3 ms·
> The UI in early Blender was as arcane as any I have ever seen, worse than GIMP's by a mile. That's just not true at all. GIMP's UI has no redeeming workflow.
by thomastjeffery 3y ago
> The UI in early Blender was as arcane as any I have ever seen, worse than GIMP's by a mile.
That's just not true at all. GIMP's UI has no redeeming workflow. Even if you master it, you must still constantly navigate it's clunky menu of features.
Blender 2.x had an intentional UX flow. When you mastered it - which really wasn't nearly as difficult as whatever work you were doing with it - you could be very productive.
Blender 3.x didn't really change that flow. It only added some optional visual interface for the people who don't already know the keybinds.
- jimmaswell 3y agoGIMP's UI is perfectly fine to me. I frequently use it for editing, design, and even drawing, and I have no desire to use other programs instead. What's so bad about it specifically?
- thomastjeffery 3y agoEvery time you want to do a thing with the GIMP, you have to go find the specific thing-doer. That's not a really big deal, so long as you can remember where it is or what it is called; but it's really not good tool design. To contrast, Blender has neatly organized every feature contextually. There are specific modes for organizing objects, editing meshes, sculpting, UV painting, etc. that each present their own smaller tailored UX. Everything that is an option (something you would edit with a text box) is under the properties window, in a contextually-organized tab. The entire structure of Blender's UI/UX is organized to match the conceptual UX of the tools it provides.
- jimmaswell 3y agoFor me, I find that modality in Blender annoying and confusing.
- DonHopkins 3y agoYet you would make it more like GIMP.