What the absolute shit is this faggotry? Why is it that in the last couple years in ALL kinds of software more and more basic and established user interface philosophies get thrown out the window?Colors are another layer of information in an icon that especially helps to QUICKLY read and find them without even really focusing on them directly. This gets lost when you fucking go for 2010s design memes.If you cry "but it looks so much cleaaaner and it distracts you way less" then why the FUCK don't you just switch into fullscreen mode to check your fucking project every once in a while without ANY buttons in sight? It's also strange how in the Blender case it seems like the monochrome icons are now a "fixed" feature while they usually always give Blender users options. I don't see them in this case and apparently it's not even possible to switch back to the old icon set.Everything computer and software related gets dumbed down and I hate it.
>everyone cries for years about blender's UI>UI finally gets updated to a completely modern level>everyone cries about blender's modern UI
Found something more your speed OP
>>646513>>everyone cries for years about blender's UIif you were crying for black and white icons, you're a faggot.from what I can tell people wanted a more accessible interface, meaning spoonfeeding with tons of icons while most was hidden behind hotkeys before. they did change this and that is OK but literally no one was asking for making the whole thing look like some smartphone instant messenger.
Thats why i love c4d ui
>>646516>but literally no one was asking for making the whole thing look like some smartphone instant messenger.But that's literally what modern user interface design is. Obviously the blender devs had zero idea of what a conventional user interface is, so when they looked into it in 2017/2018 they came up with a design that fits in 2017/2018.I think we can expect a little bit more differentiation between the icons over the next few releases, but if you're already using blender then it doesn't really fucking matter because you're not going to switch from using the hotkeys anyway.
>>646518And you're absolutely right.My guess is that they jumped on the modern design meme to make Blender taken more seriously while also saving the extra money for an UI designer who knows how to work with colors (which is trickier than one might think)
>>646512Stop whining, that's old news. And fake news. Fact is the icons will be affected by themes. The devs have expressed their desire to use colors effectively in combinations with the new icons adressing the problem of visibility.Someone expressed desire to fix the UI code in regards to loading custom Icons. So in the end Blender will get every possible option. Use the new ones, use the old ones, make your own, download new ones from others...
>>646526>pointing out shitty UI is being buttmadmust be why everyone's still using kai's UI philosophy huh dumbass
>>646528>over 30>still using babby speak and image macrosSad
>>646536Cry some more
>>646538Feeding off your delicious tears right now!
>>646541watch out, judging by his rank posts those tears are probably pus
>>646512I love flat, minimalistic designs.I love Blender's new UI.I love how salty old blendlets are over it.Also, they said it will have colors based on category.
I really like the 2.7 UI, and don't get why they have to mess everything up in 2.8 (other than to appease Maya brainlets), but there's one thing that has always annoyed me:When you hover over a button in the UI, you get a little info box. It always says what the python code is for that function, but it seldom lists the hotkey. It would be so fucking helpful if it in pic related, for example, said "Key: W" to indicate that Subdivide is found under the W hotkey menu. I also think it's beyond retarded to remove the (T)ool menu in 2.8. Holy shit, what kind of faggot made that decision. Almost ALL Blender addons use the (T) sidebar. Instead they replace it with huge retarded buttons for basic operations such as translate and scale. What the fuck.
>>646823I second your sentiment about the toolbar. That thing was incredibly useful and there was absolutely zero reason to remove it.
>>646516>Colors are another layer of information in an icon that especially helps to QUICKLY read and find them without even really focusing on them directly.Graphic designer here, colors are not a good indicator of what you should or should not do. They should be thought of as the shiny styling. Otherwise you will develop an app that some people can't even use, or worse you'll create a coloring convention that doesn't apply to custom themes or user made addons.There's a reason why Flat 3.0, bootstrap, and all other Bauhaus design follow this simple idea.
>>646851Non-graphic designer here. Everything this guy said is wrong.
>>646851>Graphic designer hereGood thing this has nothing to do with UI design
>>646823I agree with everything.
I miss skeuomorphism bros....
>>646930I wish I could mod my Blender to look like this rad winamp 3 skull theme
>>646954That's so hella f*kin epic dude
i love how sleek and sexy 2.8 looks finnaly it looks modern and not like mspaint 1991
>>647115You're sleek and sexy faggot
>>646823Plus most of the hovers don't even have descriptions. It always came off as "half-finished" to me. Like they were working on them and got bored and stopped.There's things that I'd like to know what it does.While I'm not overly thrilled at the new UI, and jesus fuck you're right about the T bar thing, I think I could get used to it pretty quickly.The render layers into collections is ripping me a new one though. I get how to turn them off and on and shit, but doing anything more than that with render passes is confusing as hell.
>>647178So why not go back to use Blender 2.79 (aka: the one I'm currently using)?
>>647203That's what he's talking about, namefag
>>647203I am using 2.79. That's what I was talking about with the tooltips. Seems like they went halfway with it.I've only really fucked around with 2.8 checking out what some older projects looked like in the new render engine. Haven't really done any projects with it because I figured it wasn't really stable enough and not everything is implemented yet.
>>646856>last icon on third row>just the blender iconobviously that launches blender
watched the blender developer video and apparently they're going for something like the godot look, so monochrome + plain color icons instead of colorful icons like before.
>>646823Are...are they not going to bring the toolbar back in the release version of 2.8? What the fuck? I thought it was just temporarily.
>>647320they want to fit in with the general KDE theme and be less mismatched in appearance
>>647635They are?I haven't heard anything about it, so I just assumed they killed it in favour of the retarded Maya buttons.
>>646851>colors are not a good indicator of what you should or should not do. This is the single most wrong statement I have ever read. Do I even have to explain why? Go on a short drive and think about how much we use colors to extremely and incredibly effectively tell us what we should and should not do
>>647825He's right though, /gd/ here as well.The most important thing is that your icon/logo/whatever reads perfectly well in monochrome before you add any color to it. Road signs and the like aren't necessarily part of that convention (due to societal habits), but even someone who's colorblind would be able to immediately tell what the sign is conveying even without color. That being said, the icons and stuff in Blender are pretty shit. Someone without prior knowledge of what they did in the first place would probably have a hard time figuring out what they're for. If you need color to help the concept, then something is wrong with the concept to begin with. Colors are accents at best. Color psychology is a thing to a degree and can help solidify an already solid concept, but stupid shit like "yellow makes you hungry" is bullshit. It's more about preconceived notions about a color that you bring with you when you look at them. Like pink is for girls, and blue is for boys, even though they're really both just colors.
>>646512plz no. this could only mean they think they are normie grade.
>>646515they used to make us use bryce in highschool. i used kazaa to download swift. shit was cash.
>>646512Just change it yourselves it's not that complicated.
>>646823Agreed, I'm sticking with 2.7 until some eventual, inevitable plugin incompatibility forces me to move.
The newest version of gimp is real bad for this as well. I couldn't tell what the fuck each icon meant. They took the depth/shadows out of icons like the perspective tool.Humans are really good at identifying things by color and shape. What used to be clicking the red box vs blue orb off in my peripheral is now task switching to find the correct group of white lines, then "read" each one to find the one I want.
>>648063>The newest version of gimp is real bad for this as well>for thisGimp has always been a horrible turd in EVERY way imaginable.
>>648064Gimp is actually not nearly as bad as people claim.The layout is a bit obtuse, and some of the really useful functions are hidden, but it's a very solid piece of software when you know how to use it.
>>648067>Gimp is actually not nearly as bad as people claim.It absolutely is when you compare it to what the team around Krita achieved in a fraction of the time and with actually listening to artists instead doing it like the Gimps, who insist the grime and lint in their greasy neckbeards knows best.
>>648067>it's a very solid piece of software when you know how to use itThat's what the devs said.
>>648067No, it's horrendous and very obviously designed and developed by people who don't actually do any serious amount of digital art.Saying 'the layout is a bit obtuse' and 'really useful functions are hidden' is basically the same as saying 'doing large volumes of work in this program is a total fucking chore'.Virtually every Gimp advocate I've ever encountered is an open source fanatic who seems willing to use garbage software just so they stick it to the man.
>>648068But Krita is useless for anything other than drawing?Gimp is an alternative to Photoshop, and is very practical for doing batch editing and stuff.>>648103>No, it's horrendous and very obviously designed and developed by people who don't actually do any serious amount of digital artLike Maya. It still works, once you know how to operate it and find the tools.
>>648104Pretty much this, batch editing, image manipulation, scriptable filtering/editing, and maybe a bit of type setting and illustration, has always been Gimp's wheel house.Anyone who tries to do "digital art" like painting isn't using the right program.Their new icons suck though.
>>646513I saw a chef on a cooking show years ago. She was talking to the camera, crying. "I dont get last time they complained the fish was raw, NOW theyre complaining its burnt? why are they never happy?" Dumb cunt just dont do any of that
>>646512>it's not even possible to switch back to the old icon set.It's open source software, my dude, anything is possible. Unless they've gone completely retarded and started storing them in some kind of proprietary pack file with super-duper encryption, I have my doubts that it's "not possible">>646823To me, this is far more concerning than icons. Hopefully there will be a plugin to bring it back.
>>646512Absolutely agree about the icons. I can, for the most part see why they want to try a new approach to the UI. They're obviously trying to reinvent it which is a healthy approach when you have years of experience. The icons however are objectively worse. Many of them look very similar, and their intent would be better conveyed through colors. I really hope they are at least somewhat easily replaceable.
>>646520Every year some newly minted teenagers complain about how moden ui design is garbage, and the best ui design was the one they experienced as preteens.This has been going on since the fucking 90s. STFU already, you don't know fuckall about UI design, or design history, your just a nostalgia faggot.
>>646512it's open source, if you don't like it, make superior colored icons and convince others that yours are betterit's just some random dude making these icons (who also happened to make blender's previous set of icons as well). you, too, can be some random dude.
>>648404>Random dude inspiring other random dudes to be a better random dude than a specific random dude.We need more random dudes like you on this board.
>>646512Oh shit, this is terrible. I never know what these cryptic symbols mean.Why are they doing this?Is there a way to vote against this?
>>648408they have already changed many of them and keep working on them
>>648404>it's just some random dude making these icons (who also happened to make blender's previous set of icons as well)Which means he's probably too deeply entrenched to be dethroned, thus going from "random dude" to "project veteran".
>>648430That doesn't matter, though. It's the same concept as making plugins for other software (open source or not) or mods for video games. Someone just needs to make a "classic icons pack." Doesn't matter how much of a veteran someone is in the project, because he doesn't need to be dethroned in the first place. Blender is open source, so third parties can do or change literally anything. Implementing classic icons will likely be trivial. No need to worry, my man.
Why are addons not pirated?
>>648720Not enough interest. If you're after a pirated copy of the FLIPS add-on, you might as well pirate Houdini instead.
>>648746>>648720Wait, isn't the whole crux of Blender its viral license stuff? Meaning, when it is part of Blender it has the same licensing?That would mean they can sell the addons but whoever bought it is literally free to freely distribute it again with no hassle at all. So theoretically you could just ask someone who has it to throw a copy to you.Correct me if I'm wrong please.
>>648748Yeah, you're not wrong. Good luck finding someone willing to pass you something they bought for free though. The Blender addon community can be surprisingly morally righteous.
>>648749Personally, I don't think that's a morally righteous attitude, but more of a hoarder's. Anyway, what I believe is worse is that the Blender devs don't take the good GPL improvements and build them into Blender. Custom vertex normal editing, for example -- there are a few good add-ons out there, all GPL of course, yet the Blender devs don't appear to have any interest in putting that basic functionality into Blender. There are many more examples like this. If I were a Blender user, I would find this quite infuriating and difficult to understand.
>>646512>Now Blender is getting monochromatic icons,Lipstick on a dysfunctional pigbut hey, it's free!
>>648750>Personally, I don't think that's a morally righteous attitude, but more of a hoarder'sNo, not really. I've been part of a Blender community before. They'll attack you for wanting free addons. Of course, you'll come across one or two folks kind enough to pass it under the table, but otherwise it's a pretty strong herd mentality of "just buy it yourself dude stop asking for free stuff".But yeah, I strongly agree with your points. There are a stupid amount of incredibly powerful addons that the Foundation just refuses to incorporate into the base build. It's puzzling how they ignore additions that would otherwise be super helpful to users.
>>648748Blender addons could in theory be closed source. The blender python API is GNU licensed, so anything that uses that also needs to be open.You could write an open source intermediary which uses the python API to wait for data. Then a second closed source script that receives/sends/processes data from there. (The segmentation needs to be pretty strict, you can't combine open and closed source code under GNU)In practice you probably wouldn't make any cash off individuals, but I could see marketing something like that to a commercial shop.
>>648754you are just crying because you actually have an alter to cry 'on'.when it comes to autodesk and their decisions, i don't see anyone protesting over their decisions. you only bitch about blender because you know its being actively developed.
>>648779>you are just crying because you actually have an alter to cry 'on'.wut?>when it comes to autodesk and their decisions, i don't see anyone protesting over their decisions. WUT?>you only bitch about blender because you know its being actively developed.WUT?!
>>648720Jama Jarubaev is a huge blender fan.Then I see he's using a lot of addons to make blender work.Box CutterSpeedflowHardopsAsset ManagementAsset SketcherTabs Interface
>>648786>Box Cutter>Speedflow>Hardops>Asset Management>Asset Sketcher>Tabs InterfaceAbout $140, then.>to make blender work."It's ((free))!"
>>648779Dude, I didn't even mention Autodesk. I don't even use their products. Not everything has to be software wars, you megasperg.
>>646513This exactly.Don't like it? Don't use it. OR explore replacing icons. OR better yet just STFU.
>>648788How about you use your fucking brain. I have all of these with the exception of asset sketcher. Guess how much i paid?
>>648814If you are pirating software, then why don't you pirate *good* software?
>>648843because supposed 'good' software don't actually have those features.
>>648814Where did you get them?
>>648843What makes you think that i don't?see image>>648868Where i get all the stuff. The persian cg flea market.