What is the most bat-guano-insane thing in Blender that you can’t believe they haven’t fixed yet?
The command prompt window that flashes real quick every time you run Blender on Windows…
@TheRedWaxPolice Yeah thats probably the worst. But you can change that by editing the shortcut setting “run” to minimized. Then the command prompt itself starts minimized.
Selection has still no option to select backfaces without changing shading mode to X-ray.
And DON’T tell me this is “consistency”…because in object mode, a box select will select every object that is hidden behind…
Oh yes, like we urgently really need another thread around here about nothing other than users bi*ching about whatever each of them chooses to consider all so horrible!
Like if this wasn’t constantly happening in most serious threads anyway, and be annoying enough there.
And don’t tell me, I should calm down, because we’re just goofing around here in this thread.
Please everybody, can we stay away from making BA another youtube, which, throughout the last decade or so, got flooded with those incredibly retarded pseudo-rating videos á la ‘The 10 most some random ideotic BS!!!’. Would that be possible?
I’m trying to gather a list of most desired things, from that a list of lowest hanging fruit will be extracted. This list will go up on a site that works similar to how the UserVoice platform used to work, and then I’ll try to get the Blender using community to go over there and vote on things. (everyone gets 10 points they can spend on votes, the idea is most people will put most of their points into only 2 or 3 things and certain things will stand out far ahead of the rest and we can use this info to try to prioritize the most desired things)
The state of the UV tools.
Yes, there are addons (free even) but the main issue are the actual unwrap algorithms (which are 10-15 years old) and the general lack of workflow optimization and quality of life tools.
Working with UDIMs is also quite complicated when it shouldn’t be.
Then there is baking.
I don’t even care about the uncomfortable and complex way of setting these ups, I think the quality of the bakes and the time it takes is bad and could be improved.
Then there are the painting tools. While i don’t expect Substance Painter levels of complexity with smart materials, I think the fact that Blender is weaker than 3D Coat when it comes to NPR style textures is quite disheartening.
A list of the most wanted improvements can readily be found on RCS. That none of those issues is on the newly published road map is the most insane thing of all.
I participate on RCS. I’m looking for “how can you not have this yet?” and “how can this still be broken after 7 years” types of things. Lots of RCS is nice to have and brand new eureka moment ideas. Lots of things there are very specific to the workflow of the person making the proposal.
Agreed… I can spider-sense the drama creeping up already
Well, the thread-title alone doesn’t make it sound like that at all (but very, very much like those sensationalist youtube-bs-videos).
‘bat-guano-insane’? You got that word out of the oxford dictionary, right?
Afterwards people are wondering why Ton Roosendaal once stated he considers BA to be ‘just noise’ (or sth. along those lines). I don’t think I’m surprised.
If you look at top section of proposals on RCS, 15 proposals are displayed.
3 are tagged as Done.
4 are tagged as In Development ( 3 of them are in the top 5 ).
1 is clearly outdated ( randomness for array modifier, geometry nodes are clearly a lot better for that)
1 was already tested as an experimental idea (weld dyntopo. It was done during Cosmos Laundromat production. They made a tree using a version of dyntopo able to create holes in mesh. And currently, joeedh is working on dyntopo. So, it is not a neglected subject.)
1 has pertinent ideas but is invalid because that does not correspond to UI logic (The one about UV Visualization is asking for display options about one object display inside a popover dedicated to the whole scene display. Proposal would be valid if options were showed in Overlays popover instead of shading popover. Globally, 2.8 design is bad to offer quick access of customization to whole scene when customization is mostly wanted for a portion of objects displayed.)
3 are pertinent but as advanced stuff. (Tension/Stress maps, Parallax Occlusion mapping, Curve resolution based on tangent angles. That kind of things can accumulate votes because nobody denies that are improvements. That are consensual stuff. But are they really priorities ?)
2 are UI stuff. (Render retained when using render region and a container object for grouping. Consensual stuff again. But those ones will provide only a slight improvement of UX. Are they really corresponding to your biggest problems ? )
It would be unfair to say that developers are not looking at RCS proposals.
Honestly, if you look at those 15 top proposals, there is nothing to mention as an exciting surprise.
Most of RCS proposals are too narrowed to be treated as big projects. And that is logical, that is how it is requested to write them.
Among several thousands of proposals of that type, probably, one thousand can be judged pertinent and easy to implement quickly. And probably, William already wrote a similar ToDo design task about a solution ; that is waiting a developer, free to make it real, since 3 years.
But, at an insane rhythm of 3 proposals integrated in a day, that corresponds to one year of work.
RCS seems hard to moderate. There are a lot of duplicates.
Many similar proposals about same problem that are at 5 / 6 votes.
You may agree about presence of a problem but not on the solution.
So, a proposal/solution may be low rated when problem is frequently encountered.
I browsed past year of proposals on RCS. Many of them are about snapping, knife tool improvements and Curves.
GSOCs proposals have been made about improving Knife and Curve. They probably will be GSOCs projects.
And snapping improvements are mentioned as a potential surprise.
Honestly, roadmap 2021 is coherent with development done in 2020. That is continuation of started work + targets for Sprite Fright movie + a little UI/UX workshop.
Our issue is that, as users, we would like to see happening a big UI/UX workshop for half of the year, not just one month.
So what are you saying here? That they’re not implementing them because they’re already Done? That they’re not implementing them because they’re too small and easy? That they’re not doing them because the upvote system has issues? Not getting you at all.
And don’t tell me you’re taking those “teasers” seriously. Those are just “ideas” that are “being considered”. Until there’s a branch for a feature, it’s not prudent to get one’s hopes up.
I am saying that they are implementing some of RCS proposals, at the pace their work on 2021 targets allows them to do it.
But you don’t perceive it because RCS proposals are too numerous.
And I am also saying that precising stuff as “being considered” makes this roadmap more realistic than the ones of previous years.
I don’t expect them to succeed to implement all of those “teasers”.
But I expect that, probably, one or two of them will be taken seriously by UX workshop and end-up in Blender at the end of 2021 or beginning of 2022.
Seriously, Antonio who is making Grease Pencil stuff will not stop his work on Grease Pencil to develop Tension/Stress maps.
LANPR will not be postpone to next year.
Jacques Lucke will not stop his work on Geometry Nodes to work on a Container object.
Julian will not postpone his work on Asset Browser to next year.
You can not expect Scene Editing Performance improvements if work on Vulkan is not continued.
After announcement of Cycles-X, will you ask Brecht and Sergey to immediately stop that ?
Seriously, I don’t see how you could ask developers to renounce to big projects that are well advanced, to pick more RCS proposals.
2021 roadmap is really just about projects that have a chance to be completed this year.
The only disappointing point will be UI workshop. Because it is scheduled to last few weeks. In the craziest case where it would be extended to end of the year, it could only last 3 months.
But solving technical debt corresponds to years of work.
No, I’m not asking them to give up their big projects. Whatever gave you that idea?
But it’s also not the case that a person can only ever work on one thing at a time.
Wouldn’t it be nice if they had a “User Request Friday” just like they have code quality days? Some of the requests on RCS are indeed too big, too underdefined, too something or other. But lots of them are fairly simple and actionable. Users get their improvements, devs get a little change of pace.
There are only 52 weeks in one year.
If we try to be a minimum realist and expect two weeks of work by one developer for one proposal. At the rhythm of one day of work per week, that means that we should expect 5 proposals done per fulltime developer during the year.
So, approximately, one hundred of proposals.
There is no way somebody will communicate a roadmap with an hundred of items.
But if you look RCS proposals that have an “In Development” tag, there are 95.
Probably, several of those tags are outdated and should be changed to “Done” or are about long term todos. On the other hand, one third of the year is already past.
But, basically, developers are almost already doing that.
We could expect a little bit more RCS proposals but not many more.
Asking to developers to make a more significant progress on RCS proposals, during this year, is inevitably equivalent to asking them to free time, used to do other things.
i think the logical conclusion would not be to ask the devs who already have a full plate to work more, rather the BF should spent some money and hire some dev(s) for small project(s).
- Animation being global rather than local.
Animate a box moving forward
Play the animation.
It moves forward.
Now, duplicate the box and move it.
When you hit play in any other 3D app that I’ve used over the years, you would see both boxes moving forward.
With Blender, you see one box moving forward. The other box snaps back to the original location, as the animation is global to the world, rather than relative to the box.
The solution is to then take extra steps to give each box it’s own “world” by creating an empty and parenting the box to the empty.
- Normalization of weighted vertex values for single bones, meaning that the values can only be fully on (1) or off(0), with no option to have vertices influenced by an amount in between ( eg 0.5 for a half influence )
and this is why I"m trying to find low-hanging-fruit that is both near universally agreed upon as necessary or nice-to-have while also being hopefully easy to implement. In some cases we maybe should tell some of the devs to stop what they’re doing and please fix this 2 or 5 or 9 year old bug/small improvement. Like do we really need another small and niche sculpt tool from Pablo Dobarro? Yes he has big things he’s working on too but maybe some of his smaller side things that seem to be purely personal should be replaced with one or 2 long-standing but simple community requests.