Bassam Kurdali's profile photoTugiadmoko “Shy” Sasmito's profile photoBlender Users's profile photoUbuntu-TN's profile photo
very interesting... I wonder why we have to have the group node by default? or is it just an optional useful example?
regardless, this looks very cool, great work!
with this modern design you gotta stop thinking about grouped nodes and non grouped. This was only relevant with the "all over the table" design of the old nodes. He is showing how tools are presented as complex tools out of simpler elements. Some will come as defaults, some you will download, some you will create and never open again! Some you will need to open 1 or 2 levels deep, but that's it, they could have 6 levels deep constructions that you never care about. Think of them as today's complex single service nodes that you can't edit unless you go to the source
well, my initial concern that this is turning into more like something like e.g. java, where you have to 'create a class' before you can do anything, rather than python, where you can just do what you want. I understand full well the power of grouping and reusability in the abstract, but! creating non-functional empty group nodes first is not the way to go, imo. make simple things easy, make hard things possible and all that.
that being said, I don't want to come off like I'm detracting from this. Looks like a potential leap for the particle system in blender... now I just wish all of blender was like this ;) (modifiers, constraints, object relations, transforms, etc.)
Yes, making all the rest of Blender like this was my first thought too. Would be epic!
yeah, I'm not fussed- likely this will go through many iterations before finally landing. Go blendini!
Add a comment...