On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:26:03 -0500, Kyle wrote:

> It is completely
> non-intuitive.  Does anyone have any valid reason to disagree with this
> statement?  If so, please explain why...

Yes, I can disagree with that statement.  Once I learned it, I found it to
be very intuitive.  But to disagree with specificity with that statement,
I'd need a concrete example of what you find to be non-intuitive.

Some things still are a little counterintuitive to me - for example, I've
been playing recently with something that is shown in the new 2.43 feature
videos - building a chain of links, starting with an extruded circle,
rotating the extrusion 90 degrees.

I can get it to do everything in the demo video - follow a bezier curve,
dynamically adjust the number of links based on the length - all of that
works just fine.

But if I try to rescale the link, things go crazy.  Links in one direction
get proportionally smaller, while links in the other direction get
proportionally larger.

For what I'm doing, I want to scale things down to a relatively small
scale and then manipulate the object within the context of the scene, but
I can't seem to do that.  I have to freeze the construct by converting it
to a mesh (I think that's ultimately what I ended up doing) and then
scaling the new mesh - but I lose the ability to change the curve and
number of links.

But for basic modelling, I find it to be very intuitive -
space->add->mesh->sphere, and a sphere is added where the cursor is.  If I
don't like where the cursor is, alt+g to clear the position, alt+r to
clear the rotation, alt+s to clear the scale.

Jim

Post a reply to this message