You mean like Silo? Mudbox? Sketchup? I would even argue to some extent Maya and XSI. The fact is there are streamlined and minimalistic interfaces in the 3d world, many of them are very good in fact.
But its not about whats more complex or crowded, but rather which one is more intuitive and based around maximum usability. Stream lining is abut removing what is unnecessary at that point and time and working for the user, not against them. Its about reducing the number of arbitrary steps.
3D should be easy to get into and hard to master, not the other way around.
I’m not sure anyone really knows what they want from the UI. I hear a lot that ppl seem to think that blender isn’t being used widely because it isn’t easy enough to use with only a mouse.
Actually there are quite a few of us who know exactly what we want from a UI, and many have and continue to use a large assortment of tools, including the dreaded “commercial applications”.
What I hear more of is usually people touting some confirmation bias in which to proclaim blender is fine and that everyone else is just “cray cray” (crazy).
Blender is not being used more widely because it doesn’t make any corporations rich. No matter what changes are made to Blender it will never be a widely used 3d software.
That’s a silly thing to say. Blender not used because it doesnt make Corporations rich? Thats not a very smart proclamation to make. Blender isnt used as much as it could and should by established and or known artist and studios because of Blender’s state and the state of the industry, not because it doesnt make “corporations rich”. Thats not even a correct way to look at it nor is it that simple or black and white.
When you are an artist who makes their living from their art, you will often pick the tool that gets you paid more and works best with your pipeline. Its that simple. Blender is used for this to some degree but its not as widely adopted mostly due to it not maturing enough yet, both in interface and in polish/feature set. Dont forget, the 3d market is oversatured with 3d applications… This means its harder, not easier.
Why would a kid who can go to college and have an instructor hold their hand and walk them through step by step the most widely used softwares; why would that kid choose to instead learn blender on his own?
Because that kid is going to have a lot of debt to pay off in the form of student loans and adding a collection of software applications to their pipeline which will cost them over $3000 is often not an option. With student versions they can try to come up with a demo reel for employment, but since the market is over saturated, there is more competition, so that student will work with software they can afford to sell their work online, work as freelance or work as a hobbyist on projects that can eventually lead to employment. This is why Blender fits in perfectly, the problem is that its not industry standard in its philosophy.
It might sound crazy to you, but students with an interest in 3d often do learn on their own on their own time. In fact, thats kind of why video tutorials sell so well.
Blender is the road less traveled. It ultimately leads to the same place as the one most traveled. Thing about roads less traveled is there is no toll but sometimes you have to stop and ask directions to make sure you’re still headed in the right direction. there are no starbucks or McDonalds on this road either.
To be honest thats just sentimental bullcrap. It means nothing, its just sentiment and semantics, something to sound romantic and noble but ultimately empty of anything objective or meaningful.
What it tells me is that you have a confirmation bias and nothing objective to base it on.
Good tools are user centric, they focus and help the user achieve their goals in the best way possible, and a large part of that is usability and intuitive design. Intuitive design cannot exist with out familiarity.
On that note, I think nearly everyone here wants whats best for blender and wants to see it grow and succeed, based on the context that success is wide spread professional adoption. It doesnt hurt to question what might be perceived as improvement, but if done it must be based more on the objective than the subjective.
