[ludi]

In Revit you don have to press enter just Ro
I'm shure each way of short cuts are very powerfull if you use them often and fast. whatwever software you use.

It's more like a native language.

[tom]

Thanks for the critics and support again. Actually the interface is still young comparing to more mature applications. We have numerous stunning plans and your ideas are important than anything else. For example realtime DoF/focus indicator is something quite new to the scene and more will come. I just want to understand what do people think about other 3D applications' interfaces and the votes are just as I exactly expected so far, thank you!

[Polyxo]

Tom, we were only talking about the interface as yet. Very important.
However- in order to make Studio play really well together with other applications, the whole complex of file-exchange/linking and geometry updating should also be a central issue.
Don't you want to start a user survey on that too?

Thanks, Holger

[tom]

Absolutely, don't worry about that, it's a high priority issue here.

[aitraaz]

Revit? Serious? Solidworks style workflow might interesting...

[Polyxo]

I'd like to add RHinno's command line. I find it way easier to remember words (+ they auto complete aswell) than where some icon is located. Just enter "rot" + enter and you can rotate objects that you have preselected or that will be asked as input for. Also RMB acts as "Enter" and "Repeat" (as s.o. pointed out already). This gives very good workflow.

Command promt, wow! Johann, I am great Rhino-fan myself. And I also love the command promt. For modelling. But for what on earth would you like to use that one inside Studio, if all available parameters are cleany layed out in modeless editors? Just visualize your Rhinoll workflow. At least I don't use the command line much, when I set up render-properties - they don't even autocomplete.
Like I said in a previous post, modelling in most cases only requires having the parameters available, which are relevant for the presently executed command. A simple promt can deliver these and can also give a °Correct or Wrong° -feedback. Rendering - and also animation require modeless editor-structures, which are far superior to a simple promt in this case - as they allow permanent access, parallel viewing, drag and drop, swatches, slider and curve-editor-control - basically everything you can't do with a command-line. The feedback here isn't given in °Correct or Wrong° categories, cant be expressed in text: °The last settings-change made your setup frontpage-stuff° . They have to get visible, either in editors or in the render-viewport. But I'm sure you'll know that. I'd love to mimic many, many aspects of my Rhino-workflow n Studio. The command-line is one of the things I personally at least would not miss a second.

schöne Grüße! Holger

[Polyxo]

Absolutely, don't worry about that, it's a high priority issue here.

Good to hear that. And also kinda good to know, that you are a 3DSMax-user - as this program has a long tradition of file-linking (.dwg) and also intelligent methods of parameter matching/updating. Holger

[Carl007]

I voted for C4D, and now that studio GUI is so flexible and that I maybe will be forced to use it at times, maybe one could have a "C4D skin", "MODO skin" etc.

So when you are real tired or drunk or stoned you will have problems to know in what app you are at the moment....

[dd_]

once again c4d comes to the top, im so use to the c4d UI its become blended into the background, which is what i really want when working

[jjs]

Revit? Serious? Solidworks style workflow might interesting...

Aitraaz - Do you use Solidworks?

Tom - Have you looked at the Solidworks workflow and how their "Command Manager" works? Ask Juan to give a demo. I am not sure how relevant it is to Studio - Polyxo make the very valid point that model modelling is very much a sequential activity and with a need to track the history as easily as possible, while perhaps Studio is more like a circus act where one is trying to spin lots of plates on lots of sticks at the same time and we need to see all (or nearly all ) parameters at once.

However I think Maxwell would benefit from the way Solidworks allows one to completely customise the interface in terms of where Icons ( SW and personal macros) can be positioned anywhere into any menu. Perhaps other software does this -( I'm sorry I have no real experiance of other packages.)

The workflow is quite sophisticated, as is required by a CAD programme, but it does need more clicks than strickly necessary - but this allows people to pick up SW very quickly and not have to learn to remember all commands.


I think from a graphic design point of view the Maxwell 'look' is fine and if it went down the 'bryce' I would think it very wasteful and to 'frivoulous' but thats just my taste.

Please let us change the background colour and colour of the text - I have great diffuculty reading the light grey against the dark grey. and on my Dell m20 with approx 1400x 1600 res screen it is nearly impossible.


TTFN

Jonathan

[tom]

Jonatan, here you can see the part of the interface that the SW team had decided to have in their application which reminds me nothing more than Bryce actually.
Honestly, this is out of being something state-of-the-art with those huge bubble buttons and candy pink fields. Truly undeserved for this wonderful application.


About customization, macro and command icons, it's not something special with SW, today many professional packages have the same ability. Maya, Max, Modo, ZBrush are also some of them... As you said, you seem you have no experience on others.

Anyway, I was just asking about "the-look", not the workflow. So it's not possible to compare SW to any other because it's one of the best mainstream design package. However the interface can be questionable such as above example.

It's true that Maxwell Studio have to be more customizable including all the colors and icons and macros. But, IMHO the result of this voting should decide the default template anyway.

[aitraaz]

jjs - yes i do and agree on your point especially as regards workflow. Its *very* efficient, direct, no nonsense, and as you mentioned, can be picked up *very* quickly - its an extremely well thought out interface...

Tom - ok the bubble buttons and candy pink fields ( ) suck but its entirely secondary - as you mentioned, its a workflow issue (which is rock solid), so one doesnt even tend to notice - if it were 'puke green' or 'barf brown' to me it really wouldnt matter much...

Having said that, if NL is out there to innovate and shake up a complacent marketplace, why base things on existing 3d apps out there? Invent a new gui from the graphic design angle, then put a poll up with some of your proposals? Most of the GUI's out there, and least from a graphic design point of view are rather antique...Innovate mate...

[Miles]

Jonatan, here you can see the part of the interface that the SW team had decided to have in their application which reminds me nothing more than Bryce actually.
Honestly, this is out of being something state-of-the-art with those huge bubble buttons and candy pink fields. Truly undeserved for this wonderful application.

Agreed, they seem to be edging towards Cosmic Blobs....

[ivox3]

Whatever it is ......i'd like it to move towards 'retardedly easy--super intuitive ' .....simple is sweet! .....and if that was a politically incorrect statement: i apologize.

.....i mean, if maxwell is going to be all original -------may as well go all the way. I'm not saying it's 'not working', casue I haven't really explored it exhaustively ........and I know there are some who've already made the workflow in Studio second nature. ....i don't know what i'm saying. ...exit.

[johann.dugge]

Holger, I see what you mean and can follow your logic. I suppose the reason why I suggested a command prompt is because I only started using Studio a couple of days ago and have not gotten used to it yet. Rotating of objects is a real pain, having to click on rotate and then click up to twice to set the pivot that to me appears to be somewhat randomly placed. So I didn't even consider the rendering part in my suggestion, just physical scene adjustments. I suppose I'd be happy if that was a bit more efficient, so thanks for pointing this out in my post and letting me clarify it.