FormZ 9 wish list...

[jonmoore]

• alphabetized list of tools in the Tool Manager...see below

 

•  Reorganize Favorite Tools list by letter (space bar) so that they match the way the NURBS and Subdivision lists are handled.  Look at NURBS vs. Loft organization for example.  I prefer the NURBS organization.  As in Lofts should be:

 

Loft

Loft Branched

Loft Guided

Loft Path

Loft Perpendicular

 

not having to hit "B" for Branched Loft, "G" for Guided Loft, etc.

 

I'm not sure how many tools are not grouped like NURBS, but it's more than just Lofts (Sweeps, Components, Text, etc...)

 

Excellent idea - especially for my rapidly dilapidating grey matter...

 

Joking aside, it's a great UX idea that will aid accessibility to users of multiple skill levels - as well as brain capacity.  

[AC1000]

Some kind of "stamp" that shows you the individual and total area of the face(s) when editing multistorey building masses.

 

In concept modelling it would be nice to have a some kind of immediate information of the floor areas and calculations. Of course you can have the information using ”Measure Quantities” - but not in real time. ( Blender displays the information of the face that tells you area, dimensions etc.  Small numbers locates near segments and center of face. You can turn them on - off.) 

 

 

Modelur (urban design) has also nice features when modelling cities. Now I use Form Z for city planning and it is best for that especially when planning concepts of free form architecture. But I’d like to get information and calculations more easily. It would be nice to have constantly updating floor area calculations of free form multi storey building. With Infomation Management tool you can propably calculate floor (Face) areas already?

 

 

[AsOne]

to be more specific about the Tool Manger:

 

Inside the Tool Manager -

 

First list the tools by Palette instead of Categories (which combine palettes and have different names than the Palettes).

Then add include an alphabetized list of all Tools as well.

 

When I want to set shortcuts for tools or add them to my Favorite Tools space bar selector it is a tedious process to locate the actual tool in the Category list.  The Category list is confusing as it doesn't list them by Palette group, which would make a lot more sense IMHO....plus an alphabetized option as well.   

 

For example there is a Specialties palette and a Text palette.  Why then in the Category list are they both under a Category called "Special?"   

 

It's all there and relatively simple to use, but with a little reorganization (including the above mentioned listing reordering) could be a lot less Byzantine.  

 

[AsOne]

+1 for real time Face areas and HxWxL for rectangular objects (dia., radius, circumference for circles, etc.)  to be listed in the Pick Tool Attributes or Info or Properties tab perhaps.  Maybe also volume for solids.

 

though this is easily obtained with Measure Quantities I agree.

[Exocubic]

SHEET. METAL. TOOLS.

 

Including the ability to unfold 3d objects - not break them apart into their component faces. Edge flanges. Hems. Weld beads in 3d that are annotated in Layout automatically. Any way at all to give geometry a given thickness and keep it throughout bending/unbending/cutting/forming. 

 

Nesting of 2d geometry derived from 3d objects (for laser or water jet cutting).

 

McMaster-Carr integration - just like those fools at Autodesk have done in Fusion 360.

 

More real-time, in-viewport rendering options (hidden line, artistic, blueprint) - like those other fools at McNeel have in Rhino.

 

Holes for real-world fasteners that update in accordance with changes to the fastener. 

 

I could go on for hours. BUT I also realize that my particular needs aren't everyone's - wish lists always seem like a bunch of kids screaming for their particular favorite flavor of ice cream.

[Gustavo]

Hi Gustavo,

 

You can set key shortcuts for topological levels & customize the navigation currently:

 

Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 10.00.59 AM.jpg

 

Screen Shot 2015-11-05 at 10.00.34 AM.jpg

 

Awesome!!!

[jsiggia]

It's been too long since I've opened V 6.7, but what is the advantage of handling group picking in the edit menu vs the options palette for the pick tool?

 

I think having the group icon added to the other options just seems more consistent.

 

Thanks,

 

Joe

[jonmoore]

Ok, it's Friday, I didn't get much sleep last night, and I'm feeling a tad grouchy; so this post may seem a little irritable

 

My biggest bugbear with FormZ is and always has been the interaction model in the Palettes. Here's a few specifics with the Object Palette that turns my cheeks a shade of red.

 

- Every click on an object in the Palette only responds on mouse release not initial click making interactions seem sslloowww

 

- If I select some items why can't I automatically group them via a contextual right click command rather than creating a new group then having to drag the objects into that newly made group

 

- Why does renaming objects involve two slow clicks, and then a two second delay before the object becomes editable (standard double click and contextual right clight would be so much better)

 

These things may seem a little nitpicky in nature but all those delays add up and disrupt an otherwise fluid modeling workflow. Pallets where items have an editable sub palette such as Materials, Layers, Lights etc are less of an irritation because a simple double click instantly opens the sub palette where edits can easily be performed.

 

There you go, rant over. Time for a nice cup of chamomile tea...

[Exocubic]

- Why does renaming objects involve two slow clicks, and then a two second delay before the object becomes editable (standard double click and contextual right clight would be so much better)

 

This one drives me nucking futs as well.

[jonmoore]

- Why does renaming objects involve two slow clicks, and then a two second delay before the object becomes editable (standard double click and contextual right clight would be so much better)

 

This one drives me nucking futs as well.

 

So happy I'm not alone with that particular frustration.  

[DanM]

I have few requests. I would like that controlled objects will remain their controls after applying other tools. For example, an extruded object will not loose it's extrude controls after control rounding it's top face.

Controlled boolean operation, The boolean object will be updated if I edit the controls of one of the objects.

[jonmoore]

I have few requests. I would like that controlled objects will remain their controls after applying other tools. For example, an extruded object will not loose it's extrude controls after control rounding it's top face.

Controlled boolean operation, The boolean object will be updated if I edit the controls of one of the objects.

 

These kinds of operations are not possible without construction history (which is a huge resource hog). SolidThinking Evolve works in this manner but has none of the fluidity of FormZ.

 

http://solidthinking.com/evolve2015.html

 

I'm not even sure that it would be possible for AutoDesSys to create a construction history based workflow without a core rewrite. Never say never though; construction history has been requested on multiple occasions over the years.

 

I personally think FormZ strikes a good balance between editable parametric workflows and the fluidity you get with destructive workflows. I think I'd prefer to see the AutoDesSys team create a Grasshopper type parametric tool (something which has long been promised) that works as a plugin in much the same manner that Grasshopper works with Rhino. That way neither workflow compromises the other.

[AsOne]

They click, wait, click again...wait...ok now edit also annoys me.  I always thought it was simply because I had a slow cpu.  

 

However, the double click instantaneously brings up the Object or Layer attributes box and the name is highlighted, ready to be edited.  

[jonmoore]

They click, wait, click again...wait...ok now edit also annoys me.  I always thought it was simply because I had a slow cpu.  

 

However, the double click instantaneously brings up the Object or Layer attributes box and the name is highlighted, ready to be edited.  

 

By jolly, there be three of us annoyed the click, wait, click again shenanigans.

 

And for bonus points you now know you know it has nothing to do with your slow CPU...

[rob]

By jolly, there be three of us annoyed the click, wait, click again shenanigans.

 

And for bonus points you now know you know it has nothing to do with your slow CPU...

 

You can either speed up the double click speed of your mouse -- or you CAN just double click on the Object to rename it (and click OK), no?

[jonmoore]

You can either speed up the double click speed of your mouse -- or you CAN just double click on the Object to rename it (and click OK), no?

 

Nope.

[Gary]

1. agree with above, ever since v7 double click in objects and Layers palette has been uncomfortable at best.

 

2. on top of that, ever since v7, dragging objects in the Objects palette has lost its ease for me. Always missing the group i want to drop object into etc., I have to work much slower.

 

Gary

[jonmoore]

You can either speed up the double click speed of your mouse -- or you CAN just double click on the Object to rename it (and click OK), no?

 

Apologies, for the curtness of my original answer. I think it's because actions happen on mouse release (not on mouse click) but a fast double click in the object palette isn't recognised hence the need for two slow clicks.

[jonmoore]

You can either speed up the double click speed of your mouse -- or you CAN just double click on the Object to rename it (and click OK), no?

 

The conviction of your response made me download the Windows version version of FormZ and see if the behaviour is any different to OS X. On windows a double click on the Object item, opens a sub palette as it does for layers, materials, lights etc (with Attributes, Info and Parameters tabs). This doesn't happen with a double click on OS X (on an Object item), so it appears that this particular UX issue is a bug on OS X. It's existed for so long I never thought to report it as a bug.

 

The others complaining about the same UX issue are OS X folk (at least I know ASONE to be an OS X user).

[Alan Cooper]

These kinds of operations are not possible without construction history (which is a huge resource hog). SolidThinking Evolve works in this manner but has none of the fluidity of FormZ.

 

http://solidthinking.com/evolve2015.html

 

I'm not even sure that it would be possible for AutoDesSys to create a construction history based workflow without a core rewrite. Never say never though; construction history has been requested on multiple occasions over the years.

 

I personally think FormZ strikes a good balance between editable parametric workflows and the fluidity you get with destructive workflows. I think I'd prefer to see the AutoDesSys team create a Grasshopper type parametric tool (something which has long been promised) that works as a plugin in much the same manner that Grasshopper works with Rhino. That way neither workflow compromises the other.

I am worried that if Autodessys introduces design history, we will be introduced to a whole new wave of teething problems. I don't want to suffer a slow-down while putting up with such. The number of complaints we already get from experienced users harking back to 'how something used to work in an earlier version' makes me worried that with a heavy duty new introduction, we might sacrifice something precious...like speed. I remember when Turbocad first introduced their drafting palette, which involved a lot of resources interacting between model space and paper space.....things ground to a crawl. History sounds resource heavy to me.

[Alan Cooper]

Mentioned before but not yet in this list:

User interface feedback of a dimension as it is being placed, to overcome the need to zoom, and / or orbit to read it in the model itself. Sometimes it can't be read because it's too small without zooming in, other times because it is off-screen while zoomed into the second snap position, and other times because the angle of view is not readable, or even within the current limits for displaying. A popup window or even better, (in case the popup window obstructs), the value of the dimension in the info palette or tool options palette as second choice, would be most desirable. If that's not possible, maybe even a tiny new palette of its own.

[Alan Cooper]

I expect we will see a complete redesign of the User Interface. I hope it gets perfected while still in beta. The design of this needs to be such that we get to see the palettes currently relevant. Inactive palettes which are as wide as what the length of whatever their title happens to be or what the opened width is are very unpopular as they are an extremely inefficient waste of real-estate. Ability to have the option to reduce a palette to a small colored icon until clicked upon would be nice, especially if it could be user preferenced to auto open upon the trigger of the action of our choice (preferably with appropriate suggestion as we set the preference).

[Alan Cooper]

Display options - wire frame options - show back faces as dashed line. [New additional option]

[jonmoore]

I am worried that if Autodessys introduces design history, we will be introduced to a whole new wave of teething problems. I don't want to suffer a slow-down while putting up with such. The number of complaints we already get from experienced users harking back to 'how something used to work in an earlier version' makes me worried that with a heavy duty new introduction, we might sacrifice something precious...like speed. I remember when Turbocad first introduced their drafting palette, which involved a lot of resources interacting between model space and paper space.....things ground to a crawl. History sounds resource heavy to me.

 

I'm with you on this Alan. I think construction history can create more problems than it solves.

 

Over the years I've spent more time in polygon based DCC packaged than CAD packages and their approach to parametric design features is more wired to the way I work. Most of them other than Maya and Houdini don't have construction history per se but a few of them have features that enable parametric like workflows.

 

- C4D enables parametric workflows via nested objects in it's object manager

 

- 3DS Max has a modification stack for semi parametric operations

 

These are seen as strengths in each respective package as they manage to allow parametric like operations as part of what is fundamentally a destructive design workflow (polygonal modelling). I definitely miss these semi-parametric operations when working in Modo, but much of Modo's charm comes from the fluidity of it's fully destructive workflow.

 

Houdini dares to be different by providing a fully non destructive node tree of operations. It's advocates love this depth of opportunity but it has a reputation of being the 'nutty professor' of the DCC world. The freedom of opportunity provided by the node tree delights some but confuse others who see it as a rats nest where the proverbial wood can't be seen for the trees.

 

The reason I digress is that I see FormZ as a wonderful hybrid between CAD and DCC package. And the thing I like most about FormZ is the fluidity of it's modelling workflow in the viewport. But I do think there are ways to provide greater levels of parametric control without it getting in the way (in much the same manner as 3DS Max and C4D manage). So if the AutoDesSys dev team are able to create more freedom without breaking fluidity, that can only be a good thing.

 

A Grasshopper like fully parametric playground as a separate plugin would also be welcome. Grasshopper and Houdini share a lot of parallels but the great thing about Grasshoper is that it's a separate entity that plugs into Rhino; that way it doesn't obscure the core Rhino workflow. With Houdini, even simple transform operations become obscured by the fully parametric node tree.

 

I've wandered far from the OP's original request for history to be retained across extrusion and rounding operations but that seemingly simple request is fundamentally about construction history and parametric control so hopefully it's no too much of a digression.

[jonmoore]

I expect we will see a complete redesign of the User Interface. I hope it gets perfected while still in beta. The design of this needs to be such that we get to see the palettes currently relevant. Inactive palettes which are as wide as what the length of whatever their title happens to be or what the opened width is are very unpopular as they are an extremely inefficient waste of real-estate. Ability to have the option to reduce a palette to a small colored icon until clicked upon would be nice, especially if it could be user preferenced to auto open upon the trigger of the action of our choice (preferably with appropriate suggestion as we set the preference).

 

There seemed to be a definitive split of opinion in the last thread here on the forum regarding FormZ UX and UI design.

 

I'm with you Alan, and am fully supportive of a more modal approach to UI design. One that's more efficient and doesn't require a host of redundant palettes for seldom used operations. But that would see a move towards an Adobe, C4D, Modo type approach to UI design and many old school FormZ users seem resistant to that.

 

I really hope change does happen though. The current UI/UX design doesn't always do justice to FormZ's rich capabilities.