I hate the setup/interface. The balls for moving in the x,y,z direction are at an angle. The x,y,z dimensions are not at an angle, so why are the balls?! Just like Bryce, a moronic setup!

I'm gonna have to agree with you, very bad set up, i do like bryce however, i just don't care for the whole software, won't be on my must have list...moving lights and things are so slow and sluggish also, and i know it's not my machine, no thanks

Ideally, you should hide those things and use more advanced controls.

The balls are quick access. I use them 99% of the time. I have no reason to hide them. Ideally, they should be setup like Poser.

I don't think they should be set up like Poser- Poser isn't the best software out there either, so why copy its layout? I'm still trying to decide what I prefer. I admit I like the exacting accuracy of typing in the numbers myself, but it's fun to have a graphical interface now and then.

I HATE number interfaces :) So it is rough to please all

Well, they could have implemented both, I suppose, the number and graphical methods are not mutually exclusive after all. But yeah, it is difficult to gauge the feeling just right I guess; some people like the UI, some hate it, some don't care...

I don't mind the set up as such. I don't like the lack of numerical control in the sliders and the lack of almost any control in the balls for moving the lights. It's VERY sluggish so visual feedback is bad. And it crashes a lot, which kind of trumps the other problems.

I'm sure the crashes and slowness are being worked on. But if the balls aren't revised, I won't use it.

While I appreciate the feedback, and I am sorry you "hate" the interface... I fail to see how that qualifies me as a "moron", or rather my work as "moronic". Much thought has gone into the "how", the "why" and the "when". There are valid reasons for the way things are done, and being anything less than a full 1.0 release - there is a very high probability that several interface elements are not complete, or even missing altogether (I say that as if I'm suggesting that there might be, when in fact I know that to be the case... I designed it). Without being complete, some elements don't quite make sense, I agree (that is, unless you know what the missing elements are and how they function - which I wouldn't expect you to). Inspiration for the UI comes from many sources, most of which are successful, proven, 2D/3D applications currently on the market, while others are from the OS' D|S supports. Much of the focus thus far has been on content support and stability... interface will get more attention as the previous becomes less of a concern.

I'm not quite sure I understand your meaning of "balls". If you're referring to the controls in the view tab, they are meant for novice users, those new to 3D. The images with the camera and arrows are to help them understand how that control manipulates what they see... in a way that they could make the connection between a real camera in their hands. They are bigger so that they are easy to see... again, for someone that may not quite have a grasp of 3D yet. They are not intended for someone who is a bit more comfortable in 3D, or concerned with screen real estate.

If, however, you are referring to the red, green and blue rings that are displayed at the bone center point when a bone is selected... They are a fair ways away from finished, as are the rest of the 3D manipulators. They are very basic right now, emphasis on the word "very". Ever seen the 3D manipulators in MAX? If you have, you have some insight on where these are headed, plus a few things. If in fact, these controls are what you're referring to when you comment on alignment... the colored rings are oriented to local space of the bone: X = red, Y = green, Z = blue, not world space, hence the angle.

As to the "could have implemented both"... we did. The Parameters tab contains... ...parameters of the selection. To boot, the sliders update as the corresponding manipulators are used in the 3D view, real time. Want to type in a specific value? Right-click the slider, type in a new value and hit Enter, viola. Want to nudge the value a little? Use the nudge arrows on either side of the slider. Want to adjust how the slider works? If it has limits and what they are if it does? How much a 'nudge' is? What the label of the parameter is? Double-click the name of the slider... a parameter settings dialog will pop-up. Notice anything? Notice the blank area of the dialog? Suppose that means something is missing right now? I'll give you a hint... yes. That would be because we are still working on it. ;)

If you're wondering why you don't see parameters for the default "camera". Thats because its not a "camera", its a view. Cameras are objects in the scene that are animatable, views are not. Views are simply that, views.. they let you view the scene. They have no parameters/properties that can be animated... whereas cameras do. The drop down menu at the top left of each viewport has 7 standard views, regardless of any actual cameras you add: Perspective, Front, Left, Right, Back, Top and Bottom. All views except Perspective, specifically, are orthogonal.

-Rob

To Rob. My issues with the system crashes and sluggish feedback are in no way a reflection on the work you have put into the product. I do understand the difference between a finished product and a wip. I actually like the interface better than Poser's in most cases and the rendering is faster than Poser's. It is that some of my issues and those raised by others since the first version seem not to have been corrected or improved. I'm sorry that I and some others have missed some of the finer points of using the program and have complained about things that are easily addressd but is that any reason for the sarcasm, Rob? We don't know the program as well as the creator, so give us a break. DBMiller

DBMiller, I'm sorry you feel I was being sarcastic, I seriously was not. Perhaps that you cannot hear my voice, see my expressions, and hence my tone, is why you would read my words that way. I was trying to answer questions, with supporting information (which you may or may not have known the answers to). My questions in return, are prompts for thought with a little hope (on my part) of optimism (on your part - the collective)... not sarcasm. The one line I can now see misunderstood as sarcasm: "I'll give you a hint... yes. That would be because we are still working on it.", is actually quite the contrary. It is my, apparently misunderstood, attempt at exciting whomever is reading, that there is more to it than what you currently see, followed by a qualifier for the preceding comment. As to the remaining bugs, we're working on them. Please consider that your bugs are not the only bugs we contend with (not suggesting that you haven't, just a reminder). With the resources we have, we are blazing through the bug database fixing what we can, when we can and when it makes the most sense to. Please refer to my previous where I state that focus thus far has been on content support and stability. Please also consider, in regard to your specific stability issues, that we need to replicate the bug in order to solve what is causing it. I'm assuming that you have in the bug submission, but in stating your problem here, you give no specifics on the setup of your computer... which leaves the impression that D|S is just plain buggy, rather than it is conflicting with something specific about your particular machine, be it OS, graphics card, driver, OpenGL, processor speed, RAM... the list goes on. My apologies for being candid, dry and direct. Please know that none of my words above are meant sarcastically. I pause often when I talk, I qualify some of my comments with associated information, perhaps too much... but sarcasm it is not. -Rob

I resent being called a novice by someone designing an inferior product! Quick and easy manipulation is not a "novice" approach, it's the fast and SMART use of the controls !! If support of your amateur product will be anything like your rude and insulting replies, then my decision to use your product has been made!

ming, I didn't call you a novice, I stated that the intent of those particular controls were aimed at novices... not that only novices would use them, or find them useful. I'm sorry you take that as an insult, it had nothing to do with you, or anyone in particular for that matter, it was simply clarification of intent. Some folks like that type of control, some like the scientific approach... some like Lightwave, Mirai, some MAX, others Maya, some Cinema 4D, trueSpace, Rhino, Carrara... the list goes on and on. Point is, you can't please everyone, but you can certainly try to provide a couple alternatives, which is what we are doing. If it doesn't suit your tastes, ok, but there is no need for the insults. -Rob

I rather use skill over your "scientific" approach. Use a mouse with a rollerball sometime. You'll see how it SHOULD work. You started with the insults! I'll ba damned if DAZ gets any more of my money!

ming, I said some prefer a scientific approach... not that that is the approach we were taking, though 3D in general is a bit visual and scientific, depending on your perspective. I use a trackball, and am quite fond of it actually... though I admit, I'm not sure if that is what you mean. I'm still not quite sure what "it" is, that you're refering to. As you'll notice from my previous post, I describe two different controls... I'm not sure which you're talking about, and your response can be construed to imply either of the two. Its apparent you took my words as an insult. As I stated previously, I did not intend to insult you and even tried to clarify my meaning. I'm sorry you read it the way you did. That is the last I'll say on the subject, as it seems niether of us intend to budge. -Rob

Much Ado About Nothing. Funny movie too.

Seems that Ming is very touchy about stuff and reading into people's words things that aren't there... Many people prefer the quick access and ease of use of the big controls and such, Pro or Novice. From what Rob is saying, though, the balls were created as something that can be hidden if users like more advanced controls. "More advanced" meaning more like higher-end 3D packages that don't have those big controls but instead allow users to use hotkeys or the little widgets up in the corner. I personally use other packages than Poser and don't like the space the big controls take up. Most of the time, I hide them. There are times, though, when it is just faster and more convenient to use the bigger controls. If the controls were put in the interface to insult anyone who used them, don't you think DAZ would have had random insults pop up every time you used them? ;)

If the controls were put in the interface to insult anyone who used them, don't you think DAZ would have had random insults pop up every time you used them? ;) lol Somewhere someone is building an insult generator. :D

I have to say: thanks to rbtwhiz for answering some of the points about the interface and I look forward to seeing how it develops. Perhaps part of the concern comes from not knowing how much of the UI is complete at this stage and as you have pointed out there is still work to do. I missed the fact that both number and graphical input methods were implemented so thanks for pointing that out. I am concerned more about the size of the controls than anything else though ;)

I too would like to thank Rob for keeping us informed. I don't know if I'd do the same given the circumstances. Anyway, I like Vue's approach a lot. It has very unobtrusive on-screen trackball and sliders for manipulating cameras, lights, props, etc. It also allows numerical entry for same. And, what I like best, you can also grab the object in any view screen and manually move, rotate, or scale it. Vue's controls are incredibly easy to use, IMO.

Rob, thank you for your well stated reply to my letter. It was perhaps more thoughtfull and understanding than I deserved. Since last night I have posted a D|S image in the gallery just to show off the nice render it puts out and to show I haven't given up on it just because of some glitches. It's still a bit sluggish but I'm getting the hang of it. I use Lightwave and it uses a graphical control for lights and objects as well as numerical so I welcome them in D|S. So, I will take my own advice (and hope ming will too) and give you a break. Thank You.

And what are you supposed to be?

I'm not sure I want to see Rob's trade...

OK, maybe I do. But I thought we were seeing his trade by seeing Studio? ;)

Michael, I'd ask you to explain the purpose and relevance of your post... but its pretty apparent that it is nothing other than plain ol' trolling. Predictably transparent. Lets get something straight, you don't know me from Adam. You and I have never had reason to speak, or anything else for that matter. That I once accepted a single phone call from you, years ago, at work, only because I was told by our receptionist that it was work related, doesn't change that a bit. You have axe to grind, and that is abundantly clear. That you would attempt to insult me and make something personal out of the mere fact that I work at DAZ, nothing more, only speaks about your character. That you apparently have an issue with the chosen religion of some of those who are also employed by DAZ, only says that much more about your character. You paint yourself in a rather revealing light, albeit not very flattering. And not that it has any relevance, or that it is any of your concern... but, I'm not Mormon. Equally irrelevant? I'm not alone. Unless you have something constructive to add to this thread, we're done. Continue being belligerent and you can deal with the admin, I'll waste no more time on you. Try and have a pleasant evening. electranaut, Jackson, DBMiller, Thank you for your input, and for keeping it civil. Your concerns, along with many others, will be taken into account as we continue development. -Rob

Ah yes, like your own background is lily white, eh Sarge, especially when it comes to belligerence? ;) All of your comments still exist in the other forums, unlike here where you deleted the worst.

If you are reading this thread and wondering about, what now seems to be, a disconnection in some of the latter posts, starting with #23... Michael Brooks (aka Sarge / sargebear) has apparently deleted a few of his posts. His posts ranged from attempting to insult me personally based solely on my employment with DAZ (in particular, my bio on the website), making slurs about the religion of some of DAZ's employees, to suggesting improper accounting practices by DAZ. The sole purpose of this post is to put the posts that remain into perspective. -Rob

luckly or unluckly I read the whole thread last night before the deletions. shakes head no need to go there. Abought the interface. As what everybody is playing with is Alpha, and Beta soon to be released to general public, then a final with a SDK eventually. Here is what I want to know. On Topic. Will Daz Studio have customizable menus/interface? Almost every major 3d application will let you customize the interface to the way a person works. Menu custom, sometimes even interface though it may involved digging under the hood. Since a number of people have voiced opinions on the interface both good, bad, and indiferent. how much control or lack of it will users have?

My apologies, I meant to let everyone know that. Personal attacks are not permitted here at Rosity and posts which I felt were trolling have been removed. Thank you to everyone else for keeping it reasonably civil :-) Shoshanna Renderosity Moderator.

your posts have been taken ( along with mine) and noted. and are on file.

Having been informed that Shoshanna removed the posts (as stated above, and in IM), I offer my apology to Michael for suggesting that it was he who deleted them. In any event, without the posts, or summary of those posts, the responses seem disconnected. There was no need to ever have gone there... but it did, at my expense. Just wanted the facts for those reading, so that in developing their opinions of the events, they have adequate information to base those opinions on, in so much as this thread is concerned. MachineClaw (I'd use Robert, but it feels like I'm talking to myself ;)), Along with other bug fixes and the like, we have begun to work on the interface. Part of that work includes saving/loading the layout of panes/tabs... customization. Right now, you can drag tabs between panes, you can resize the panes themselves, you can dock/undock panes, you can hide/show panes, some tools can be can be hidden/shown... and that provides a degree of customization already, but it will be better utilized when saving/loading of layout is in place. Another thing that will help with regard to work flow is once more of the keyboard shortcuts are in place... at first there will be pre-defined keystrokes, but our aim is to provide a way for the user to define/re-define what keys do what... Yes, I'm on the development team, and it feels great to contribute as I do, but make no mistake... I'm a user at heart, which I tend to think is a good thing. I was on that side of the fence before I was on this side. I want what a lot of people want. I've paid attention to what people have said they wanted, and I've kept that in mind as we've built the spec. We're far from done. -Rob

apology accepted Robert

Sounds like flexibility has been thought of and is going to or is in place to be implemented. Hard to judge a alpha sometimes even a beta. I look forward to the open public beta to play around with Daz Studio. Can't comment on something I don't have on my screen that may be a non issue apon release. hopefully there will be a lot of comments about the alpha and how people didn't like it and that they are glad that it was fixed or implemented in v1.0. Thanks for the comments.