Jump to content
3DCoat Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

3,078 profile views

Sorn's Achievements


Novice (3/11)

  • Helpful Rare
  • Great Content Rare
  • Great Support Rare
  • Helpful Rare
  • Helpful Rare

Recent Badges



  1. Thanks for keeping us updated. It's appreciated. Uncertainty makes relying on a tool for work difficult. I can handle the wait for bug-fixing and new features if I know roughly what's going on behind the scenes. Or, for instance, that things are being worked on but nothing concrete has come out of it yet. If you have us in mind, tell us so from time to time, that's also important so we aren't forced to think otherwise, assuming the possibility that development has actually stopped or stalled for some unknown reason. Tell us, we'll handle it, whatever it is. Thank you, then, for communicating with us, Sergyi. Make it a habit, now! PS: I can only imagine how difficult it must be to be in your position. Stay strong!
  2. Absolutely fantastic news! Thanks for the explanation and the heads-up, it's very appreciated.
  3. So, after some months without builds or, to my knowledge, any communication about the status of Linux development, may we have any news about the Linux development? Thanks in advance for any info given. There's been a lot of bug fixes and new improvements since the last update available to us. I'd like to know if or when we'll get to use any of those. Again, thanks for any info you may provide.
  4. Any news about the Linux build? It's been quiet for months now. Is everything fine?
  5. In my machines, running different Arch variations, I couldn't use 3DCoat because any interaction with file browser crashed it instantly. I tried this method suggested above, installed distrobox and Ubuntu 22.04 (with nvidia to have 3D acceleration) and oddly enough 3dcoat-Ubuntu22.04 still crashed but 3dcoat-Ubuntu20.04 worked! Apparently I can use 3DCoat again on my machines! Yay! Thank you @veris for this very practical workaround! Edit: on a different (newer install of the host system) machine, 3dcoat-Ubuntu22.04 worked. The file manager looked different too. Anyway, thanks again.
  6. @AbnRanger, let me politely decline to answer your reasonable inquiry about an example(s) of other DCC software with similar interfaces as the one I'm suggesting. Let me tell you why, though; fair is fair. I do know of some, several, for DCC and other fields. But presenting them as examples will easily turn the discussion into a direct comparison about features and workflow paradigms between them and 3DCoat. Thus, rendering the discussion about UI pointless and orphan, mixed up in a horrific cacophony of all sorts of strong opinions about software preferences. Maybe you and I would manage to restrain ourselves, barely, but this is a public forum. It doesn't end well. Second, and most importantly, I really don't care at all about what other DCC software do or not do if I'm thinking about this one: I'm suggesting what I would do if I could, to make the best possible UI for 3DCoat. That, in turn, would possibly be the envy of everyone else, but that is absolutely not my concern. I really don't care if no one has done it before, or if everybody has already implemented it. I'm just stating what my preference is and I try to articulate it in case it makes sense to others and the developers, who knows, maybe pick some ideas from here or refine some of their own, or steer an internal development already underway in this direction. Or nudge them into committing to it if on the fence. They'd possibly already have thought about it, it's not that these fine developers are completely new to this or are totally clueless. They seem a pretty capable bunch. I won't be angry nor disappointed if none of this gets done. But I really don't care if others do it or not. I want 3DCoat to do it, and that's what my focus is. In the past I've been in talks about similar issues with developers of other software, commercial or internal, and I tend to explain the same thing. Sometimes the feedback turns into "here, the limitations are those for us, and a complete overhaul is not possible at this stage. How would we make it as close as possible? Would that work?... and so on". At other times it's absolutely out of the question for some reason and it's fine. And sometimes they like what's already in place and the users too, so no harm done. Still, I'm right and you are not! Nah, all is fine.
  7. Exactly my thoughts, @digman. I'd let the UI as is, if it depended on me. And allocate some time to develop what would be needed to make it as plastic as possible, as stated before. When ready, switch the interface with the new, using the current one's layouts as the default presets of the new. Fix current needs if urgent, really needed, as @AbnRanger states, in the interim. But keep those fixes at the most basic and minimum: the truly necessary for right now. I do understand, nonetheless, that in most DCC programs, some tools ARE the interface, they are coded for the code that manages the interface we see. So sometimes it's far from an easy switch. Many (if not possibly all) tools would need to be touched, and some testing afterwards would be needed to see if everything works fine. And that, assuming the code of the "new" engine for the interface is flawless (it seldom is, by no one, on the first iterations). So here we are. What do I propose, then? Well, leave the UI alone, focus on a mid-term overhaul of the interface code to make it plastic (all dockable, un-dockable, resizable, respositionable, "live" colour coding of the interface with a panel, font choosing and scaling free and "live" (as in no reboot), the whole lot). In the mid term, it's an overhead of work, interfering with current plans of development. With the right plan, allocation of hours/resources weekly, as time goes by, while being tested in stages, it will come to fruition. Once that is done, you have a magnificent platform, with ABSOLUTE freedom for users and no more wondering about what tool goes where, and all things related. Also, users will give another level of feedback too, and new workflows will naturally appear. Many puppies will lick our faces happily and the sunshine, through the window facing the garden, will be warm and cosy forever... that kind of thing. I think of this as an investment in the mid-term/future rather than a "solution" for the present, a solution for the present that still takes resources now and will inevitably will come to bite us again, and again, as time passes, new tools emerge, new workflows are needed. That'd be all from me on the matter. I hope it inspires good things and if nothing I said is feasible or deemed necessary, let's all move along and do some 3D stuff anyway.
  8. Let me try this again, about the UI: What I'd like is a drag'n'drop of everything, from panels, to bars, to windows, palettes... to be able to place them, to detach them from the main UI to make floating panels/windows and be able to attach them back again to the main UI and, if at all possible, to be able to move windows to another monitor and keep focus on them whilst working (so not having to click on the window to interact within it with the mouse/pen). The point is not to be able to set up different layouts to work with, but to do this on the fly, as it were, while working on something. In that maner, at any given time, the user can adjust, adapt 3DCoat to the user's needs. In conclusion: user should be able, at any given time, to place anything anywhere, add or remove, dock and un-dock, while working. That to me should be the aim of the engineers of any 3D application. Give your users the freedom to use your tools however they please, let them see what works best. Provide sensible defaults (ask feedback for defaults so it's easier for newcomers to get a grasp of what's what) and let the users evolve their UI while they work and play. Hopefully this is not controversial. Otherwise I don't know what to say, really. Edit: I forgot one thing, a mode with a button on the interface and keyboard shortcut (so doable with keyboard and mouse/pen at user's discretion) to toggle everything off and back in place as it was to make the window clean of everything and anything but the geometry or working asset at the moment of the toggle activation should be implemented as well. Again, to me, all efforts of the engineers should ideally be concentrated in making all of the above possible, even in stages if necessary until that is a reality. Spending time with UI setups is going to be an endless effort, as new needs and worflows arise, particular cases appear, niche opportunities present themselves, user idiosyncrasies... let them free, they'll invent new workflows with your tools, new combinations: use your users to show you and other what your tools can do instead of anticipating what they might do and how they may do it. There, that'd be all. Edit (2): Nope! I also forgot the super-promise-it's-for-sure-the-last-thing: text should be scalable at all places, and colour of the interface, panels, all of it should be easily changed too. Even while working, without having to restart the application. Now it's final. Final final. Last definitely final.
  9. I don't know exactly what to answer to that... question? Nor do I see anything to do with what I said, frankly. My concern would be: the UI should be totally configurable by the users. All panels, tools, bars, windows... the lot. On any 3D software that should be the aim. And engineers should focus on making that possible, not on the possible arrangement combinations of tools and helpers on the screen.
  10. And some users just want different UI setup for different sessions, or for fun even. The UI should be set up by the user, not the engineers. When developers ask for feedback on UI I get cold sweats. Like when a client wants to "help" with colours. We'd all be better off if they stopped concerning themselves about "the UI" in any shape or form. Please give us a UI we can tweak at will, and stable (no crashes), thanks very much. That's it.
  11. Or maybe there's a safe call to the file browser that's not problematic if on different version of Gnome. I don't know. I'm open to test whatever needs to be tested, gather information as requested too. Other users willing to help and I will need some lead, here; that's all.
  12. There's absolutely NO other program with this issue that I know of. On Gnome standard, either X11 or Wayland, ALL work and can interact with the file browser. It has something to do with 3DCoat's implementation. The fact that works in Ubuntu (I assume it does) doesn't mean it can't work in anything else. It's quite baffling. Anyway, I've been in contact with Sergyii before, about this issue. If they don't want to fix it, we can't help. If they want to, they could tell us what to try, steps to follow to help nail down where the problem is. Because, there is actually a problem there. The last time I was in contact with him he was open to fixing it but said something along the lines of he didn't know how or what to fix to make it work. Hence, if he really doesn't want to schedule proper time to fix it himself, I offer to help out. The users have an invested interest too in fixing this. So we could follow guidelines, track, gather data for him. But if the only answer is only Ubuntu (and an outdated one at that) then we're at a loss, here. At this point I feel it's pointless if we are told this ridiculous crash has anything to do with not being Ubuntu. Again, absolutely everyone else does it perfectly fine. A shame, really.
  13. I upgraded my license to support the development of 3DCoat, but unfortunately I have no use for it in its current state. I don't use Ubuntu and it is impossible to work with 3DCoat. Anything that touches file manager crashes 3DCoat. It's the only program that displays this behaviour of the many professional tools I use (almost none of them officially support my distribution either, but that basic interaction doesn't seem to be a problem for absolutely anyone but 3DCoat). Is there anything we could do to fix this issue once and for all? I'd gladly test whatever is needed if developers care to provide a set of steps to try and figure out what's happening. Maybe some other users could join following steps and reporting so we can fix this ridiculous situation. It's a pity this is a problem. I know of others that already have stopped using 3DCoat for the same reason and it's a waste of a really good tool. 3DCoat can do many things really well, and provides solutions for common tasks on the 3D content creation process with interesting workflows. Let's fix the issue! Come on, let's do it.
  14. Guides updated for 3DCoat 2023, to avoid confusion and mentioning differences in the process since 2023 (two executables, none sharing the same name with prior versions of 3DCoat). Happy 3DCoating!
  15. So Mac and Linux won't receive any video/documentation, some procedures to test? I may have missed it, admittedly. But the omission on the official YouTube channel is peculiar. Also, what if Blender is installed somewhere else? Thanks!
  • Create New...