Properties Panels

[augustin_valjean]

@Storrboy

But I’ve kind of wondered why the check box is in the header of the panel? I think initially it was causing the indentation issue that Harley first tried to tackle, but why does it need to be there as opposed to in the panel as an “enabled” item? Is it because people want(ed) an immediate indicator that’s it’s turned on without having to drill down?

This is indeed why the checkbox is in the header and why, no doubt, it will remain there.

[Harley]

Looking over this discussion, my personal favorite is this variation of my first post:

Without any open/close widgets. No drag widgets until hover. No divisions between closed sections. Vertical alignment of everything, but without added indentation. Open panel title styled with its content.

This seems the cleanest and easiest to read quickly. I’m sure we can all figure out that clicking on a heading will open it up (especially since some panels are opened and others closed by default). And knowing that you would guess that clicking on an open title will close it. And it is pretty easy to tell which sections are expanded versus closed. In practice I don’t think it would appear that “Post Processing” is a child of “Performance”.

Again, just my personal thoughts.

[zeauro]

The problem with this is that it is non obvious that you can rearrange panels order as you want.
Put Bake panel on top of editor while working on texture.

[Harley]

@zeauro

The problem with this is that it is non obvious that you can rearrange panels order as you want.
Put Bake panel on top of editor while working on texture.

I’m showing the “drag widgets” on hover. So the very first time you move your mouse in there you will see them and figure it out. In fact, I’d argue that showing the drag widgets on hover would work better to communicate this. Showing them all the time they just fade into the background. But dragging panels is mouse-interactive so having them popping up prominently on hover would reenforce this.

[Harley]

What it could look like as your mouse pointer passes over the “Dimensions” heading:

[stephen_firman]

Here’s an idea.:o These words could replace the arrows on mouse over?

[Harley]

Incredibly, ZBrush users figure out that they can click on a title (without an arrow or plus sign) in order to expand it…

[Harley]

ZBrush-like?

[Piotr_Adamowicz]

Those Zbrush users are something else. If they can figure out a UI that messy, they can do anything

Right about now Blender could use a designated person in charge of the UI to pick one of the versions in the pics above and implement it. I believe further discussion is unlikely to bring anything new to the table.

[Harley]

@MadMinstrel

Right about now Blender could use a designated person in charge of the UI to pick one of the versions in the pics above and implement it

It would just be nice to somehow get an indication of the types of things that might be accepted. Someone to say “this is acceptable” and “this is not”. People don’t like working on stuff with no hope.

But I don’t see much chance of that happening. The likely response to anything remotely like this is usually that we don’t want to consider changes like this until we have a committee set up and have a plan, rather than do things hodge-podge. But the committee never gets made and plans aren’t done.

@MadMinstrel

I believe further discussion is unlikely to bring anything new to the table.

I’m still enjoying this. It gives me a nice break from real work…

[SaintHaven]

@MadMinstrel

Those Zbrush users are something else. If they can figure out a UI that messy, they can do anything

Right about now Blender could use a designated person in charge of the UI to pick one of the versions in the pics above and implement it. I believe further discussion is unlikely to bring anything new to the table.

Zbrush’s UI was hard to pick up. I hated the application with a passion at one point until everything clicked UI wise. Its really not cluttered, in fact its very organized…the problem is that its unconventional and non standard. Whatever frustration you might feel towards zbrush’s UI, many will feel the same with Blender’s UI. I know I did. The cool thing about Zbrush though is that it was designed specifically around the wacom pen and tablet workflow.

Anyways thats besides the point. I agree we need someone or someone(s) in charge of UI streamlining and organizing, if the BF is interested in such.

[kettlefish]

Well, now modules have user owners as well as developers to address these type of problems. Does anyone know who it is for the UI? or if someone has even been assigned yet? surely they are the ideal person to be talking to.

[xrg]

I don’t have much Zbrush experience, but I rather like it’s UI. It’s just the 2.5D/3D and impressively poor terminology for things that throws me off. The actual panels/docking and things I think works rather well.

AFAIK there still is no UI team for Blender.

[skywolfblue]

@MadMinstrel

How about aligning the checkboxes to the right border? That way the text is in line but you can still tell if the configuration is correct without actually reading the text (by the graphical pattern).

I agree, this is important. All the checkboxes need to be in a nice vertical line so a person can go up and down the list unchecking or checking things fast, without having to move the mouse side to side and all over.

@Harley

ZBrush-like?

I actually like the current default.

I don’t think the proposal is very intuitive to new users, they see lines of text, but nothing is telling them that text expands into new sections.

However, I do like the “active sections” shading, it’s a lot better at saying “I’m my own section”.

[Piotr_Adamowicz]

@xrg

I don’t have much Zbrush experience, but I rather like it’s UI. It’s just the 2.5D/3D and impressively poor terminology for things that throws me off. The actual panels/docking and things I think works rather well.

I’d add to that the detestable (and unconfigurable) viewport navigation and general scattering of related options. But you’re right, the basics of the Zbrush UI work fine.

[dirty-stick]

I made a patch to make the triangle optional.
http://projects.blender.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=35931&group_id=9&atid=127

[Michael_Knubben]

Rather than having the triangle optional in the preferences (which is also unlikely to be implemented, as Ton --rightly-- detests cluttering the preferences), it could be themeable. The theme designer would choose the image, if any. That way it’s customisable, but not cluttering up the preferences with a fairly insignificant option. Functionally it doesn’t change a thing, as the entire header functions as a ‘button’, although it does affect spacing of checkboxes (for the better).

edit: I should add, my favourite is http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=54390, although I agree that the lack of arrows (and those are still the best indicators in my opinion) doesn’t explicitly communicate ‘I can be opened’ to a new user.
I’d also make the divider between two opened panels less thick and 3d. Just a 1px line should look nicely sparse, but clear.

[dirty-stick]

It would be nice to know if a theme patch might be added.
I dont know.

Heres a mockup:


I dont know if i can code this yet.

…

Heres a logical view of the problems.

Show triangle
Optional.

Show panel icon
At the moment, the triangle is 3 point triangle.
So changing it to an icon would be another task.
This would be optional.

Align Text
The way the code is.
First it draws the boolean property [x] via python.
This shifts an offset.
The offset is then used to display the header label.

So the best solution i can think of:
Make it so the header label has a pre offset, say 20.
Then draw the boolean property via python.
If there is only 1 bool property, this will shift the offset to 18.
Then draw the header label.
The header label will only be shifted if more than 1 bool property exists.

This would be optional.

Panel open close theme colors
Dont know enough yet, but looks like two options.
1: Replace the existing colors that the panels use.
2: The other option is to make it optional.
This would give it two different color modes.
Header_and_Body or Open_and_Closed.

[PLyczkowski]

I’m sorry to revive this, but I think this simple option was omitted:

[dirty-stick]

I think it would be very possible to write that option into a patch.
Though i dont feel like trying at the moment, with the git migration.
I did write a patch with the options Show_Triangle + Align_Text, nothing happend so i stopped.