[Bf-committers] Arbitrary materials for mesh display in viewport (solid view)
shatter98 at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 2 22:43:37 CEST 2010
I really like this idea. A simple checkbox on the UV/Image Editor header for "Overide Material Textures in viewport" that is unselected by default would save a lot of confusion and headaches as to why images render differently then they look in the viewport.
> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 18:37:20 +0200
> From: gustav.goransson at gmail.com
> To: bf-committers at blender.org
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Arbitrary materials for mesh display in viewport (solid view)
> It might make things clearer, but I think one have to take a step back
> and see what is good from a user perspective
> Right now blender shows textures assigned in the UV/image editor NOT
> actual textures that are assigned to the material that will show up
> when rendering. I think this behavior is a rather stupid and very
> confusing. It gives you no feedback on how your material maps to your
> object without actually hit render, unless you actually in edit mode
> selects all faces of you object -> open the image/UV editor and open
> the texture. It would be a lot nicer if you blender displayed the
> textures of object's material instead. One could also add a display
> color to all object which specify the color the object have in solid
> mode. This would also solve malefico's problem.
> Then we could have following viewport modes:
> 1. Texture + Shading: Mimic how the object would look like rendered
> (basically what GLSL + textured mode does now)
> 2. Texture: Show textures of the material assign to object.
> 3 Solid: Show the display color of the objects.
> 4. Wireframe: Show wireframe.
> 5.Bounding box: Show Bounding box.
> In addition to this you can have object specific settings and option
> in Image/UV editor to override the viewport modes...
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 16:59, Roger Wickes <rogerwickes at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 1a. Textured Solid View
> > 2a. Light direction and color setting in User Pref
> > It seem to me we have Blender-level settings (User Prefs),
> > then for each 3D View window a selectable view mode that builds on the blender-level,
> > and then for each object in a 3D View window an override which modulates the above.
> > This feels like a good hierarchy to me. My only ...blip... in this hierarchy is changing
> > all the 3D views to be "consistent", but I understand the need to have like 3 of the windows
> > in wireframe and only one sucking up CPU in solid mode (ah, the wonderful Pentium 3 days).
> > What if we could agree that the User Prefs and 3D View toolbar/properties pull-out
> > set up general rules for what and how things are displayed in general, and is set by the user
> > based on their machine's power. A new feature in User Prefs would be a Lock all 3D Views to changes
> > made in one 3D View with regard to display quality setting, which would set all the other 3D Views
> > (with another option - across desktops) to use the new display quality setting (view mode).
> > Then, with some future feature on a group basis, we can set the display level for a group that
> > either uses the general setting, or over-rides the general setting for objects in that group as has been requested.
> > For example, all "background" (or "matte") group objects would be in wireframe, "set dressing" in solid,
> > and "foreground" in shaded view mode. this would allow the user to direct cpu resources to view/display those
> > objects of most importance in the better quality.
> > On an object-by-object basis, the Material properties Display panel could "Use default" or could override that
> > and define how a specific object is displayed in 3D View. This would be a simple change to the
> > Material Display panel to have a selector, much like the 3D View selector, with options to
> > Use 3D View default
> > Bounding Box
> > Solid
> > Solid Textured
> > Shaded with GLSL
> > Shaded Multitexture
> > Shaded Textured
> > Textured
> > which i think mushes all the different modes into one list, roughly ascending by CPU drain. Right now
> > it is sort of a radio button mush.
> > Would be nice if the 3D view header display mode option, and the 3D View Properties panel used
> > this same list for consistency.
> > This would allow future possibility for us then to have some objects in wireframe and others
> > textured in 3D view, which is what has beenrequested.
> > --Roger
> > *Not the coder in this area so take all my suggestions with a grain of salt"
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Gustav Göransson <gustav.goransson at gmail.com>
> > To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
> > Sent: Wed, June 2, 2010 8:10:04 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Arbitrary materials for mesh display in viewport (solid view)
> > The displaying of models/textures in the viewport might be the most
> > confusing area in Blender (After five years of using blender I'm still
> > not sure if I get it...).
> > Right now we have:
> > 1. Viewport Shading (Textured, Solid, Wire, Bounding Box).
> > 2. Shading setting in the n-panel (GLSL, Multitexture, Textureface) +
> > Texture solid.
> > 3. Display settings for each object (Texture, solid ,xray etc.).
> > To this add how blender shows texture loaded in Image/UV editor that
> > PapaSmurf mentions... and not to mention procedural textures...
> > In my opinion blender need to be a lot clearer on what are displayed
> > in the viewport and which setting that overrides others before
> > introducing more viewport features....
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
More information about the Bf-committers