I haven't tried the program yet, but from the snapshots I have some
comments. These comments should be taken only as my personal opinions and
suggestions.

  - General:

  Viewing all possible features, even mutually exclusive ones, at the same
time might not be the best approach. They take valuable screen space and
don't seem to be intuitive.
  A suggestion: If two features are mutually exclusive (for example a pigment
can't have solid color and a color map at the same time) their options
should replace each other when the other is activated.
  This also will probably remove the need for redundant texts such as
"Applies to whole pigment": Things that are mutually exclusive replace
each other and their specific options are hidden with the feature itself
when the feature is hidden, and things that always apply to the pigment
or whatever always stay visible (when the pigment-tag or whatever is viewed).
  There seems to be inconsistency between several values. In some places
you can only use a slider to enter a value while in other places you can
only enter a number in a textbox.

  - Control area:

  Why there's a 'Rename' button when the name of the texture is apparently
in an editable text box?
  If the text box is not editable, it might be a good idea to make it so
(thus allowing the removal of the redundant button).

  How about pre-defined textures and materials?

  - Pigment screen:

  'None', 'Custom color', 'Pre-defined color' and 'Pattern' are all clearly
mutually exclusive, so perhaps it could be a good idea to show only the
one that is active (and some way of selecting the active item with a menu,
a set of radio buttons or whatever).

  The current layout seems like the color component settings apply to both
'None' and 'Custom color'.

  The pre-defined color could also show the color in question.

  In 'Pattern' the color map could also be shown. For an example, here is
how CME does it: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~warp/cme.png

  This screen should show all the settings such as turbulence, octaves,
lambda, omega and so on.

  This screen seems to lack pigment maps. Since pigment maps can have
several pigments inside them (which can themselves be pigment maps which
have several pigments inside them and so on...) some kind of hierarchical
tree of pigments could be developed.
  The same goes for color list pigments (checker, hexagon, bricks) which
can have pigments as components (which can be color list pigments or
even pigment maps themselves).

  There could be pre-defined pigments, color maps and pigment maps.

  - Normal screen:

  The same principle about mutually exclusive things applies here.
  There's also some inconsistency between screens: Here the mutually exclusive
things are inside their own box while in the pigment screen they were
scattered among the entire screen.

  The screen seems to lack slope maps.

  The normal map seems limited. It could be a very similar hierarchical tree
as with pigment maps.

  - Finish screen:

  Again some inconsistency between the screens. Now here there's a checkbox
for defining whether to use finish or not, while in the other screens there
was a 'None' radio button.
  All screens should look similar and similar things should be done in the
same way.

  It seems unclear how an ambient color is chosen. One could expect R, G and
B sliders to select the color.
  Instead of an 'Amount' button in the ambient color, perhaps it could be
a good idea to use a 'lock color components' (or similar) checkbox like in
most painting programs. When the checkbox is checked, moving any slider will
move the other sliders as well.
  The same applies to reflection.

  Sliders always limit the range of the values. The values themselves are in
non-editable text boxes. If one wants to go outside the range it's not
possible. They also limit the resolution of the value (ie. the steps which
it jumps).
  Range-limiting sliders also take valuable screen space when they are not
really needed.
  Since the text box is not editable, one can't put a value by hand. This
means that some values just can't be entered (because the slider jumps over
those values).

  The meaning of the slider after the 'Metallic' checkbox is unclear. It
doesn't seem to have any meaning.

  - Interior/media screen

  Media, scattering and density are listed as separate things, as if they were
different features (which could even be mutually exclusive) although
scattering and density are just media options and should be inside media.

  It may be a good idea to put checkboxes at the left of 'IOR', 'Caustics'
and so on to let the user specify whether he wants to use the specific
feature or not (without having to clear the value).

  Explanations in some features seem quite redundant.

  There doesn't seem to be any way of specifying absorption and emission
color.
  Also there doesn't seem to be any way of specifying the pattern to be
used in the density.

  It seems that multiple medias are not supported. Again, a hierarchical
tree might be a solution.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message