Uniformity in the interface is important. The more one tool works like another the easier Anim8or is to learn and use. What about using the original Select tool semantics for Move, Rotate, etc.? I'd have to remove the ability to move in the Z direction (i.e. into/out of the screen) with the right mouse button because that button would add shapes to the selection.
I was thinking about that. The fast selection disrupts that uniformity. The original select tool semantics applied to fast selection would feel a bit odd to me, personally. I can't imagine right-click and dragging to both add a new object to the selection and move it with the selection at the same time. And middle-click dragging to remove and move? Seems like it'd feel weird.
Fast selection (I'm going to call it tweaking) is nice, but I'm not convinced it's the best answer as the main force behind editing shapes. It eliminates the back-and-forth switching between tools, but seems to sacrifice too much of the flow for general editing. Also, it promotes more carelessness. I don't know about you, but I think transforming whole shapes in the object editor, or whole objects/figures/sequences in the scene editor, should be done with deliberate care first. Then adjustments can follow.
As you know Steve, I'm all for a tweak feature, but I think it should be treated as a separate tool for making adjustments. What if the original select/edit system was in place, and there was a nice big tweak/fast selection mode toggle button (like in the image below -- or in the top toolbar somewhere) that enables tweaking (can be used for all elements across all the editors)? This tool would be used extensively in point edit mode (I'm drooling just thinking about it) and when editing figures/sequences, and likely when fine-tuning animations in the scene editor, but the original select-then-transform method is a solid foundation that (in my opinion) should be kept for the sake of precision editing.
Attachment 1
though I can see how there might be issues when dealing with shapes within/around other shapes (accidentally clicking and dragging on unintended shapes).
But that's how the select tool works now. If I change everything to use Widgets then that's how thew would behave, or do yo have something else in mind?
Well, from my experience, you select the element first, then the widget appears on the element, then you click-drag on whatever part of the widget to transform it along the axis. Click-dragging outside of the widget leads to transformation on all axis, etc etc. Some editors allow you to just click on another element to select it and activate the widget on that element (like blender), other editors require you to change between a select tool and the individual transform tools (XSI). Multiple selections would have a single widget at the center point between those elements. There are benefits:
- It's universal across nearly all 3D editors. Users coming from other programs will know exactly how to use it, and new users, well, they wouldn't know the difference
but if they need to use another 3D editor, it'll be nothing new to them - The widget that's being displayed is a solid reminder of what transformation mode you're in.
- Right and Middle mouse buttons could potentially be freed up, assuming selection methods change (technically, only one button needs to be used to both add or subtract from the selection. If you click on an already selected element, then it deselects it. Otherwise selects it. Might be a bit drastic of a workflow change though)
- It helps ground the user. There's a lot of different types of elements that have to be transformed. But there's one singular widget used for all of them. A lot of times, it's easier to understand the effect of your actions by looking at where the widget is moving or rotating, rather than the element itself.
I recognize that widgets would be a lot of work, and I'm betting a lot of users would rather have something else first. I mentioned widgets mostly as an alternative to having fast selection as the primary method of editing. If fast selection/tweaking were just supplementary to the original system, I think the need for widgets would become more supplementary as well.
Anyway, that's all my 2 cents on the subject. Many thanks for all the hard work, Steve
