 |
The actual problem was fixed in September with IgorBeg's updated icons added in October. Marking as Resolved and will close in a couple of days. |
 |
Okay @PhyllisSmith! Thanks! PS: Thanks for the word "talents" but, unfortunately, I am a common person. ;-) |
|
|
@IgorBeg Since you created them for SUV and Cakewalk, that is sufficient for now. We would rather you use your talents on something more productive. |
|
|
Thanks @PhyllisSmith. Do you want I create the "autorange" PNGs (with |-|+|) for the other themes, or it doesn't matter? |
|
|
@IgorBeg Thank you for confirming that the yellow line is NOT off by 10 pixels as I do not yet understand Camera/Projector usage. Plus, thank you for the SUV and Cakewalk autorange icons -- checked into GIT today. @Andrew-R We revisited the size of the menu "perhaps it is possible to optimize the use of space between elements to make it more compact" BUT the real reason GG wanted to make it longer was to put all of the icons on the bottom in a single line with labels over them to make it clearer what they are. Before there were just a bunch of symbols that were hard to guess their purpose. I think we are done with this BT so unless hear otherwise, it will be marked Resolved after the next builds. |
|
|
Thanks Sam and Andrea_Paz. More or less like Andrea_Paz, I prefer to use the tumbler, on the right side of the Range limits because it increase/decrease the limits in symmetrical way. My taste of course. But, with my "autorange" buttons the Graphics is now less heavy, I think. Many tumblers there were before. Sorry. |
 |
@IgorBeg Perfect, thank you! I also replaced reset.png, I like yours more because it has the dot. But I like more a single button: the one on the right increases the limits of the range symmetrically. The left one narrows the limits of the range. You lose the possibility of asymmetric changes, but it does not seem important to me. |
 |
@IgorBeg Great. I like these buttons. |
|
|
BUT question of Solarix, is it off by 10 pixels??? No! It is perfect! (Cin_20200931_release) |
|
|
Here a demo for Cakewalk theme with "autorange" buttons. https://streamable.com/5m5hpg I don't know how many users like my "autorange" button. Anyway I uploaded two compressed file with the "autorange" buttons for SUV and Cakewalk themes. @Andrea_Paz I think you know where to insert the PNGs in the right place and re-make the build. Let me know, please. Export_20200101_SUV_autorange.tar.gz (820 bytes) Export_20200103_cakewalk_autorange.tar.gz (765 bytes) |
|
|
@solarix About your comment " I personally don't like the limits/boundaries also during the drag-and-drop operation of the yellow camera rect right on the compositor. It feels like a broken mouse ("I need it 10 more pixels left.. WTH?"). But I don't have an idea (yet) how to solve this elegant there." The yellow camera was discussed in a closed but 0000185 but that is a lot to have to read. In summary: PROBLEM: "the green frame does not represent the projector boundary, the green frame represents the camera boundary. Only the red frame represents the projector boundary. Therefore, the green frame cannot keep the same size and position as the red frame. The red frame indicates in which direction and size I have changed the project view. However, the green frame does not currently show me in which direction and size I have changed the camera view. But this visual information is exactly what the green frame is supposed to give me. In which direction and size did I change the camera view? Unfortunately, I can't get this information from anywhere at the moment, because the green frame is used to display the projector view visually. I always have to insert an image to find out in which direction I changed the camera view. Without an inserted image it is currently pure speculation how the camera view was changed." SOLUTION: "In the Camera view a yellow outline box has been added and checked into GIT. Hopefully this will provide good information for both points of view on usage." COMMENTARY: "I just tested it, it works fantastic. You have found the best solution. I think Igor will be just as happy with that. You can always see all the bound" and "Really, really well done. PERFECT." So the yellow line is never going away BUT question of Solarix, is it off by 10 pixels???? |
|
|
You're right; my mistake. Can your beautiful icons also be used in Cakewalk? |
|
|
@Andrea_Paz wrote: "The current ones, the horizontal thumblers, are confusing because they usually indicate two actions (left or right) while in this case they are a single button. " I think you are missing something. The horizontal tumbler works like its parent (vertical tumbler) but in horizontal. @Andrea_Paz wrote: " If you leave the thumblers, I would say to replace them with the icons proposed by IgorBeg." Unfortunately those icons can not be used for the goal. I have done a simple icon for the SUV theme to be different from the other tumblers. It is a demo. if You want, we can discuss it. And if it like to You (all of you), I could make it for the other theme (I need a few of time). Scrrencast at https://streamable.com/4h8xiu PNGs added.
autorange_up.png (229 bytes)
autorange_hi.png (239 bytes)
autorange_top.png (252 bytes)
autorange_bottom.png (237 bytes) |
|
|
First proposal, others are certainly more talented than me...
x-y-z.png (2,366 bytes)
x-y-z.svg (6,529 bytes) |
|
|
GG writes here about Andrea's last post: Yes, I like the idea. It definitely would look better. I needed 55 icons fast, and so I wrote a program to transpose the current vertical set of tumbler icons. I do have more time now, and perhaps can make new images, but you guys have much more talent in this part of design that I was just waiting to see if there were volunteers. Theme based icons are a double edged sword. They make each theme individual, but demand a complete rework if you want them to be a custom job. gg |
|
|
I like the large, clear window (I am weak in vision). If you leave the thumblers, I would say to replace them with the icons proposed by IgorBeg. The current ones, the horizontal thumblers, are confusing because they usually indicate two actions (left or right) while in this case they are a single button. In addition there are already many thumblers in the window increasing the confusion. I'm also fine with taking them out to recover a little space: the design is even cleaner. After all, their function is already fulfilled by the thumblers in the Range input box. I don't like the idea of a partially hidden window, but since I can't judge how serious the problem is on small monitors, I also accept this solution, if considered the best. |
 |
Wow what an open and lively discussion here. Usability issues are nerver easy (I'm professional C++/Qt/Linux Developer). i completely agree with all of your points (from "new users (hopefully) will become used to this dialog users" (Yes: I'm already in this situation :)) to "We do not like the size all that much either, but[...] no one even paid any attention to the "expand range" (that's true: the first reply was a confirmation after all..). Just one hint: IMHO the discussion is all about the edit-dialog. I personally don't like the limits/boundaries also during the drag-and-drop operation of the yellow camera rect right on the compositor. It feels like a broken mouse ("I need it 10 more pixels left.. WTH?"). But I don't have an idea (yet) how to solve this elegant there.. Offtopic but important: Thank you all for your commitment! I'm cin-cv user since 2009. It's simply the best... |
|
|
@Andrew-R Oooooh, I really like the idea of embedding the color balls in the sliders, but I think GG was going to allow for changing their color like you can in the Show Overlays window by clicking on them. We did notice that the slider can disappear so if you hit the reset button, it comes right back. |
 |
> perhaps it is possible to optimize the use of space between elements to make it more compact May be make color balls 'embedded' in slider's color? Strangely, but I can make slider disappear by entering wild 'range': Like -79 to -21 (was playing whit mouse scroll in imput fields and around sliders - it works...just may lead to such visual surprize :} )
sliders.png (74,929 bytes) |
 |
Personally, I appreciate the information as presented in the window prepared by GG. I like the presence of the horizontal range tumblers; I find that they make the configuration of the plug-in intuitive and immediately understandable, the other adjustments allow to refine the choices in a more precise way. I also find that one should avoid hiding the configuration tools, everything should be apparent at first glance. If the configuration window is considered too large, perhaps it is possible to optimize the use of space between elements to make it more compact, but I wouldn't eliminate configuration tools to do so. |
|
|
@Andrew-R We do not like the size all that much either, but want to make it as obvious as possible rather than having to go down to the zoom bar to modify the range. It is a lot longer for sure BUT as you can see in Note #4067, no one even paid any attention to the "expand range" and not only new users but existing users did not take advantage of these arrows. Instead a BT would be opened. The goal here was to make everything immediately obvious and not have to change it again -- if you make something "hidden" (which it already was) it does not get seen at all. For compariston, attached is the original from way, way back. I will see what GG thinks about removing the horizontal range tumblers and the color balls but I do not think he will want to.
original.png (4,878 bytes) |
|
|
Thanks GG for the improvement; aAnd Phyllis for the image and Sam for the video. Unfortunately, the end of the month is at the door, and there is little time, I think, for the monthly builds. I have to agree with Andrew-R for a few of things. Why don't delete the horizontal tumbler? You have the tumbler on the Range that works very well. More or less like in "Cin_20200929_ProjCamWindow_d.png" Or, in different way, like Andrew-R said, "Cin_20200929_ProjCamWindow_c1ab.gif": the eye icon show/hide the Range. Keep in mind I done them very quickly. The really good thing for me, just now, is that the Clear button, on the right side of the slider, reset the Range to the project format; really well done!
Cin_20200929_ProjCamWindow_d.png (17,659 bytes)
Cin_20200929_ProjCamWindow_c1ab.gif (19,430 bytes) |
|
|
I have tested the functionality. In itself it was solved quite well by Phyllis/GG. You can define your desired workspace very precisely and/or very quickly. You can move the frame very fast, but also very precisely. Enclosed a video. https://streamable.com/af49ja |
|
|
As far as I can remember, the thumblers was a user request, but I'm not sure. Maybe Phyllis or another user can remember it. Update: I think I confused this with another topic. The window is indeed bigger, but in my opinion absolutely reasonable. Compared to the mask window, this window is small. Personally I am not a friend of hidden options or hidden panels, a window should show all important functions compactly at a glance and this is the case here. This is how I think about it, but tastes are different, so we can certainly discuss it. |
|
|
Hm, but I think new window is bigger :} Are those horizontal thumblers really needed? And overall, new users (hopefully) will become used to this dialog users, so big self-explanatory window will be less needed? Yet it will hang here demanding more mouse movements and precision. May be additional panel can be hidden behind the expander button? |
|
|
It looks very clear and structured. I like it. |
|
|
An updated Camera and Projector based on feedback above has been checked into GIT. It is much nicer and has more specific functions. All of this feedback and suggestions really help to improve CinGG. See image attached.
camera_and_projector.png (20,089 bytes) |
|
|
The second variant would be this one, I like this one best.
Camera_Projector_Window_02.jpg (27,429 bytes) |
|
|
I also like Igor's suggestion quite well. How about the following suggestion? The advantage of my suggestion is that you can enter the range of the X,Y,Z directly or change it with a button. There you can also read off the context directly and it is self-explanatory without the need for additional explanations.
Camera_Projector_Window.jpg (27,509 bytes) |
|
|
I think that for the sliders and its Zoom IN and Zoom OUT would be better change the tumblers with other icons. Look at my photomontage "Cin_20200927_ProjCamWindow_zoom_a". And, if possible, as in photomontage "Cin_20200927_ProjCamWindow_zoom_b", where you can see the range on the left and on the right (only texts that you can not edit). It would be more clear. A different layout for all the icons on the bottom will be need, I would think.
Cin_20200927_ProjCamWindow_zoom_a.png (11,557 bytes)
Cin_20200927_ProjCamWindow_zoom_b.png (12,995 bytes) |
|
|
Actually this was added around March 10, 2020 per the release notes: "Slider bars have been added to the Projector and Camera compositor menus for ease of use along with tumblers to change the range. All inter-related components are updated accordingly such as the zoom bar ranges and the auto xyz lines (Dan feature request)." |
|
|
@solarix You can easily do what you want -- see the tooltip as shown in the next png. @Sam @IgorBeg "it would be better if I could set it via the input window or show a hint if the user wants to increase this value." This has actually been solved already (probably in another BT). But it is hard to notice -- any suggestions for a"range symbol" to make it easier to see?
expand_range.png (13,846 bytes) |
|
|
Sam wrote: Why can't I do it via the input window of the camera settings? You can also use the tumblers on the right side of the slider to increase or decrease the "scale". I don't like this way. I agree with you, Sam. I would change the way how it works now. And, I would like a percentage slider. More, just now, there are a lot of icons for the type of keyframe. A new Layout is need, for me. Sorry. |
|
|
@Andrea_Paz Many thanks for the hint. However, I find it very confusing, a new user will never figure it out by himself. I did not know myself that it is to be adjusted in such a way. @All Does it have a reason to do it that way? Why can't I do it via the input window of the camera settings? To avoid the same requests in the future, it would be better if I could set it via the input window or show a hint if the user wants to increase this value. |
|
|
Dooooh.. I'm sorry for wasteing your time. It works. In CV, there was no such connection between the zoom bar and the dialog AFAIK. Many thanks for the quick reaction! |
|
|
It's a boring problem that everyone gets into sooner or later. You have to go to the bottom of the zoom bar; choose the X and Y curves and set the limits to what you want. See figure.
limits.jpg (10,266 bytes) |
|
|
I have just tested it and can confirm it. Before, larger values could be entered. Some older projects might not work properly because of this limitation/error. |
- Anonymous
