Blender lite?

Just dreaming here, but I wonder if there is a use for a lite version of Blender. Perhaps something with a more user friendly and attractive interface and limited functionality intended to be used by the average person. Functions with push button type gui for zooming, rotating, panning. Simplified materials selection control, preset lighting and scene setup, pose room, etc.
The aim of which is to provide a simple program where one can download a .blend file, move it around and tweak it somewhat, then render a pic. Then perhaps a market can be opened for selling .blend files model to be used as 3d cliparts? Revenue could trickle into the Blender foundation if such a thing kicks off…
Not a coder, or I’d be hacking away at the code right now…:smiley:

Just dreaming here

Keep on dreaming…

Look at if you really want some easy to learn

I’m not saying your idea is bad, I just cant see how anyone could find any satisfaction in saying “hey look at my new cool picture! I didn’t really make any of it, though i did move the box to the right a little”. Why would anyone want that?

I think a good coder would be much more useful working on the ‘real’ blender.

Sacrilege! :eek:

Every model/animation I see here is art. Every picture has a background and someone obviously put a lot of effort into creating it. Those people are genuine artists, like rembrandt or… da vinci. Though I don’t know a lot of how to work with blender yet, I think it should stay the way it is,…could you be proud of something you’ve just made if everyone could create what you just created? No offense, but I don’t see what would be great about a lite version. If someone wants to make art, they learn or they quit… just my perspective on things.

-> software -> DAZ|studio

your dream has come true and it’s free…

now go buy some content to tweak !

(welcome to the jungle)

Daz, but not quite…
I’m not saying I don’t know how to use Blender, and I want an easier way in. I have been using Blender for quite some time and I can generally accomplish what I want with it. :rolleyes:
Art for art’s sake, well, I wouldn’t want to go into that. It’s not about artwork, just a convenient 3d renderer for the average joe who needs a picture of something, but with options to move it around at the angle he wants.
It’s just that you can make really good objects and renders with Blender, even with just the default scanline renderer. And I usually make small objects, then render them as transparent png’s to use them together with 2d graphics. Not all people want, could or need to learn 3d graphics, though. I was just thinking that if an easy to use version is available for people with no 3d knowledge, then perhaps it would encourage them to play with it and who knows, maybe get motivated to delve deeper.
Something like: Download this nifty program, load a model into it then render your tweaked version. Not very artistic or creative, I agree, but perhaps useful if incorporated into some other artwork?..Lots of other beginner level 3d programs out there, I’m sure, but why keep the disdainful attitude? Everybody has to start somewhere. And in some cases, you don’t have the luxury of time to create the perfect 3d render. Perhaps someone wants a picture of a coffee cup, but at a different angle. And he/she is not a graphics guru, just a regular person assigned to create a poster or powerpoint presentation. An easy to use 3d program would be what’s needed.
Dreaming, yes, but it’s not against the law, eh?

Just use an older version if you want a lighter Blender.
Then write a new UI panel in Python. :wink:

yeah, everybody has to start somewhere… I started 3 days ago and been on it 24 hours a day trying to figure out everything(no, I don’t have a life). Srry about the attitude earlier, just felt like screwing around:P blender lite would be easy, but would it be more fun?

Art for art’s sake, well, I wouldn’t want to go into that. It’s not about artwork, just a convenient 3d renderer for the average joe who needs a picture of something, but with options to move it around at the angle he wants.

When, when would the ‘average joe’ require a 3d renderer?

Average Joes could try Teddy or Google Sketchup.

He doesn’t, really, and that’s the point. He needs a picture of an object. Not blow his mind trying to learn 3D. 2D stock photos and cliparts would probably do, but if he can have an easily manipulable 3d object, his options for the final pic (angle, lighting, etc) are greater.

Blender lite would be easy, but would it be fun?
Fun, well, people have different ideas about it…:smiley:
One similar thing I could think of is Acrobat. Making pdf takes skill, but viewing and printing them does not. Think of a lite version as a .blend viewer and printer, with some additional control thrown in.
Everything’s just speculative, by the way. Just discussing possible scenarios for introducing and working with 3d for the uninitiated…

Actualy, the idea of 3d clipart could be a neat idea.

Perhaps autodesk should come out with “lite” versions of Autocad and 3DS right? Just so that “average Joes” can use them?

Er… no and the same goes for blender. Just because it’s free/opensource doesn’t mean it needs to be dumbed down for the masses.

Wait until others do it, then follow… then you’ll be stuck to number two forever.
You could think of it as dumbing down, but you could also view it as extending the Blender user base for other users who needs pictures and images. Logos, graphs, cliparts, etc…
Photoshop has a lite version, I believe… it may be scoffed at by “serious” users, but it’s still very useful. Why not 3d?

Maybe not a ‘lite’ version, so much as a tweak to the interface to hide more advanced settings until the person feels comfortable enough to move forward. I think this has been discussed to some extent in another thread. I personally wouldn’t mind if it were ‘dumbed down’ a little since right now I’m trying to wrap my brain around Blender and a new Linux OS. Talk about overload.

It’s not useful for serious work. No curves for instance. Photoshop “Elements” is designed for a whole different demographic than the core serious photoshop user. Splitting Blender would only split the devs time and you’d have the old “Jack of all trades, master of none” syndrome.

Some programs simply aren’t “entry level” and shouldn’t be forced into that. Not every complex program needs a “lite” version. Many people have photo editing needs, but comparatively, few “average joes” get serious about 3d work.

That being said, there’s nothing wrong with forking Blenders code and creating a “dummies version” if you like. Just don’t expect the Dev’s to waste their time on that to the detriment of more serious tools.

Hm, I’m sure more advanced users would love that. It’s stupidity on the level of MS office “hiding things” it thinks you don’t use, forcing you to dig for them when you do need them.

No thanks.

Ok, maybe most of the people here who had years of experience are quite comfortable with the old interface, but I believe an easier to grasp ‘default’ interface layout should be implemented which will greatly benifit beginners. This won’t be a major overhaul, more like rearranging the panels, etc. And minimize stuff that’s more ‘advanced’.

Of course, the current ‘complete’ interface preset should always be kept.

With a click, the user should be able to switch between the two interface. (More like the current Ctrl+Left/Right arrow key)