I have a few more complaints, er... suggestions: ;>)

1) Now that I've figured out how to use the yellow snap buttons, the snaps work as expected -- EXCEPT -- I cannot get the endpoint of a curve to snap to itself (to its other end, for example). As an inconvenient workaround, I have to draw a new curve to close the gap, join the curves, turn points on, then delete a point to shape it. My point is (Ooh! I made a pun!), once a point is selected it should be able to snap to ANY other point.

2) There is no Adobe Illustrator (.AI) export! This is a must.

3) Although the freehand drawing tool creates beautifully smooth curves, a smooth tool would still be nice to progressively smooth (remove detail) from curves.

4) I know people are making a lot of feature requests (myself included!), but please do not lose MoI's simplicity by adding too many. Moi's simplicity is one of the things I like about it. Don't try to be Rhino. I LOVE Rhino, but Rhino seems like WORK; MoI, on the other hand, is FUN. Don't lose your niche.

5) I can't figure out what the Rotate/Pan/Zoom options panel does. If I check Reverse Zoom Button, for example, nothing seems to happen.

6) The Restore Defaults button in your menu boxes is a GREAT feature. In a lot of programs, I'm often afraid to make changes to menus because I fear I'll never be able to restore (that is, remember) the original settings. It's little touches like this that let me know this program is different from most others (in a good way).

7) The Zoom and Pan buttons are too touchy. The way they zoom gives me motion sickness -- seriously. Rhino's zoom is MUCH better because it only zooms if you move your mouse/stylus (if you stop moving it stops zooming).

8) You have Copy and Paste buttons -- a Cut button would be very convenient to have. I tend to use cut and paste in conjunction with hide/unhide to manage my curves when modeling.

Well, that's my list. Again, I think the program is AMAZING -- even in this beta stage. With a few more improvements/tweaks it will be incredible.

Regards,

Johnny

Hi Johnny, thanks for the feedback!


> I cannot get the endpoint of a curve to snap to itself (to its other end, for example).

I should be able to fix this up eventually. It is a bit complex because when you drag an object around it isn't so good if it sticks to its old self too much, for instance it can make it hard to make small adjustments if the point that you were moving was snapping on to its original location (or nearby it with the "on" object snap).

So to avoid that problem, snapping is disabled on the object's own self while you are dragging any part of it.

It should be possible to fine tune this at some point to make it work more like you expected but it is rather delicate, I might not be able to get to it for a while.

In the meantime, there is a much easier workaround - you can use the Transform / Move command to do what you want without creating any extra stuff.

In its basic function, Transform / Move does the same kind of thing as drag - lets you move something from one spot to another. But it differs from drag in that it keeps the original object around in a ghosted state and lets you snap on the points in the original object. This will let you snap on to the other endpoint like you want.


> 2) There is no Adobe Illustrator (.AI) export! This is a must.

This is planned. It will likely be the only other file format support that will be added before the V1 release. It will probably be a little while yet before it is implemented.


> 3) Although the freehand drawing tool creates beautifully smooth curves, a
> smooth tool would still be nice to progressively smooth (remove detail) from curves.

I want to add this eventually (along with a set of some other curve tuning/tweaking tools), but I don't think that it will make it into V1.


> but please do not lose MoI's simplicity by adding too many.

It's great that one of your feature requests is not to add new features! :) Seriously though, this is something that I am quite focused on.

There are several factors that allow me to add new stuff without ruining the (apparent) simplicity. One is that I try to combine functionality into a single tool whenever possible - for instance a couple of betas ago I added a surface "untrim" ability but instead of adding it in as a separate tool, it works as an extension to the delete command (if you select a boundary of unattached trim edges and hit delete, it will untrim them). Another example is that fillet will fillet curves, edges, or surfaces depending on what is selected before you do the fillet. So that's one avenue of feature expansion without additional perceptible complexity - individual tools getting more powerful as time goes on.

The other major factor is the hierarchical nature of the side-pane UI will let me add in big new feature areas without messing things up, because they will be collapsed by default. So in future versions you'll see stuff like "Render", "Dim", and "Analyze" tabs over there, but you won't get hit in the face with all the tools unless you go and click on those tabs. Also, there is another type of hierarchy with the related sub-tools (like boolean pops out with difference, union, intersection). That is another area where there is space to add new things without ruining the top-level UI.

I spent about a year working on all these factors to make it possible for MoI to "scale up" with new features without it having a terrible impact on the top-level UI.

So there will be quite a bit of new stuff added over the next several years, but there is a plan in place to manage it and preserve the essential simple nature.


> 5) I can't figure out what the Rotate/Pan/Zoom options panel does. If I check
> Reverse Zoom Button, for example, nothing seems to happen.

Normally, if you click and drag on the "Zoom" button at the bottom of a viewport, if you drag downwards you will zoom out, upwards zooms in. If you check "Reverse zoom button", then it should be flipped - downwards will zoom in, upwards zooms out. Are you seeing something different?

Let me know if you want details on any other particular setting.


> 6) The Restore Defaults button in your menu boxes is a GREAT feature.

Thanks! At some point I'm going to try and combine all these options into just a single options dialog (with different chunks of stuff in it). Right now options are kind of scattered around here and there.


> 7) The Zoom and Pan buttons are too touchy. <....>

There is a plan to make some settings for controlling the sensitivity of these. Right now the default is pretty sensitive, that's so if you're using a tablet you can control it with pretty small motions of the pen instead of moving it very far. If you're using a mouse, it is sort of more natural to use the scroll wheel to zoom instead - that will go in steps and won't have the continuous motion. Also if you right click in a 3D viewport to rotate, that won't be continuous and if you middle click to pan, that won't be continuous unless you go close to the edge of the viewport.


> 8) You have Copy and Paste buttons -- a Cut button would be very convenient to
> have. I tend to use cut and paste in conjunction with hide/unhide to manage my
> curves when modeling.

Well, this is another one of the areas that increases simplicity - trying not to have a function that can be easily replicated by the use of two existing ones, in this case copy + delete. It is kind of difficult to add anything new to the Edit palette, it is getting rather full.

What about if you had a keyboard shortcut for Ctrl+X for Cut, would that work for you?

- Michael

Michael,

You said that it get's tricky because an object will snap to itself. But, what I'm talking about is POINT snap. If a SINGLE point is selected, it should be able to snap to any other point. It works great in Rhino. However, using MOVE, as you suggested, does work very well.

A keyboard shortcut for CUT would be a welcome addition, but it does throw a wrench into the idea of modeling without having to use the keyboard. However, I consider CUT a compulsory tool. In my Rhino workflow, I CONSTANTLY use cut in conjunction with hide/unhide to manage my curves and surfaces. It's sort of a curve/object keyboard ballet. ;>)

Some more suggestions:

It would be nice to have Select > Curves and Select > Surfaces functions (again, to assist with the juggling of curves and objects while modeling.

Perhaps, most conspicuous by its absence is a Network Surface command. I assume you are working on it since it is a cornerstone of NURBS modeling.

The viewport navigation buttons (zoom, pan, etc.) FREQUENTLY get in my way. This is the ONLY thing about MoI that I consider to be EXTREMELY ANNOYING. It would be FAR, FAR better if they were wide and low instead of tall and narrow (as they are now).

Finally, I find MoI to be a SUPERB 2D drawing program. I also use Adobe Illustrator, but completely DESPISE it. In the popular vernacular -- Illustrator Sucks! Both Rhino and MoI absolutely CRUSH Illustrator in terms of it's core function -- drawing vector lines. Maybe you should be working on MoI 2D? ;>)

Regards,

Johnny

> But, what I'm talking about is POINT snap. If a SINGLE point is
> selected, it should be able to snap to any other point.

Yes, I should be able to fix it up to do this eventually.


> A keyboard shortcut for CUT would be a welcome addition

It is possible to set this up on your own copy right now by using these steps:

First, close MoI, and then open the moi.ini file, which you can find here:
c:\documents and Settings\[your login name]\application data\moi\

Find the [Shortcut Keys] section, and add this entry (the stuff for Ctrl+X should all be one long line):

[Shortcut Keys]
Ctrl+X=script:var gd = moi.geometryDatabase; var objects = gd.getSelectedObjects().getTopLevelObjects(); gd.copyToClipboard( objects ); gd.removeObjects( objects );

This will enable Ctrl+X to do a cut for you.


You're the first person to comment on cut not being there... Eventually there will be some way to easily add something like this as a button so that you won't have to use the keyboard, but that won't be ready for V1 though.


> It would be nice to have Select > Curves and Select > Surfaces functions (again,
> to assist with the juggling of curves and objects while modeling.

This will come eventually as well. But not likely for V1 though.


> Perhaps, most conspicuous by its absence is a Network Surface command.
> I assume you are working on it since it is a cornerstone of NURBS modeling.

I'm not working on it currently right this moment, but it is something that I am going to try and complete for V1 though.


> It would be FAR, FAR better if they were wide and low instead of tall and narrow
> (as they are now).

How would you expect the wide and low buttons to look? It is difficult to make wide and low, and also incorporate both an icon and text.


re: Adobe Illustrator

I'm always amazed that they don't overhaul Illustrator to a greater extent.

In future versions I do want to explore adding more 2D illustration functionality to MoI, such as strokes and fills. But that is going to be a ways off.

- Michael

Michael,

>> It would be FAR, FAR better if they were wide and low instead of tall and narrow
>> (as they are now).

>How would you expect the wide and low buttons to look? It is difficult to make wide and >low, and also incorporate both an icon and text.

I really don't see the point in having an icon AND text. You could have text OR an icon and save substantial space. The attached image shows one possible way the MoI icons could be modified. It maximizes the most useful area of the viewport, which is the center. (When people draw on a sheet of paper, they tend to draw in the middle of the paper -- not in the corners!)

In truth, my version of the icons might be a few pixels too small -- but they give you a basic idea of an alternate design. You could, of course, also just use icons and no text at all (this might, in fact, be the best way to go).

I've also included a screencap of a Lightwave 3D viewport. It uses tiny icons tucked into a title bar that GETS THEM OUT OF THE WAY OF THE USER. The icons are very small, but most people tend to use the keyboard for those functions, anyway. However, since part of your goal is to minimize keyboard usage, your icons might need to be a bit bigger -- but not as HUGE as they are now.


>re: Adobe Illustrator

>I'm always amazed that they don't overhaul Illustrator to a greater extent.

>In future versions I do want to explore adding more 2D illustration functionality to MoI, >such as strokes and fills. But that is going to be a ways off.

I really do think MoI is great for 2D drawing. The reason I mention it is that programming 2D graphics -- as opposed to 3D -- HAS to be a whole lot easier and faster. If you added a few essential features (like background image, color fills and color blends, curve blends, and line weights), you could quickly have a commercial application that is ready to sell and PRODUCE AN INCOME STREAM for you.

I think there's a place in the market for a vector drawing program that is BOTH less expensive and more useful than Illustrator. With MoI 3D, it appears that you may still be looking at a fairly substantial development period before it's ready to ship. It's just something to consider... :>)

Regards,

Johnny

> I really don't see the point in having an icon AND text.

They each serve a slightly different function. A Text only button has a problem that it is short. It is easier to hit a target with the mouse if it is square. When one dimension becomes smaller (in the case of text, the height) it increases the difficulty of acquiring it.

Text also requires a bit more effort to read, text by its nature is similar to other text, and when you have a bunch of text together individual words do not stand out as much as icons do.

So being square and having greater differentiation are pros for the icons.

But just differentiating is not quite enough, you not only want to be able to differentiate between buttons, you also want to know what each individual button does as well - text is best for this particular area.

So the combination of both delivers particular things that each one on its own does not.


> The attached image shows one possible way the MoI icons could be modified.
> It maximizes the most useful area of the viewport, which is the center.

It's an interesting idea, but it creates a new problem where the view controls are not clustered together anymore.

If you are having problems running into the view controls while you are modeling, you might want to switch to the single-view mode instead of working in the split view too much.


> I've also included a screencap of a Lightwave 3D viewport. It uses tiny icons
> tucked into a title bar that GETS THEM OUT OF THE WAY OF THE USER.

Personally I find that's exactly the problem - they are so far out of the way and so tiny it is difficult to hit them. I have to really concentrate when I want to use those types of controls, it becomes a disruption in workflow. Being tiny and close together, you have to concentrate more just to pick out the one you want, and then you have to move with great precision to hit it. Also, having them on the top like that means that your hand may be covering up part of the view you are manipulating if you are using something like a TabletPC.

MoI is designed to solve some of these common problems.


If the icons seem too large for you, you can shrink them to your taste using Options / UI size, that will allow you to shrink or enlarge the entire UI including those view control buttons.


> With MoI 3D, it appears that you may still be looking at a fairly substantial
> development period before it's ready to ship.

Well, I'm certainly hoping that it will not be too substantial, I'm targeting something like 4 or 5 months down the road from now.

- Michael

I'm new here, but I found a few things as well...

No back/left/bottom views. Perhaps clicking on the front/right/top views a second time to get the opposite side?

3D could probably have a corresponding ortho mode, for doing planar stuff that doesn't align with other standard views.

Export of .obj a little messy. Seems that each surface is a separate part which is grouped/combined to create the mesh. This means that in some sections vertices don't match, etc. Is it possible to create an .obj where edges match on joining surfaces and vertices are welded? This also explains why Wings3D has strange stuff happen upon import. Considering the way some objects behave, it's suprising they can import to Wings. (Wings will produce "temporary" edges, which suggests something weird going on with vertice order.) If this can be figured out, the program would work better alongside subdiv modelers. As it is now, it's only seems good for straight to render with no other tweaking.

Not much in the way of simple documentation beyond a descriptor. Not everyone comes from a nurbs background with an understanding of how the tools should behave. Some seem simple enough to figure out such as booleans or lofting, but others such as sweep or blend might need more explanation to newbs. (Having a lot of "whaaa?" moments with sweep until I figured out I was doing it in backwards order. I'm still having surfaces balloon out though. Blend doesn't seem to do anything at all.) Even setting up an "official" wiki somewhere where the well initiated could explain things would be nice.

Future pricing? (No nurbs parallel to Wings3d yet, but Silo maybe...) What is the plan? Is it going to be around $100(US) for absolute beginners? Or is it going to be more expensive and cater to professionals who may be able to throw budget money at stuff for a "simple" pipeline tool?

I do like the interface, so you should stick with it. It's simple for the most part and pretty clean. Nothing is really hidden in the depths of the program or relies excessively on hotkeys. So it's not overly complex or confusing like Blender or some other "professional" programs.

Hi Paul, thanks for your feedback!

> No back/left/bottom views. Perhaps clicking on the front/right/top views
> a second time to get the opposite side?

That's a great idea for how to handle it. I had messed around a bit with having a little arrow menu appear over those tabs to let you change them, but I like your idea better. I had skipped doing this because the way I had messed with was too awkward, so I had postponed working on it until after V1. Your idea makes it more feasible, but it still might end up postponed until after V1, just because of general lack of time.


> 3D could probably have a corresponding ortho mode, for doing planar
> stuff that doesn't align with other standard views.

This is another thing that I want to handle eventually, but have currently put in the "after V1" bucket.


> Export of .obj a little messy. Seems that each surface is a separate part which is
> grouped/combined to create the mesh. This means that in some sections vertices
> don't match, etc. Is it possible to create an .obj where edges match on joining
> surfaces and vertices are welded?

The edges should match between joined surfaces exactly, just the points are unwelded. If you're seeing a problem where joined surfaces don't produce the same edge structure, can you please post a model that demonstrates it? That would be a bug.

The new beta that I am releasing today has a greatly overhauled .obj export, so you'll probably want to grab that.

I'm still in the process of working on the meshing and I expect to work on the welding quite soon.


> This also explains why Wings3D has strange stuff happen upon import.

Wings3D appears to have bugs in its .obj import - in this (long) thread: http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=162.1 , some sample OBJ files were loaded into several different applications and they worked fine everywhere except for Wings3D. I also replicated problems with exporting models from Rhino into Wings3D without using MoI at all. This very much leads me to believe that Wings3D has problems with its .obj import, it is possibly related to models that have a closed seam on them, like tubes or cylinders.


> Not much in the way of simple documentation beyond a descriptor.

This will get better more towards the end of the beta. If you find something confusing, please don't hesitate to post a question on it here in this forum.


> Blend doesn't seem to do anything at all.

Right now blend only works if you have selected 2 surface edge curves. If you just select 2 curves instead of edges, it won't do anything right now, eventually it will do a curve blend in that case though.


> Even setting up an "official" wiki somewhere where the well initiated could explain things would be nice.

It would be nice. I'm afraid that the time to work on that is rather nonexistent right now though. In the meantime this forum is the next closest thing.


> Future pricing? (No nurbs parallel to Wings3d yet, but Silo maybe...) What is the plan?
> Is it going to be around $100(US) for absolute beginners? Or is it going to be more
> expensive and cater to professionals who may be able to throw budget money at stuff
> for a "simple" pipeline tool?

The pricing is not completely set yet, but the plan is that it will be very affordable compared to other CAD programs, it shouldn't be too far off from Silo2 pricing, probably a bit more than that but not too much. It will be more than $100, though.

However, I feel that I should mention that MoI is absolutely intended to be a professional tool, that is it is intended to be a tool that is highly productive and easy to use at the same time, and that does a lot of useful things. But I expect people to use it conjunction with other software quite a lot, so it will be priced to be accessible to many.

- Michael