I'm from the future... Go back to using Right Click select if you're a Pro... it's the only way to really flow with Blenders "Hand-Glove" interface style set up. Just press w for the context menu if you still need it.
hi there. I'm using 4.1, and the drop down arrow beside "edit" is not there, so I'm not able to open the current shot in a new window. How can I go about doing this, or at least enabling it? Thank you!
We need better decisions in the first place PLUS finally finishing projects. There are many examples in blender for unfinished projects stuck for years now. And no one can follow the NEW decisions are made while othere new projects from month ago, are still in progress. For a example: Asset Browser, Blender basics 100% working like lights, shaders, rendering + file output..., Light Linking, Compositor, exotic OS's like MacOS...... Bugreporting is a pain, like some dev comments say that there aren't enough hardware to test it on all OS's, then some of the bugs get fixed several blender versions later and no one can follow. Dev's test with different OS's than in the bugreport mentioned and telling you it's on your machine. And the best is being told that basics and important stuff aren't on the "SCOPE" without a hint on why, and that it is no discussion here in the bugreport chat. Chat...what was it again...? What is a bugreport for? It's nothing else than a discussion in the reports, to figure out the bug or tell the dev's to test it on the right OS, graphics card and blender version. Best advice at the moment would be the last point on the list at 0.56 in this video!!
Here we are 4 years later. Counter productive UI changes that no one in community wanted. Blender is now made by contractors that don't use blender. But at least corporate money comes in xD
Thanks, this is good food for thought, and makes me rethink how I will approach a project that I had half done but put aside for a while, when I pick it up again. I do struggle personally with this: I tend to work on very large projects where there is essentially nothing useful to show or try for many months. So I could do small commits along the way but they would not enable any new functionality for quite a long time. And may result in code that gets totally ripped out again if the project is a failure. So I have been reluctant to make other developers go through the work of consuming it in small PR requests. Yet maybe I should anyway, and hide the work in progress under "experimental"?
The thing to understand here in my experience is that "my project is too big" is not an inherent problem of the project goal itself, it's a problem of how the project is organized. If you always have nothing to merge for months, your projects tend to be unpredictable in effort and problems, difficult to test and prone to merge conflicts with changes others implement in the meantime. On the other hand, see e.g. the game developer ThinMatrix on RU-vid: They quite nicely show how they implement rather large games but multiple times a day have something to show off. So how to get there? Essentially, you need to ask yourself: "What is a rather small change I could do to the code that is interesting to review and brings me closer to the goal?". Ideally that change - even minimally - has some visible effect for users or other developers. If not, then at least you definitely need to implement some test that you as a developer can use just to ensure you can test if others break that code along the way. For commits: The idea is to always commit the code in a working state and do that multiple times a day. The relevant paradigm here is that when working on the above small thing, you always try to keep the code in a state that you can compile and test. If you do a large change, break it down as much as possible. If new code you write is not used yet, definitely write a small test use case for the code yourself. That way multiple times a day you have the code at a working state that may not do exactly what you want or be complete, but that compiles and is testable. That's the perfect time to commit it. And since you do this multiple times a day, if you mess up, you can easily go back to the last commit, without loosing much work.
With the idea of creating Pull Requests early and therefore risk having code for incomplete features in a release, you have multiple benefits: * As soon as it is merged, others have to consider your code in their refactors and therefore you have less work with complicated merge conflicts since others already do that work for you when they decide to e.g. touch variable names your code also uses. * You have additional reason to navigate at sight, leading to better prepared work in the long run. You should anyways always write code where ideally after every small change, it is and stays concise and testable - by hand at least, better automatically. Otherwise you spend time navigating in the dark and then have to test a huge bunch of code at once at one point. So you can as well publish your smaller steps in a concise Pull Request. * You get feedback on your approach early thanks to the review of the Pull Requests and may avoid early to re-invent the wheel. Also it's easier to usefully review small Pull Request than large ones. * If others change something somewhere else and that breaks your code, you can relatively easily trace back when exactly that happened since both before and after the breaking change, your code is already merged and testable. Ideally your small addition is of course already of some use, although users may not be able to use its full potential yet. Then it's even better since in that case you can even get early user feedback.
@@ni-wo @dkeys86 It's now on the Storypencil tab, inside the Edit Scenes panel there's a "switch menu" that let's you choose between "Switch" or "New Window" for editing scenes.
I could be wrong, but statistically there are more Photoshop users than Maya and Max users combined therefore Gimp should've been way more popular than Blender as a FOSS alternative to the big proprietary giants but it’s not as most people just pirate Photoshop instead of going through the learning curve of Gimp and getting over the UI-UX. They seriously need an overhaul. Not just the UI-UX but also their development, management and the website etc. They seriously need someone like Dalai and Pablo in their team full time as well to manage and lead the development, fund management, community management etc. Community is everything for softwares especially if it’s a FOSS one. They need to hire someone fulltime to manage the development and funding for Gimp and also someone to manage and oversee the community and everything. The website of Gimp hasn’t changed in years, same with the UI. If more people don’t use gimp then there wouldn’t be any community nor any funding nor any growth. Like anytime I see a new user trying out Inkscape or Krita, they have more good things to say than bad things but it's always the other way around for GIMP, so they must be doing something right. The social media presence of GIMP is just laughable, it's 2024 and they still don't a YT channel unlike Inkscape and Krita like c'mon guy. Website hasn't changed in the whole time I'm using the software, the donation section which should've been one of the highest priority is just not baked out enough, like have a one time payment or a subscription based payment to support GIMP instead of relying on paypal for everything, have other payment methods. Like I'm not sure if you guys understand or not, that the fact Linux is pretty much in 99% of all VFX studios and they have to use windows or mac just to use photoshop from time to time and GIMP could've been the defacto FOSS alternative for photoshop and if the VFX pros were using it then you would've received more donations and code but like if you guys don't implement a vibrant plugin community like Blender and create discord and other communities where users can easily share feedback and suggestions without hunting down forums that only 2 people know and people helping each other, then I honestly don't see a future for GIMP since there are so many image editing tools nowadays that are doing everything so much more right than you guys. The best thing they can do is emulate how Blender is running the show unless as much as I like gimp, they are gonna end up being another open-source abandonware.
Hey how about a pre-rigged low poly test model that comes with blender that we can check to see if everything works i cannot for the life of me use riggify to copy a animation onto a pre-rigged model. I put every bone in place and it criss crosses everything everytime.
Omg go and find yourself a math guru one at matrix's and quaternions and make a algorithm to walk the animation bones to the existing model bones so retargetting a animation onto a existing rigged mesh doesnt take five days per every single user doing it. You already did the bone to bone mapping with riggify that was annoying but manually trying to place bones just right for hours is ridiculous. And for the love of god have a option to move the view with the asdf keys like a video game the ORBITAL CAMERA ALWAYS ONLY FOREVER . WILL ALWAYS BE HORRIBLE. Its the same old problems since i used it last 2 years ago.
Nce addon!!! But. I have a question, how can I add more frames to a created scene? I can't edit once it's created, is there a way to do that? thank you guys for this!
Awesome. I'm struggling to choose between brushes in Draw mode in GP using shortcut keys. The numbers 1 to 9 does not seem to be working. Any suggestions here as I have to constantly switch between brushes
