Jump to content

Stephan Moenninghoff

Member
  • Content Count

    356
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Stephan Moenninghoff

  1. All good and well but please let's not create the standard excuse for not caring about the aesthetics of the UI here. This thread is and has been about how VWX *looks*. Perhaps also a little bit about how it *feels*. But not about how it *functions*. A modern appearance is completely separate from functionality and what this thread is about is mostly aesthetics. Improving on features has never been a weak part of VWX, in fact I think we must admit that huge progress has been made over the past years. This all has happened while maintaining a dated and clunky UI. That is what this thread is about so please let's not muddy the message by such comments (although I'm sure it is a valid comment in a different thread).
  2. Sending and receiving values from any node is a good idea and other node-based apps have it, too (screen shot from Origami). Any output should be able to be fed into a sender node and received anywhere for input. That would be a welcome new feature for Marionette.
  3. Confirmed. The Resource Manager previews also show the black backgrounds. Once edited on a different machine, they return to normal.
  4. Today everything is back to what it was before. So, again, the user folder must be reset to fix the black renders. I wonder what brings this about. Is there anything the customer might be doing, that provokes this behaviour?
  5. Thank you @David Sand @Bas Vellekoop. Bas' suggestion solved the problem so thanks for saving my day! Yes, deleting the user folder is kind of brute force and should be done with care. I have restored the customer's workspace and everything seems fine now.
  6. Here are two viewports rendered with OpenGL (top) and Renderworks (bottom) on a client machine (left) and the same viewports rendered on my computer (right). The client is quite desperate because he is getting these black backgrounds in both OpenGL and Renderworks intermittently. He is also seeing white (RGB 255,255,255) areas in rendered images turning black on his computers but nobody is able to reproduce the behaviour anywhere else. Any ideas? Thanks!
  7. Check out this mockup and while you're there: please upvote the topic 🙂 Thanks!
  8. Tabs would definitely have to be more dynamic. Developers should be able to decide which tabs, besides the stock ones, they want to add. Also, why is the Attribute Palette not part of the OIP? There are some really nice opportunities there. Just think class attributes and the like. I still keep thinking I'm overlooking something though and there are some logical clashes there....
  9. I made another little video. There were some comments and suggestions about the OIP earlier in this thread which I thought about. (There's more to come. I have been thinking about why the Attributes Palette is not part of the OIP and I think I must be overlooking something...) and I received some personal messages about how some of the things I proposed did not come across in an understandable way. Goes to show that everyone, including myself, struggles with that elusive chasm between sender and receiver. As always, here my little disclaimer: I haven't the slightest clue if any of what I am proposing makes any sense to anyone else or if it is even possible to implement in Vectorworks. Still, please upvote this if you haven't already (the little green triangle, right at the top...) 🙂 PS - there's a little bonus extra at the end. Wait for it... OIP.mp4
  10. That's what the gradients are for. But you may be right after all. I suspect it would be too much of a paradigm-change 🙂
  11. Yes, and I was only proposing a substitute for scroll bars for tool palettes, not the RM. I don't think it's too critical though, just a detail. However - It goes to show how difficult it is to craft a UI for two platforms if you don't want to create your own UI. The treatment of scroll bars is quite different on Mac and Windows and needs some consideration. It can be done though and it can be done quite well. Agreed. That's why I am proposing a popover window instead of a menu. A popover is something that allows multiple choices and each choice is carried out or applied immediately. No confirmation necessary. Klick outside it and it goes away. As shown in the last prototype movie.
  12. BTW a scalable UI is nothing too exotic. Blender has had this forever. Not surprisingly - as they use vector-based UI-elements. Pixel-alignment is not too great for non-multiples of whole pixels but it applies only if a low-res monitor is used. On Retina/5K monitors, the blurring is negligible. Blender.mp4
  13. I know what you mean @zoomer about those scroll bars. It can be irritating. Nevertheless, tool palettes are unlikely to have a large number of hidden buttons if they are standard out-of-the-box palettes. If they are made by yourself and you know what's hidden, that's also ok. So I would really love to see how this works in the wild. Interesting though what happens when people start to use horizontal tool palettes. Does every user know about the Shift key for horizontal scrolling? So, yes, there is some uncertainty there. But this is what user testing is all about. I firmly believe any radical departure from the status quo needs very thorough user testing.
  14. Here is an excerpt from another proposal I made in 2016. This is about how the Quick Prefs and some other UI elements of the main drawing window might be improved. It already looks quite dated now which goes to show how quickly UI, icons, dialogs etc. start to look dated. In other words: it's not enough to do it once. Just like other features are improved and updated every few years, so should the UI. Not easy to do.
  15. Accepted! Nice way of doing this, @Peter Neufeld! Thanks for sharing. I wonder what other methods will arise. Did @Jim Wilsonnot have plans to show us his? 🙂
  16. Yes, I don't think that's actually a bug that would merit logging. More like a limitation in what surface modelling can and cannot achieve.
  17. I like @elepp's surface method. It may be more work but it creates an even cleaner geometry than mine. I try to solve everything using solids because the surface modeller always creates hollow objects which may create problems down the road (Push/Pull does not play nice with most surface objects). I have a few more challenges up my sleeve. I'll dig them up when I have a few minutes. Thanks for contributing, guys. This was fun!
  18. @elepp and @markdd I think you both have solved it. In Mark's example I am still not sure the bottom is a true circle. If it isn't, it can't be considered as solved! The sides don't curve inwards BTW. It may look like they do depending on the view but the sides are straight. Here is how I did it. Curious to learn your methods. Körper.mp4
  19. OK, not bad. The top must be a rectangle though, not a square. If you can do that I would consider it solved.
  20. You are very close, in fact it looks like you have cracked it. And yes, you are right, it's not done via a loft. The loft will not give you any precise control over the alignment of the curves. Is that a true circle at the bottom though?
  21. I had to create this shape today: A circle which morphs into a rectangle. The shape had to be absolutely symmetrical. Sounds easy but is it? Who can do it?
  22. I should add I am working with build 445255 because I am beta-testing the German version. This may well be fixed in the final build. @Selin has already contacted me about this and she did so shortly after my post so I believe this is a high priority affair. @line-weight give them a break. 2019 feels good. I need to work with both 2018 and 2019 currently but going back to 2018 really feels like going back. The multi-core OpenGL in 2019 is so liberating 🙂

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...