[Bf-taskforce25] Modifier Layout Proposal

[Alberto Torres]

Hi,

My thoughts on this: I think the best is the current stack plus some
ideas from the mockup:

- I'd add some icons of the most frequent modifiers (such as mirror
and subsurf) next to the "add modifier" button. Clicking one of those
icons would add a modifier.
- I'd add a couple of buttons: one for expanding/collapsing all
modifiers, one for setting auto expand/collapse (you click on a
collapsed modifier and it expands, you click on another and the
previous one collapses).
- Drag&drop (but I wouldn't remove the up/down buttons).

Same for constraints.

DiThi



2009/6/6 Brecht Van Lommel <brecht at blender.org>:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 14:57 -0700, Nathan Vegdahl wrote:
>> But having said that, I do think that having compact stack, and
>> selecting items in the stack to see their settings, is an excellent
>> idea.  But I'd rather have a vertical stack with text as well as
>> icons.  And I think in practice you would need extremely large stacks
>> for that to become a space issue.
>
> I'm also wondering why it is the modifier stack that these mockups are
> being made for. As far as I can see, there isn't actually a problem here
> to be solved?
>
> If the full particle or cloth panels for example would be moved to the
> modifiers panel, more advanced organization may be useful, though I'm
> not a proponent of that, it's doesn't really solve any problem besides
> being more consistent. But consistency is not a sufficient argument in
> my opinion, for the problems it introduces, we can also communicate the
> relation with their entry in the modifier stack better.
>
> With the current modifier stack, taking up a full tab, you can see and
> edit all modifiers immediately. Personally I haven't seen situations
> where the modifiers take up so much space for which an extra level of
> navigation would be justified. I imagine in very complex rigs this may
> be the case, but I have not seen it in any rig, and even in that case I
> think a modifier grouping/folders type thing would be more useful.
>
> Keeping the navigation hierarchy as flat as possible is a good thing in
> my opinion.
>
>
> Though some things do definitely require an extra level in the
> hierarchy, in particular materials, textures, bones and particle
> systems. They each work a bit different now in 2.4x, materials use the
> "3 Mat 2" number button to switch between active materials (particles do
> the same), bones are simply cut off to 4 max, and textures use a fixed
> size stack.
>
> It's not necessarily good to make those consistent, there may be
> different requirements, I'm not sure, but I think there's definitely
> similarities. It would be interesting to see mockups for these cases too
> (supporting unlimited number of materials/textures, even though they are
> limited now, this is likely to change).
>
> Cheers,
> Brecht.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-taskforce25 mailing list
> Bf-taskforce25 at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-taskforce25
>