Not sure why the developers felt the need to change node editor to shader editor.
The shader editor will later on have the need to embody everything nodes…which not neccessarely rhymes with shading editing at all.
I actually hope they revert back and not follow the shader tree naming convention modo has.
But…since it now is named shader editor and not node editor, you would expect that when you edit your preferences, and trying to change your UI colors…it should be under shader editor…but NO, there it is still called Node editor, so some consistency would be wise to make it easier to adress things where it should be, I suggest revert back to Node editor.
As for faults in UI, when changing the object data vdb step size, when hovering over the values…you get information saying that higher values will give more detail but render slower, this is just wrong…higher values means values up and not down…and it´s the other way around, lower value as lower step size means more detail but slower render…not the other way around.
and the UI description of vdb step size…I refered to the object data vdb, but it is also the same for the viewport display step size…and probably the render step size
3 places where this can go wrong as for not setting it right.
Shader editor is a subtype of node editor
Node editor was deemed too generic since it is bound to cover many more use cases in the future. We’ll probably get “particles editor” and “geometry editor” next
That’s not inconsistency, it’s hierarchy.
The Shader editor is type of Node Editor just as the Compositor is a type of Node Editor. Changes to the ‘node editor’ are therefore applied to both, as they should be.
at the end and all is fine… 