Irrelevant to me. I’m fine with either of the two options.
In any case I would like better visualization to better distinguish things like overlapped faces, or separate (split, not connected) faces. The same for edges and vertices I guess.
Maybe a “Merge Distance” option like Remove Doubles is necessary for that viewing mode I’m proposing.
And perhaps extend it to UV editor too.
Edit:
Well, now that I read zeauro message here and DcVertice comment here and in UX design entry, maybe it’s not that irrelevant to me. They have good points there
Facedots is not only a selection system, also allow you to know if the ngon have a problem and the weight of the ngon go to some direction because have more vertex or select in wireframe mode where the facedot system is basically the only way to select properly.
Also facedot system allow a lot of tricky ways to select faces with box selection. It allow you to select a lot of face without problems selecting that faces because other faces are near or overlay, but the facedot are not in the same position…
Combined mode in this mockup is not different than Vertex Select Mode.
How a user is supposed to understand that he is in a combined mode Vertex+ Edges and not in Vertex+Faces or Vertex+Edges+Faces ?
Since fusion of unwrap and edit mode, unwrap tools are using the idea of an active Face.
You can be in Vertex Select mode or Edge Select mode and unwrap your mesh.
There are both kinds of active element : an active vertex or an active edge and an active face.
Although follow active quads operator is restricted to activation of face select mode.
Mock-up is neglecting a solution for Edges+Faces combined mode.
As we are in 3D world, I have the strange feeling that colors dependent on the depth in 3D view could be useful for better visualization in some cases. I’m not sure if that depending on the user’s point of view, because it would change constantly and I guess it would be annoying. But depending on the depth in some axis for example.
I think in bones in pose mode. X-Ray view is really useful, but sometimes it is a bit difficult to distinguish the depth to select bones, especially in ortho view. But not only for bones. And it could be colors in object or outlines.
Do you know if something similar exists in some other software, that in some view mode the colors change depending on the depth of the view? (different color, or gradients of the same color or gradients of two colors for example)
Double faces are usually shown as terminator artifact. Bad shading, flickering and glitching.
Faces with no area (0) don’t even appear (no dots). I usually got then through stats, and remove loose geo, doubles and such…
Not always, you try duplicating faces in default cube.
…
Well, I think the problem is when artists/designers believe that the tool with which they make art and create beauty should also be beautiful and artistic. The tool should be first of all useful, clear, consistent and well organized. And this does not always mean artistically beautiful and pleasing to the eye.
G is for Grab because in Blender you are grabbing. And it works this way by default. Other apps refer to this as tweaking. Translate or move would not be a properly discriptive label. It so happens that the grab tool can also translate just like other tools. But calling it move would be therefore deceptive.
Nothing is done “Just because” in any app.
So it is better to dissabuse yourself of that idea.
Even choosing W has a logic. It has to do with certain keyboard standards already adopted.
In this case blender decided to go with something more immediately familiar. Letters that represent what words - in English- refer to the actiin.
I used 3D Studio from DOS version 4… When Max came i was already on the boat… Used it until version 8 i think… And like you, didn’t have any problems getting used to the ‘blender-way’.
Face dots are useful. I like’m.
They help you select the exact face you want.
They help you see if you have, like, a 0 length face somewhere in your model and so on…
If it’s an option to display or hide them, I approve.
In development news (May 9), there was a major batch of commits related to particle drawing and more tools were made to work in the multi-object edit-mode. More modifiers have been converted to use the new system free of derivedmesh logic, and Bastien is beginning on work on dynamic overrides (in a branch) to go with the static overrides now in Blender 2.8.
There were a few commits related to the visual widgets as well (the extrude widget and the scale cage). The Grease Pencil branch is seeing daily commits as preparation to merge it in continues.
If Blender users designed Blender, The user preferences would morph into this giant unusable mess where you enabled and disabled a bajillion different options, oh wait it already is that carry on…
Hah, good one.
I think the most fair thing to do then is “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
That is, if face dots are going to be removed, there has to be a good reason for it.
I generally like this, but the colors need more tweaking. The difference between selected and unselected is not pronounced enough, and between selected and active is barely visible.
It works ok in this simple selection, but when you have a bigger, denser mesh, spotting that stray face or vertex you accidentally selected on the other side of the model will be unlikely. Which will result in more time lost fixing the mesh you subsequently you ruined.
And one more very important thing: with the dropping of facedots, face selection must be rewritten to directly work in screen space - i.e. What You Click Is What You Get. Particularly for oddly shaped, unbalanced, or concave polygons. Super-thin polygons must also be accounted for so that you don’t have to zoom in to select them, and specially highlighted so they are never invisible (with facedots, they were always visible because the dot would show up, and this was great).
I haven’t installed Blender 2.8 so far, and I’m wondering: how usable is Blender 2.8 at the moment (May 2018) ? Are there major Blender functions that aren’t working, or is it a fully usable blend of 2.79 functions and updated 2.8 parts?
In other words: is Blender being upgraded to 2.8 seamlessly, or is 2.8 an unstable construction site of half-finished functions?
