Re: Schematic View

["Ahmidou Lyazidi" <ahmidou.xsi(at)gmail.com>]

I like the shape manager and counld'nt live without it anymore!

2008/3/4, Stefan Andersson <sanders3d(at)gmail.com>:

The shape manager could go to heaven and leave place for another view :)


/stefan



On 3/4/08, Matt Lind <mlind(at)carbinestudios.com> wrote:
>
>
> The last thing we need is yet another view.  I'd rather see consolidation.
> If this new view comes online, then I'd prefer to see more intelligent
> display filters so it could be dumbed down to the existing schematic view,
> then remove the old schematic view.  For example, a rendertree like nodal
> graph for operator connections as displayed in the moondust demos, but for
> those who want a straight schematic, perhaps just hide all the operator
> nodes and operator connections.  It's getting very difficult to train new
> users on XSI from the kubillion options already on the table.  It's becoming
> more an excercise of what not to show them because early on in their
> experiences, there's so many ways for users to click and get into trouble.
> XSI could use some streamlining in the UI, this is a good place to start.
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
>  ________________________________
>  From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
> Luc-Eric Rousseau
> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 8:55 AM
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: RE: Schematic View
>
>
>
>
>
> Well ,  I wrote this to explained the current Schematic view in response to
> comments that it fails at being a nodal editor à la Houdini.  It's not what
> we were going for in that view, so it's not a failure of the view that it
> doesn't do this, or generic relationships à la Hypergraph.  That sort of
> workflow would probably go in new view, so keep the suggestions coming.
> I've been thinking that another view may better reflects the dual-world of
> TDs and animator, for example.  For the Schematic itself, we are more
> cautious and conservative.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
> kim aldis
> Posted At: February-29-08 6:03 PM
> Posted To: xsi
> Conversation: Schematic View
> Subject: RE: Schematic View
>
>
>
> I so don't understand this reluctance to create a decent hierarchy and
> relationship viewer in what is, after all, a hierarchical data set. You
> desperately need a node view for viewing relationships and you desperately
> need to improve the usability of the schematic. Surely it's not impossible
> to add that functionality without breaking it for those that use it as is.
> I'd be willing to bet most of those would be ecstatic to be able to see and
> manipulate relationships in the schematic and those that don't use it for
> the most part don't use it because it needs badly to be improved.
>
>
>
> Your argument makes no sense and if there's anyone on this list you should
> be listening to  seriously about this it's Brad. He has a better
> understanding of this and articulates it better than probably any other user
> you have.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
> Luc-Eric Rousseau
> Sent: 29 February 2008 20:06
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: RE: Schematic View
>
>
>
> Actually the schematic in XSI isn't driven by XSI's architecture, but rather
> by the workflow for a specific group of Softimage|3D users.  It's not meant
> to show operators or construction history, and as you can see moving nodes
> around is a secondary action (i.e. you can't just click and move around
> nodes by default), and it remembers user positions of the nodes you
> modified.  We do not really want to show operator in that view or complicate
> that view with more features that then "breaks" it for these users, it's a
> conscious decision.
>
>
>
> XSI's Schematic was also a good way to view and edit shared materials, but
> the size of the scenes and practices have evolved.  The Material Manager is
> the best place to view and edit these relations today, with features and
> including "Who Users?" tab.  SI|3D also didn't have the powerful material
> inheritance feature that XSI has, simple things like materials-on-groups.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of
> Bradley Gabe
> Posted At: February-29-08 2:34 PM
> Posted To: xsi
> Conversation: Schematic View
> Subject: Re: Schematic View
>
>
>
> […] As far as improvements go, it also seems there are two areas, aesthetic
> improvements such as node size and layout, and functionality improvements
> such as the ability to rewire operator connections. Aesthetic changes don't
> require updates to XSI's core the way many functionality improvements do,
> which is why we've seen a few changes in aesthetics of the schematic in the
> past few XSI updates. We haven't seen any major udates to functionality such
> as the ability to rewire operators, not because Soft doesn't want to, but
> because what we already have in the schematic is likely a manifestation of
> XSI's current core architecture.



--

__________________________________________
Pixel Abuser (at) http://www.swiss.se/
Blog (at) http://sanders3d.blogspot.com/
Web (at) http://sanders3d.googlepages.com/
work e.mail: stefan [at] swiss.se

---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi