[Bf-funboard] general comments and funcionality improvement suggestions

Tue Apr 3 19:30:40 CEST 2012

ah ofcourse. I forgot the obvious implications concerning cameras and their settings.
A camera is not just another viewport mode.

Thank you for looking into it,though,and taking the time to explain the problem.

I can live with it.
Are there any other of my ideas that are a fool's errand?
I would like to know so I wouldn't need to keep my hopes up for them. 

Kind regards

Steven

> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:53:50 +1100
> From: ideasman42 at gmail.com
> To: bf-funboard at blender.org
> Subject: Re: [Bf-funboard] general comments and funcionality improvement	suggestions
> 
> error, corretion below.
> 
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm ignoring pressing numpad 0 switching back to last view issue -
> > this is an intentional feature, but rather not discuss it for now.
> >
> > so it boils down to: Middle mouse drag in camera view COULD/SHOULD
> > keep my view (frame same area of view - zoom/pan)
> >
> > listed 4 possible solutions, 1 workaround :)
> >
> > == first/obvious option ==
> > This is tricky because for it to work...
> >
> > * The regular viewport would need a SHIFT X/Y feature,
> > ...notice if you zoom in the side of the camera view the vanishing
> > point is no longer centered,
> >
> > * Middle Click Dragging would have to change the Field-of-view
> > ...notice if you zoom in camera view it changes the FOV (zoom out
> > becomes wide angle).
> >
> >
> >
> > This is of course possible - but I really think this would become more annoying
> >
> > 1) you would have this new/strange shift setting in the viewport which
> > would need to be controlled somehow (yet another setting we need
> > buttons, viewport manipulation for) - really for common work having
> > FOV in regular viewport is overkill IMHO,
> 
> ... for common work having ***SHIFT X/Y*** in regular viewport is
> overkill IMHO ...
> 
> >
> > 2) Changing the users FOV every time they go out of camera view would
> > also be irritating IMHO, sometimes.
> >
> >
> > == cheating option 1 ==
> >
> > So when you MMB drag the view it can just cheat - make a `ghost` copy
> > of the camera that is not displayed in the scene - and only exists for
> > the purpose of view navigation,
> >
> > This can work but I worry it makes our code a bit messy and is a
> > fairly bad hack for a spesific use case, users would also need to be
> > aware that a view is in this new `mode`, and have a way to get out of
> > it.
> >
> >
> > == cheating option 2 ==
> >
> > Allow the camera to be moved but dont adjust its location rotation (a
> > temporary transform which isnt stored in the object - internally this
> > would change the final matrix but not the loc/scale/rot).
> >
> > Again, can work but is adding an exceptional case we have to keep
> > supporting (camera matrix and location being intentionally out of
> > sync) and think this could backfire easily and be hard to support.
> >
> >
> > == best guess ==
> >
> > Without adding viewport shift or changing FOV.
> > Surely its possible to place the view *roughly* in the same place as
> > you are zoomed to?
> >
> > eeeh - well yes - but you would need to check on the depth of objects
> > infront of you - then re-position the view based on this to
> > *approximately* frame those same objects,
> >
> > I think this is the best option since it doesnt add difficult to
> > support code - and only changes the behavior in oneplace.
> >
> > Still, guesses can be infuriatingly wrong - should empties/lamps be
> > included? - should the median depth be used or the closest object?
> > what if there is 1px of a close object in the view, should that be
> > ignored? etc........
> >
> >
> > == don't solve, workaround ==
> >
> > You will notice in non camera view, Shft+B, will border zoom onto an
> > area (using depth), currently Shif+B is used for border render in the
> > camear view but with some keybinding changes we can easy have it
> > working.
> >
> > This way you can define a region of interest and move out of camera
> > view to zoom into it.
> >
> > The operator that does this could very easily have an option to
> > initialize its border from the view bounds so you dont actually need
> > to draw the border.
> >
> > Once this is done is basically just a matter of adding access to this
> > feature in a way that suits you. Im not convinced this is good default
> > behavior - because it will zoom into a small object if there is only
> > one in the scene, but It could be configured to be useful to the
> > porpose you are taking about IMHO.
> >
> > Perhaps just having a way to access border zoom in camera mode would be enough.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Steven Schoorens <bollebib at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> That is exactly what I mean
> >> You put it so much better then I did XD
> >>
> >> and I would also second your request.
> >> I havent worked with multiple camera's yet,in blender, but mostly I prefer only one.
> >> So maybe it could be that there are 2 ways to work with this: One way is to make a new camera with some shortcut as you propose (I think),but I would also propose a second suboption that lets you reuse your current camera if you so wish-> this way you move the camera and put a keyframe (with autokeyframe on)automaticly. Doing this you can quickly move through your scene AND in time to make quick camera movements,and refine them afterwards.
> >>
> >>
> >> wouldn't this maybe tie in a bit with your last request ? (save and load view states)
> >> But it might still be good to have that last feature as well. I notice that 9 on the numpad is the only number not doing anything viewport related right now (unless I'm missing something?)
> >> Maybe it might be good to assign that button to that feature,and pressing "9" will get you the Floating saved view list,Shift+9 lets you add new views,alt+9 lets you remove them
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> this way you save multple views you find interesting and recall them as needed...
> >>
> >> I think this would work fine,unless someone has a different idea?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> kind regards
> >>
> >>
> >> Steven
> >>
> >>> Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:32:04 +0200
> >>> From: j at zafio.com
> >>> To: bf-funboard at blender.org
> >>> Subject: Re: [Bf-funboard] general comments and funcionality improvement      suggestions
> >>>
> >>> If I understood it right, your concern is the transition from Camera View
> >>> to 3d View, which happens when rotating (or even just press MMB once) so
> >>> the "jumpcut" would be the small "zoom out" that leaves the camera's
> >>> "gizmo" just in front, right?
> >>> Plus any panning and zooming you do in Camera view is lost when you switch
> >>> to 3d view...
> >>>
> >>> So, you want an option for the 3d view to inherit the "view state/settings"
> >>> of the active camera, so there is a clear and flickerless transition, right?
> >>>
> >>> I think it is a good idea, in fact, it would be also interesting to add the
> >>> "inverse" option to match the camera to the 3d view.
> >>> As it is pretty usual you move around a scene in 3d view and you find a
> >>> nice angle you want to use to render, but you have to create a camera and
> >>> recreate the same settings... which takes more time than checking an option
> >>> or pressing a shortcut.
> >>>
> >>> This last option could be also integrated right in the "add camera" panel,
> >>> and even creating it from the Add menu or with a shortcut, adding SHIFT or
> >>> ALT.
> >>>
> >>> Another interesting feature would be to save and load view states (for
> >>> either 3d views or Cameras), rather than having to create lots of cameras.
> >>> It is faster to press a shortcut, than having to create and setup a new
> >>> camera each time.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Bol Bib <bollebib at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Hello and thank you very much for replying ^^
> >>> >
> >>> > I call it "snap back" but it's actually more of a 'jumpcut' sort of thing.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >  I'll talk you through the steps I take for a real use scenario:
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I'm in animating stage of my work process(but doesn't matter which process
> >>> > you are in really...),and I just want to animate and look at how everything
> >>> > will look in the camera,.
> >>> > So I push '0' and I get the camera view. I move stuff around, I zoom
> >>> > in/zoom out,move the 3D view up/down,but remain in camera view mode (so no
> >>> > rotation of the 3Dview).
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Then I want to animate some detail which for whatever reason doesn't quite
> >>> > work from the camera view (for example:the object I want to animate is
> >>> > behind the object )
> >>> > so I'd have to rotate to get a better view of the bone/object,right?
> >>> > But when you try to rotate the viewport/3D view when you are IN Camera
> >>> > mode and you have done several operations with the 3D view (zoomed in/out,
> >>> > moved 3Dview...)
> >>> > as soon as you rotate the view you snap back to where the camera phyiscly
> >>> > is,in the scene,and any zoom or move you had,is gone,and you have to
> >>> > re-zoom en re-move your viewport to where you were working on.
> >>> > This can be could annoying when having to to lots of small tweaks to an
> >>> > animation or a model or a scene.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > -So in short this is how blender now acts:
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > press 0 ->move and zoom 3D view a bit->when trying to rotate=> JUMPCUT to
> >>> > where camera really is ,and only then normal 3Dview behaviour (which is not
> >>> > wanted behaviour.)
> >>> >
> >>> > -THis is what I would like
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > press 0 ->move and zoom 3D View a bit->when trying to rotate=> Just normal
> >>> > 3D view behaviour, the Camera contour/passepartout just disappears without
> >>> > the need for a jump
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Of course this problem is not such a problem if you use different 3D views
> >>> > at once (so you can have a dedicated camera view viewport),
> >>> > but this greatly reduces screen estate and not every one has multiple
> >>> > monitors,or a huge one to make up for that.
> >>> >
> >>> >  When repressing '0' ,apparently the camera view still remembers those
> >>> > view translations,which is good. But this issue make me lose quite a bit of
> >>> > time because of needing to re-zoom and/re-move the viewport every time I
> >>> > rotate out of the camera view
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > -to recap:  I just want the camera view to behave like any other 3D
> >>> > viewport,in that when you rotate the view,it just rotates like a 3D view.
> >>> > You DO in fact LEAVE the camera view (as it is now),but leave it WITHOUT
> >>> > any jumps in the viewport.
> >>> >
> >>> > The "lock camera to view "mode make the 3D view behave like a normal
> >>> > viewport but it ACTUALLY moves the camera. So you would have to reposition
> >>> > your camera if you did this,which is no solution to my problem.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Does anyone NEED that kind of snapback/jumpcut? If they do,then make my
> >>> > "solution" ,if you deem it just, an option. If they don't, well maybe this
> >>> > could/should be default behaviour?
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I hope this is clear ,now,if you have any more questions I'd be happy to
> >>> > answer them.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Incidentally,are my other "issues" in that huge "wishlist"(and in the
> >>> > second one) clear? Am I just being an entitled bastard? (very possibly...)
> >>> > Or are some points worthy of being considered?
> >>> > I just wish to complete some workparadigms the people at blender obviously
> >>> > had in mind, and extend them to the whole program (like the filters,Follow
> >>> > Context...),
> >>> > as opposed to only here and there (like in some cases right now) and
> >>> > propose some ideas to make blender even more awesome then it is.
> >>> > I do not think I'm asking for very difficult stuff (like bmesh or cycles
> >>> > or a pony XD) but ,in my opinion, stuff that would make lots of people's
> >>> > workflow much more enjoyable,quick and organised (like filters, hiding of
> >>> > UI elements...)
> >>> >
> >>> > Except perhaps number 10 (LINK BONES and their respective keyframes) this
> >>> > one might be a bit too much (but would be very usefull though) for a simple
> >>> > patch.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Would you prefer it if I make a new mail for every issue I have ,or is
> >>> > bundling them like that okay?
> >>> > Should I wait a bit before posting new ones? Or can I post them whenever?
> >>> > I don't want to exageratewith lots of posts, but  I'm just very passionate
> >>> > about user comfort in programs. (and Blender is the best one yet ,but could
> >>> > be even better!)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Kind regards
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Steven
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > > Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 11:36:09 +1100
> >>> > > From: ideasman42 at gmail.com
> >>> > > To: bf-funboard at blender.org
> >>> > > Subject: Re: [Bf-funboard] general comments and funcionality improvement
> >>> >      suggestions
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > 1. looking out of the camera ,from which I animate, if I try to rotate
> >>> > the view, going OUT of said camera mode,I always get a violent snap back to
> >>> > the camera,regardless of where I was zooming with the camera. While I know
> >>> > this is logical behaviour,it is not functional behaviour. While animating
> >>> > one zooms ,rotates, and moves on the fly while adjusting bones and objects.
> >>> > The snapback I experience makes me have to re-frame and re-zoom back to
> >>> > where I was everytime.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > There IS the lock camera to view mode, which has good functionality
> >>> > but it actually moves the camera ,and at this point in the animation,I
> >>> > actually DONT want the camera to move.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > To recap,when I am in camera view mode,i just want the viewport to
> >>> > behave like a viewport and not snap back everyime.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Hi. I read this a couple of times but cant follow it - you dont want
> >>> > > the camera to move but also dont want 'snap back' -
> >>> > > could you explain in detail how you think it could work better?
> >>> > > _______________________________________________
> >>> > > Bf-funboard mailing list
> >>> > > Bf-funboard at blender.org
> >>> > > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> >>> >
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > Bf-funboard mailing list
> >>> > Bf-funboard at blender.org
> >>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> >>> >
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Bf-funboard mailing list
> >>> Bf-funboard at blender.org
> >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-funboard mailing list
> >> Bf-funboard at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - Campbell
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> - Campbell
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-funboard mailing list
> Bf-funboard at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard