An Opinion --- User Interface, Blenders Future?

General Forums Blender and CG Discussions
21

Without reading all the posts, this are my thoughts:

The UI of 3DS Max is a pain in the a. but Autodesk is (still) successfull with it.
I agree a easy to use UI is very important to attract new users, but I’ve seen many Software with a terrible UI (Allplan from Nemetschek, the new Microsoft Office, …) which are successful as well. An expensive marketing is the key, and that’s what makes non Open Source Software more/ to expensive. Only money counts, not the “good” things, that’s what I learned in the past 10 years. It’s sad but true.

Kind regards
Alain

22

We not only need functionality, functionality itself has to be complete, it has to be coherent.

No, it doesn’t. It’s more important for things to somehow work, even awkwardly, than to not work at all. Everything else goes on the nice-to-have TODO list that is infinitely long as-is. Blender can’t realistically afford polishing everything.

But the User Interface is still complex, its distracting. Counting 113 UI elements on blenders startup — an eye has to gasp it. Comparing Blenders Sculpting with Sculptris (UI). Their functionality are similar, they even share some bugs. But, in the UI there is a difference.

At startup it is undefined whether the user wants to sculpt, because the mind-reading feature still doesn’t work properly (it’s on TODO).
Anyway, if you think it’s too distracting, make a “sculpt” layout and petition for it to be included in releases.

In Blender there are tools doing similar tasks: “Clay/Draw/Draw(SculptDraw)” or “Flatten/Polish”. I think, it would be good to ged rid of tools which do nearly the same in sculpting.

Yes, they do nearly the same thing, like a fountain pen and a point marker. Despite this, an artist would probably prefer one over the other in certain situations. Are you seriously proposing to remove it so we have less items there? (Have you seen ZBrushs tool panel, for that matter?)

23

Ok, I’ll bite.

To use addons as an example, the user enables them, then they show up in the ui, where they are most appropriate & efficiently used & easily accessed. If you no longer want them in the ui, simply disable them after use to reduce ‘clutter’ or collapse the panel, for later reference. I actually went through many addons sometime ago & coded that the addon panels be closed by default to reduce clutter. So I don’t understand your issues with them.

Blender is a complex 3d program & is among the most highly customizable ui’s in any software types.
I wonder how much you look into the ui to see just how much you can do & how much you can hide if you want.
Already in the top header there’s the Screen layouts, with animation & scripting & motion tracking & other layouts, you can build & save your own too, very easily. Hover over the 3d view & press ctrl/up arrow to get full screen mode, you cannot get more simple than that.
Nearly everything in Blender is already context sensitive, if you have a bone selected, the bone tools show up, if you have an mesh selected in edit mode the mesh edit mode tools show up or press ‘T’ & on ‘N’ keys to hide the menu’s for your session, this is really good & uncluttered.

I would say, with respect, to take the time to learn Blender & the tools properly, then you may gain a better understanding of why things do what & why they are where.
Considering that Blender is a powerful feature full application, with most of the tools you need at your fingertips or close by, the developers have done very good job.

To say that or imply that coders just load up the ui is not true in any sense.
There have been UI studies, UI google of codes, ui refactors & any feature added is added in the most appropriate area after consultation with artists & coders alike.
Artists play a large role in developing blender & also in the way the ui functions are layed out, usually these artists have also tested & or requested the feature.
I’m not talking about your hobby artist either. I’m talking about guys & gals that use Blender daily in their production environment, with many of them relying upon it for many years as the major tool in there daily work & income.

Finally, like I did, when Blender went from 2.49 to 2.5x, If you don’t like something, become pro-active & change it yourself.
I did, I disagreed & still do with the spacebar menu becoming the search, I thought it a waste of such a large key, so with help from like minded people, we coded the Dynamic Spacebar menu, which gives you mode sensitive menus & the search.
(no it’s not like the shift/a, in fact, it’s nothing like it.)
edit to clarify: (the ctrl/a menu is included in the spacebar menu)

That’s just my two cent’s worth.
No doubt this won’t be the last ui thread either…

24

I really love the wiki tutorial :
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Doc:2.6/Manual/Your_First_Animation/1.A_static_Gingerbread_Man

It is really better to have a tutorial with images of UI buttons used rather than a .blend scene that cannot explain steps to obtain it.If you want to do a .pdf about basics, I think it is the tutorial to use.

A tutorial can’t cover all aspects of 3D domains available with blender.
Maybe we should add to wiki tutorials like “your first game in 30 min plus 30 minutes” ; “your first Cycles render in 30 min plus 30 minutes” ; “your first video tracking in 30 min plus 30 minutes”; “your first sculpt in 30 min plus 30 minutes”; “your first 3D printed model in 30 min plus 3 hours”.

But in my opinion, it takes less time to read the Introduction and Starting chapters of the wiki manual.

25

yes, we need new interface!
XD

26

Glad you brought up the Dynamic spacebar. What I was thinking lately is that it is a nice op browsing tool, however I think it could be extended greatly. I am on OSX using Alfred launchbar for almost everything and one of the features is browsing the filesystem. Maybe the dynamic spacebar could be extended in function to be able to browse the blender file graph (materials, objects, groups etc) and maybe do actions on it based on the context? For example you start typing ‘Cb’ and it finds add Cube op (fuzzy search) but if you prefix by ‘/’ you search the scene and it finds a object ‘Cube’. Pressing shift for example gets you preview (some nice things could be done here), right arrow or some modifier key gets you a list of context ops.

This could be extended further I guess, this is as far as I got… :slight_smile:

27

As someone who oppose some peoples UI-opinions, I am confronted with people who tell me that I have to learn blender to use the UI. Its a stereotype I see in every UI relating discussion, silencing those who do not agree.

I accept your opinion, as good as I can. May I expect, that my opinion is accepted as a valid point of view, too?

I did, I disagreed & still do with the spacebar menu becoming the search, I thought it a waste of such a large key, so with help from like minded people, we coded the Dynamic Spacebar menu, which gives you mode sensitive menus & the search.

As far as I understand, this menu is about operators. Its not about panels.

But … Thank you for coding it.

It is really better to have a tutorial with images of UI buttons used rather than a .blend scene that cannot explain steps to obtain it.If you want to do a .pdf about basics, I think it is the tutorial to use.

A Blend file itself could not do it. But, we have Python.
Some weeks ago I thought about it and asked myself, whether there could be a kind of Operator-Listener. ( I have problems finding good words for this, that leads to problems searching it in the INet. )
After a user fullfills a task, the listener will recognize, and raise him to the next level (to the next scene).

Would it be possible in Blender?

Maybe the dynamic spacebar could be extended in function to be able to browse the blender file graph (materials, objects, groups etc) and maybe do actions on it based on the context

Do we need a 2nd outliner? (exept, context based actions)

28

I would like to know what, for instance, the ‘Photo Modeling Tools’ has to do with sculpting, is it necessary it shows up in sculpting tool region (or in Texture Paint)?

And the ‘Rigify Dev Tools’ in the Texture Paint?

There are many other examples of bad UI choices around, so there should be more control over addons and their inclusion in the UI.

paolo

29

I am surprised you felt that way. Maya is one of the smartest and most simple UI’s I can think of. There’s a lot too it, yes, and simple shouldnt mean bare, but what it does do is put everything in a easily found menu which is then categorized properly for the most part. Just pressing the spacebar will give you access to most of the features within Maya…no crazy hotkeys to memorize, no keyboard contortionist type interacting, a solid attribute editor with a tab system. Pretty simple if you ask me. IN fact I found very little distracting with Maya’s UI. Some could even say its boring, and to that they may have a point.

In fact, I think Maya is a great example for what Blender’s UI can start leaning towards…in the sense that categories and their menus are easily found with the touch of one button. A clear organization and layout with minimal scrolling needed.

As for the simplist is best… I would disagree. It doesnt matter if its simple or not, but rather how its organized and whether or not its inherently intuitive. I believe intuitiveness and accessibility within a clearly organized system of functions is paramount.

I agree that a context sensitive UI is also beneficial when it comes to layering functions and options within a UI. There is also the issue of different controls being present depending on which window your mouse is hovering over. I find this problematic. Even the UV window doesnt operate like the 3d viewport, which it probably should imo.

It kind of is, to an extent. It was in one of the blendercon vids Ton brought up the need to find ways to layer the UI. He said something along the lines of running out of space as features and other elements are piled on and that its becoming or soon to become a problem.

There have been UI studies, UI google of codes, ui refactors & any feature added is added in the most appropriate area after consultation with artists & coders alike.

I’m not so sure about that. In fact its pretty obvious thats not true. This isnt saying Blenders UI is bad, but to suggest an understanding of UI theory and optimal placement is taking place across the board is hard to swallow.

30

SaintHaven,
hi, before you start mouthing off & trolling people, how about you do some research on the subject.
Otherwise you make yourself look like a fool.

31

Just organizing the UI isn’t particularly difficult, but it’s pretty tedious and boring. CGCookie has a tutorial covering the basics of adding buttons and things if anyone wants to give it a serious shot.

32

You are going to have to be a bit more specific champ. Also the act of trolling is to get a reaction out of people, so it seems silly that you are calling my post “trolling”…unless you are trying to get a reaction out of me which in that case you are indeed trolling.

I noticed that sometimes, angry and often insecure individuals will respond with insults and vague claims with the intent to belittle another, just because they dont like the content of someone’s post. If you find fault with my post, use specifics, not failed attempts at belittlement. “Otherwise you make yourself look like a fool.”

33

IMO this whole thread is just flamebait.

I don’t think there’s been one single suggestion that hasn’t been a variation on “It isn’t similar enough to programX, go look at that to see why it’s bad” which is just another iteration on the old “I want blender to be a ‘free’ clone of programX”.

34

I have to say, I completely disagree with the original poster.

The first and foremost consideration for an interface’s design should be how effectively it functions (or how effectively it enables the user to function). So, we could simplify or oversimplify Blender to make it more friendly to new users, but that would ultimately limit its effectiveness and speed of use for advanced users. It’s like saying that we should redesign formula one cars or chainsaws for toddlers. The design should be focused on allowing advanced users to most effectively leverage their skills, talent and time. And it is!

Here’s a summary of this whole debate to me:

1:
Most programs historically use a “Menu bar up top, stuff im working on/creating/looking at down below.” Those drop-down menu functions became inconvenient to use, so people started putting floating buttons in their interfaces because they were faster, easier and more convenient to use. These turned into palettes (think adobe, history or layers palettes in photoshop).

2:
Blender uses a different organizational paradigm. Menu functions, shortcuts, other features, and the visual preview of what you’re working on, are all tied together into separate spaces. Like the 3D view, or the curve editor, or the UV/Image editor, or the outliner (All the functions you need are placed right there next to the visual preview in headers and toolbars, shortcuts are unique when you’re working within that “Editor”). Why is this so hard for people to accept / understand / grasp?

3:
People don’t like change or what they’re not familiar with. So we get a bunch of people complaining about how terrible Blender’s interface is. I used the Adobe suite for years before using Blender, and I thought the Blender interface was REVOLUTIONARY. Most people are incapable of setting aside their own biases (historical working habits).

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you don’t need a function or don’t know what it is, don’t use it! I don’t want any options or functions hidden away from me in some far away place by default (think: the MS word ribbon interface, and how terrible it is). All of these options and functions and features are what make Blender a robust and powerful 3D suite.

I’m sure most people on this forum are skilled with photoshop…remember how scary it looked when you first opened it? I’m betting that none of you are scared by palettes now.

35

I think it is also important to remember the difference between an addon and the program itself.

Sourvinos is right, there are several addons which register themselves all the time regardless of context. It isn’t an inherent flaw in blender, it is the addon itself. It’s not impossible to register an addon to only appear at a specific context, but it is more complicated.

If you have dozens of addons enabled all the time, you are going to have a lot of clutter. If you had a car and you wanted to add a spoiler, and a roof rack, and auxilliary lights, and a winch, and a brush guard, it’s not going to look clean and streamlined. it might even be ugly, but if you want to have all those features available on your car, you’d need to live with your ugly car.

Also, don’t be afraid of grabbing the reins and coding things yourself. every single addon in blender is a .py file that you can edit. that means that you have hundreds, if not thousands, of examples of code. if one addon registers itself properly and doesn’t clutter the ui in irrelevant contexts, open up the file. see how they did it. Coders aren’t special wizards with magical powers. they are people who took the time to see what the code is doing and how to improve it. If people spent as much time reading about the BPY api as they did posting about all the problems with the code, there would be an army of competent programmers out there who want to make changes.

Knowledge is power, and if you choose not to empower yourself to make a difference, don’t be surprised if you end up constantly disappointed.

36

Its ok if you dont share my opinion.

A moderator should know the difference between the aim to keep discussion on-topic, and being provicative. I mean: downgrading the thread and my writings. “Flamebait”. And stereotypical things like [[ “It isn’t similar enough to programX, go look at that to see why it’s bad” which is just another iteration on the old “I want blender to be a ‘free’ clone of programX”.]], which do not fit into anything I wrote in this thread. Reading this I am sure you never looked into my writings you critisize.

Knowing this game. The moment I react, I am “the troll”. Wont play that game any more.

37

I dunno about you guys but, I’ve worked professionally on Max, Maya, XSI (a bit, not proficient) and Cinema4D.

Freelancing and hobbying, I have switched to Blender almost exclusively, and it is because of the UI and workflow.

I does what I want, when I want it and it as few steps as possible. Blender is the only one which makes sense to me.

My 2 cents.

38

Interesting reads - I am one of those that love Blender’s workflow and find it fast and efficient.

But for new users I can see some issues.

What I think could be improved in the UI:

Toolbar:
The toolbar side is bloated and uses a lot a screen space vertically.
The text buttons are just a wast of screen space and could rather be done with icons.

Tool option field:
Maybe the tool bar should be replaced with the active tool property bar as it is displayed
below the tools in the tool bar.

Window content aware menus:
It feels somewhat redundant to heave model mesh select etc menus in each 3D view port you have.
Maybe there would be a way to quickly hide those menues and integrate them into the main menu.
Layer manager icon for example could be in a status bar or something and not be in each viewport.

But it is also nice to have them in each window unite so have content aware menus right where you work.

Documentation:
Besides all the UI talk I feel the biggest task for new users to master is learning the software
and better documentation would help greately. Understanding is often a reason for thinking Blender sucks.

On the other side I find Blender extremely efficient and fast to work with. I started using Blender when it
was part of NaN and the interface drastically improved.

While it has some screen space issues the upside is you can customize it a lot, it is very flexible, you can have
layouts saved, the key shortcuts are window content aware.

I am not really sure what I really would want to be changed with the interface.

Maybe a good pie menu that even more puts the need for menus and icons away so I can work even faster.

I compared it once with Maya and also there you need to customize it a lot to work efficient.

39

Many Valid points, Please just understand UI is one of the massive funding area’s in apps like maya and Max (millions spent). Blender can be difficult at times but as far as my use you can customise just about any aspect of what you want on screen at any one point, So the real answer is a simple obvious tool to save and load UI layouts (blender,org page where users can upload there own UI layouts for others to use in relation to tasks wanted to achieve, Again video’s of UI layouts in use would simplify that for new users who ask for specific tasks that are new to them that others have found solutions to.

40

I have worked in/still use all sorts of 3d software (Max, Lightwave, C4D, TrueSpace, and many more), and the truth is that, unless the software is focused on a particular sub-topic, all GUIs tend to be complex to grasp. The amount of functionality in Blender, Lightwave, C4D, Maya, Houdini, Max, SoftImage, and so on, is astounding - it goes far beyond Photoshop or Illustrator, for example.

Sculptris offers a very focused, nice and clean interface because it deals with a limited subset. ZBrush and 3DCoat, on the other hand, although both focusing mainly on sculpting, painting, and a couple of other things (retopology comes to mind) are already much more difficult to learn due to the amount of added functionality - which their GUIs reflect.

And though some members of the 3d app family can be easier to learn and grasp (depending on your viewpoint), the fact of the matter is that all of them are complex - or rather, 3d production is a complex task, consisting of many complex sub-tasks.

This is reflected in the GUI for all of these applications.

From a personal viewpoint, I had a much harder time learning Lightwave and its GUI. Blender 2.49 made more sense to me. v2.5 and beyond represent a, for the most part, clear and nice-looking GUI that is much more customizable than most other 3d software. Cinema4D also presents a clean interface that is as customizable (even a tad more so) as Blender’s (though once you get more indepth, C4D’s interface becomes a bit cumbersome in use). Some of Blender’s GUI caveats (no floating panels) can be solved easily with “windows stay on top” OS utilities.

Personally, I feel it is an individual’s perspective and experience that makes one interface simple to understand, and another GUI incomprehensible.