2.8 or 2.7?All the tutorials and materials (including huge amount of books I got for free as a local college was throwing them away) are for 2.7, but learning 2.8 seems more future proof as it's an almost complete overhaul of UI and it is the future and will be a standard for a while.In classes and in my imagination, making low-poly furry games, the 3D business seems fun, but browsing youtube and /3/ makes overly worried over redlines of vertex. I regret dropping PhD in romantic comedies so much.
>>676525>this thread againCan you fucks keep it in the /blender/ general? We don't need to have this thread every two weeks, thanks. >>674142
>>676525Maybe I'll ask another question as this is a quite slow board. Should I bother with these books or put them on a shelf to make my room look "professional", while using youtube? I did take a quick look and it's basic to lower intermediate stuff.The best seems to be https://nostarch.com/blendermasterclassI used Python books from that publishing house. The rest is from around 2014.
>>676527Then could you, at least, answer the second part of my post as it's more broad and general, please?
>>676525What you learn in 2.7 is completely applicable to 2.8. The UI might have gotten a "fresh" coat of paint, but that's about it. Even then it's not all that different. The differences between 2.7 and 2.8 are minimal at best.>FurryYikes>>676528It's funny to me you think people will care about your image over some books in the background. If it really matters to your little ego though, the 2.7 books might make you look more experienced since they're older. Maybe it will disguise the fact that you just picked it up. Why it matters is fucking beyond me. No one is going to sub to some furry who cant speak English because they have a Blender 2.7 book in the background. Get your priorities straight.
>>676525>2.7, but learning 2.8 seems more future proofIt doesn't really matter, and neither have any future whatsoever.
>>676525Unless you have some specific addons you need, 2.8 obviously. You're going to change at some point anyway. Better sooner than later. Plus it already works just fine.
>>676594>No one is going to sub to some furry who cant speak English because they have a Blender 2.7 book in the background.Why are you so hateful? And why would you focus on my English language skills and on me wanting to model furry games, so much? Ps I realized that I forgot to type "while using YouTube to actually learn".>>676599It works but there are few intermediate level tutorials and books, yet.
2.8 isn't that different from 2.7, mostly hotkeys and removed Toolshelf.Hotkeys you can set to 2.7 preset.Don't read/look up tutorials for no reason, just look up specific part on things you are currently have troubles with.
>>676525Neither seem different besides asthetics, though 2.7 is more stable.I use 2.7, so I'm not the best person to answer this, but I'd say start there then move over once 2.8 leaves the beta stage.
>>676525Go for 2.8, it might feel a bit more of a bumpy in the beginning but at least you won't have to go through the headache of adapting to the newer versions later on. The 2.7 learning material will apply to 2.8 most of the time - things are roughly the same, just moved/rearranged to somewhere else. For example the "20 layers" buttons are gone and instead you use the outliner and the layers are called "collections".There's no point in sticking to an old version, the only case where it makes sense if you're already deep into production of a short film or something and need to have all the old scenes working and rendering properly.
>>676675people that abuse animals deserve to be hated
>>676702This whole shitty board deserves to be hated.
>>676525Personally it took me about a week to switch to 2.8. It's not that different as people might think - Eevee and UI are the biggest changes but that's about it. If you plan on doing modelling/rendering only you can go with 2.8. For everything else I'd suggest go with 2.7 because things just don't work yet or the program keeps crashing out of nowhere in 2.8.
I'm still using 2.7, as they changed some of the hotkeys in 2.8, and my muscle memory is resisting a lot. I try to do simpler things in 2.8 to get used to it, and I love it for its grease pencil
Guys how do I get to see the big sidebar on the side that's ACTUALLY USEFUL and not the N-TOGGLE sidebar that's full of useleess trash features and tools while in this viewmode??? Top is my screen, bottom is the screen that I want to have. What do I do??
>>676958>the big sidebar on the sideit's a window areasplit your window and set it to the properties editor type
>>676958Blender's UI was made by retards from Mars, so instead of having windows you can dock and move around like every single application in history, you have to play a math puzzle, split your windows in half until you get the desired layout and THEN designate what those split window areas will contain. For now, I'd just recommend wiping your settings.
>>676528Books in anything computer related are a meme and will be outdated withing 2 years.
>>677065>he thinks "computer science" is about computersalso kah-nuth code is garbage
>>676594This. 2.8 runs a bit better, is able to utilize newer cards better and I like the UI a bit more, but they're about the same if you don't use Eevee
I prefer 2.79 at the moment, that fact that the changed how background images works is annoy, the wireframe is 500% harder too read and they changed how the 'a' key works. Also pie menus can eat my ass.Pic related
>>678064and which of those aren't easily customizable?
>>676525just jump into 2.8 dude, it can already do everything and more and i have been using and learning from scratch for the past monthlegit 100% of the crashes i have got are from ctrl+Z too much, not a single random one iv watched several 2.7 tutorials in the past week now i feel more comfortable and know where stuff is that i want to use and if theres anything that i cant find i usually just press f3 and search it inside blender or a quick googlestarting to learn on 2.7 would be a huge mistake imo dude
>>676525you could start on 2.7 now but then several months or a year will pass and you will be feeling like you are fairly competent and will start seeing new plugins or stuff people are making on 2.8 and gowow, how did they do thatoh 2.8oh shit so now i need to learn 2.8the alternative isoh how do i do x from 2.7 in 2.8?literally everything is still there just in a new place
>>678064>>678067wow rekt ahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahhah
>>678067Pie menus and the wireframe as far as I'm aware, also background images.
>>678064>>678067>>678080>as far as I'm awareyou're not>Pie menusum, don't use them? they're supplemental>wireframepic related>background imagesagain, don't use them? image planes still worktime to stop posting
>>678084Eh wireframe is still a little fucked compared to 2.79 but everything else is mostly fine I guess. Thanks I'm now a little more based towards 2.8
>>678085well it does help distinguish wire depth, but it does look a lot better in edit mode
>>676525what kind of stupid question is this? 2.8 will be released in a few months there is literally no reason to learn 2.7
>>678088The "see through" view is completely fucked though. Downright impossible to use now.
>>678302do you guys have thalassophobia or just simply suck at selecting?
>>678307In 2.7 there's a clear sense of depth so you know what you're looking at. It's easy to take a glance and know what's going on and where things are.2.8, everything is completely flat shaded the same color so it's pretty hard to make sense of where things are.
>>678394In 2.7, that may as well just be regular mode lol. You can't even see the occluded ear ffs. Xray mode is only good for select-through anyhow.
>>678414>You can't even see the occluded ear ffs.And the mess where the ear is on the 2.8 version is somehow better? >In 2.7, that may as well just be regular modeThat's the point. It's just supposed to be a way to see through the object without having to go into wireframe view. It keeps the shading so you still have a good sense of the forms and volume of the object. Wireframe doesn't have that, and the 2.8 X-ray doesn't either. 2.8's actual wireframe mode has depth information in it (seen in >>678088 , and >>678084 ), yet X-ray doesn't and is completely flat. It's just about useless for what it's supposed to be used for.
>>678394You can change the X-Ray slider
2.8 still does some shit that pisses me off from time to time and the fact that i'd have to completely re-do my rigs from their metarig base really turns me offI plan on adopting it within a year or so but really not much incentive other than marui to make me jump for it
>>678527Where at and how?I've probably missed it somewhere then. Which would make the whole past argument on me I guess. I still prefer the look of the old version though.
>>676525I use the 2.8 but there is no beautiful girls like in Daz, so I don't know, maybe for modelling some shit . I will mainly stay on Daz
>>678980You're a fucking retard, did you know that?
God this is a painful time for beginners, what with 2.8's release being months away killing the drive to learn something that's about to be outdated. But maybe that's me just making up reasons to procrastinate more.
>>678990Pretty sure he’s aware and doing it purposefully.
>>679000If you start with 2.7x the only thing you may have to unlearn will be a few shortcuts, and the release version of 2.8 will ship with a shortcut preset compatible with 2.7x so you have no excuses.
>>679004Oh cool, thanks Anon.
>>679000just download the beta and start learning you lazy fuck
>>676598>Neither have any future whatsoeverlol nice joke
>>678064Yeah the reference background images are one of the essential parts of my workflow. I don't see myself going to 2.8 until the resolve that.
>>679004It's dangerous to rely on 2.7x shortcut feature in 2.8. They could remove it at any moment and you'd be fucked.
>>680170Yeah but by that time you'd hopefully have enough experience to migrate easily.