same algorithms underneath multiple tools.

I honestly think we could get rid of a lot of brushes without annoying anyone. Now don't jump on me, my ideal goal is not to end up like sculptris having only ten-ish brushes (because like everyone else I like choice, but I like choice that make sense).

But we certainly have room for a few elimination.

In that regard I really hope 4.0 will have "the balls" to cut in stuff that is obviously not needed and wouldn't be missed by new users (because that's what it is about, a new refined experience not dragging on old broken stuff because we learned to "deal with it" and got accustomed to it).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway tell me what "hide tool" does that let's say carve with a sharp border alpha can't do ?

euh..split objects,delete hidden parts...

Except every single brush (unless retired to lightbox) has a different twist

I can find you at least a dozen Zb brushes for which the "different twist' is just a ridiculous change to one or 2 settings.

What about voxel Clay brush and Sf mode Clay brush...I think they pretty much got what we could call "a different twist".

They are nothing like each other...

I agree some merging can be done but I also agree with LJB who said that in the end it adds up settings somewhere else.

if you merge two tools you are adding actually more settings to the mother one.

you also need to extend. hint description ...can it double?...can it triple?...can it take the whole friggin screen?

I think merging has to be done very cleverly and carefully...and should first be done regarding main 3DCoat funtions(baking,export/import,merging ect...)

When beta testing its better to have single brushes anyway...its better to isolate issues.

And who knows..maybe even some brushes will be removed before V4 is out..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

euh..split objects

Ok, I never thought about doing this. I learned something. So yes this one is different (but again Hide tool to separate, wouldn't it be better to add that function under split by allowing other tools than selection strokes clicking on a button in the tool options panel after drawing like we currently do in hide tool ?)

As for the addition of options. This has been somewhat an issue I agree but I think we can manage to do that even if 3dc is a complex and feature packed software.

And for the hint we (LJB did ^^ thought about it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO Hide tool should stay hide tool because its the only tool that allows you to "cummulate" your spliting selections by adding/removing more "hiding".Just my opinion here...does not mean Im right.

All others are instant one shot "applies".

I think clone,split, and "cut and clone' could be somehow merged but Im not sure as Im not an expert on those tools I would need to really analyze how they work carefully before requesting this...

Here is a good Zb example...they even got masking selections types as "brushes",this is something I will never understand,it could all hold under one thing like E-panel....and its there clogging the whole brush library..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying zbrush is perfect don't worry ;) I should know ^^ but there's still lots of good idea to borrow and improve on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the addition of options. This has been somewhat an issue I agree but I think we can manage to do that even if 3dc is a complex and feature packed software.

I like all your Ui ideas. Maybe its harder/longer than you think for Andrew to implement...i don't know.

I like mostly everything you guys came up with but it seems alittle V5 for me...

Maybe its possible to do all that UI overhauling but it seems like a many months job..

Personally,I have an idea of a cruder V4...with mostly all new features we got + stability,brush presets + icons is already a good jump.

Just a good solid build that allow showcasing from users on Cg forums.

And for the hint we (LJB did ^^ thought about it).

is that a video link beside the tool...that is good idea!

But text still need to be accurate .....and if the tool is actually 7 tools in 1 its not gonna work...users will get lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like all your Ui ideas. Maybe its harder/longer than you think for Andrew to implement...i don't know.

I like mostly everything you guys came up with but it seems alittle V5 for me...

Maybe its possible to do all that UI overhauling but it seems like a many months job..

Personally,I have an idea of a cruder V4...with mostly all new features we got + stability,brush presets + icons is already a good jump.

Just a good solid build that allow showcasing from users on Cg forums.

Well, LJB originaly started on the UI overhaul because he had issues working with the UI for Video Tutorials (spending time searching for the ui item he wanted, something we laughed about in one of his videos because we felt the same).

So pushing back this reorganisation is kinda defeating the whole purpose of suggesting the new UI Doc in the first place.

is that a video link beside the tool...that is good idea!

But text still need to be accurate .....and if the tool is actually 7 tools in 1 its not gonna work...users will get lost.

It's a balance. That's why if Andrew agrees we'll need a few "power" users good in their area (those mostly using retopo or paint room etc) to tell us what we can merge, get rid off, do differently. Because we can think of a general organisation for panels where things should be etc but for the rest it's so subjective we can't honestly decide for all the users, at least not before having enough voices to agree on those changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, LJB originaly started on the UI overhaul because he had issues working with the UI for Video Tutorials (spending time searching for the ui item he wanted, something we laughed about in one of his videos because we felt the same).

So pushing back this reorganisation is kinda defeating the whole purpose of suggesting the new UI Doc in the first place.

It's a balance. That's why if Andrew agrees we'll need a few "power" users good in their area (those mostly using retopo or paint room etc) to tell us what we can merge, get rid off, do differently. Because we can think of a general organisation for panels where things should be etc but for the rest it's so subjective we can't honestly decide for all the users, at least not before having enough voices to agree on those changes.

Ok,I will actively support those Ui ideas and participate in suggesting and bothering :) Andrew about implementing those.

By actively I mean ,will "really"...spend time reminding him of those ideas and adding +1s and stuff like that...until it is totally implemented.

But not until every single crash/freeze/artifacts/explosions occurrence is washed out of the app...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,I will actively support those Ui ideas and participate in suggesting and bothering :) Andrew about implementing those.

By actively I mean ,will "really"...spend time reminding him of those ideas and adding +1s and stuff like that...until it is totally implemented.

But not until every single crash/freeze/artifacts/explosions occurrence is washed out of the app...

Deal (and I absolutely agree bugs should be top priority for now).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But not until every single crash/freeze/artifacts/explosions occurrence is washed out of the app...

The above as Artman stated is what needs to happen now... The below is for future consideration...

Again, we have the difference of how users work with the interface... The icons I like but still use text as I like text icons for my tools vs image icons. Andrew has given us both now.

One thing I do not like is drop down boxes under drop down boxes, under more drop down boxes.... The more you merge tools, the more drop down

boxes or roll outs you need.

It's a way of looking, I like the amount of tools right a my finger tips. Some see it as clutter, others see it like I do...

This is part of human nature in that we all vary in how we see the world... One is not better than the other in many cases...

I would not like too much merging of tools, but again that my preference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But not until every single crash/freeze/artifacts/explosions occurrence is washed out of the app...

The above as Artman stated is what needs to happen now... The below is for future consideration...

Again, we have the difference of how users work with the interface... The icons I like but still use text as I like text icons for my tools vs image icons. Andrew has given us both now.

One thing I do not like is drop down boxes under drop down boxes, under more drop down boxes.... The more you merge tools, the more drop down

boxes you need.

It's a way of looking, I like the amount of tools right a my finger tips. Some see as it clutter, others see it like I do...

This is part of human nature in that we all vary in how we see the world... One is not better than the other in many cases...

I would not like too much merging of tools, but again that my preferences.

Why are you against the merging (and again I insist I'm not talking about stacking 5 tools on top of each other, I'm aiming for a balance between ergonomics and usefulness) ?

I would be totally with you if we didn't have the preset system. Merging add clicks to tool that were previously exposed, I personaly hate losing time clicking on ui items as I'm a kind of shortcut guy. But we have the preset system ! The way I see it: toolbar is a repository. Preset is YOUR tools.

You can use both anyway you want and if you don't like fiddling with dropdowns, just create a preset to your liking which is a direct access to your tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use presets... I did not say I am against all merging and remember I giving the other side of the coin here... My statement said I would not like too much merging of the tool sets.

I would not want the toolbar to completely function just as repository...

I am in agreement that some merging would be helpful and that would take input from a number of users of which tools/brushes should be merged and drop down boxes added...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not want the toolbar to completely function just as repository...

Repository is just a label, the idea is to have all tools visible by default there.To allow first time user to use the tools and discover, and for the advanced users to make their own recipe with custom preset and possibly hide the toolbar.

It's choices there, open choices :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow there's a long debate here, i didn't read everything.

Sorry Artman, i may weirdly explained myself,i know that the tools are internally different but for the users it doesn't matter, since it does the same.

At the end if the tools was so importantly different why the "unhide all" and "invert hidden" is working similarly for the 2 hidden tools.

Anyway i just tested these tools again and at a user level it's the same.I'm pretty sure this is the kind of stuff that doesn't allow us to have a general hide tool that would work in every room.

Thank you BeatKitano for the tips , but it look weird to me to do this kind of presets.

By the way you are right , the move tool too should be a general tool.

There's a way to just think about general application before local when creating a tools ?

We should simply add options in the options windows concerning any type of modeling ,because:

- For the users it will be easier to create preset

- 1 hotkey

- generalize the tools for the others rooms.

thank you guys to enlight me,

Pixo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are completely right BeatKitano, i saw the rework you proposed for the UI, i m more than totally agree with you.

We should remove and simplify as most as possible the tools and brushes, there is too much and everywhere that can be merged.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0