[Bf-committers] blendercasts reloaded...
p_boelens at msn.com
Sat Nov 23 17:41:27 CET 2013
A long, long time ago I remember there being a discussion about macro's in Blender. Iirc the core concept of those was the same: allow a user to record a set of actions and replay them.
To me it seems like the proposed Blendercast would rely heavily on such a feature. If macros ever get developed in the future, this may be something to keep in kind. For example, they could be extended to allow saving to and loading from files (i.e.: boxModelHouse.macro), jumping to a particular time or "step", setting a playback speed and show the name and parameters of the action being performed in real-time (i.e.: Extrude face (0, 0, -0.5), Scale face (0.2, 0.2, 0.2)).
Perhaps something like that would be a more feasible alternative. It could then be used as an addition to tutorials for instance, both written and screencasted, as well as having a wider use-case.
Just my two cents.
> From: brechtvanlommel at pandora.be
> Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 17:11:59 +0100
> To: bf-committers at blender.org
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] blendercasts reloaded...
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Gaia <gaia.clary at machinimatrix.org> wrote:
> > On 23.11.2013 15:30, Brecht Van Lommel wrote:
> >> For me the reasons not to do this are:
> >> * It shifts work from tutorial makers to developers, and it's the
> >> developers that are already the bottleneck at the moment, we have many
> >> people making tutorials. So developer time seems a more rare resource
> >> at the moment.
> > I am not sure why this would shift work from tutorial makers to developers.
> > Or do you mean "creating this tool would need developer resources" ?
> > Otherwise why would tutorial makers not use such a tool ? Its not so
> > different
> > to use compared to creating screen casts ...
> I think you would want to implement this feature to make it easier for
> people to make tutorials or to help them make better tutorials? So
> basically that means you will have developers spending time helping
> out by implementing this feature (which is really complex), and it
> seems like those resources would be best spent elsewhere.
> >> * I have never seen such a system done well in other applications, the
> >> few times I've come across it, it's always been pretty frustrating.
> > What made these tools frustrating ? Is this a bad concept or did you
> > only step
> > into tools which had it badly implemented ?
> >> I'm not sure why, maybe it's just a coincidence and there are
> >> applications (of Blender's complexity) out there that do this very
> >> well.
> > This actually keeps me on track :) Actually this is a good argument for
> > continue thinking about how it could be done better :)
> My guess is that it is a bad concept because it's a fragile high tech
> solution to a problem that already has a proven low tech solution
> (video tutorials), where the tutorial creator has more control by
> being able to take their recorded video into a video editor to cut and
> enhance it, without working within the inevitable limitations of a
> solution like blendercast.
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers