Rotation Nodes Design / Splitting Nodes #109965

New Issue

Open

opened 2023-07-11 14:27:51 +02:00 by Hans Goudey · 14 comments

Hans Goudey commented 2023-07-11 14:27:51 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

The group of nodes above raise the question of consistency with the other somewhat similar "Separate Color" and "Combine Color" nodes. Though the rotation nodes are arguably more like "creation" or "conversion" nodes rather than "separation" or "combination", either way they make it clear we should have a better understanding of when we use a single node with multiple modes or many nodes.

Benefits of a single node with many modes

• Easy to switch behavior after adding the node.
• Easy to see available behavior after adding the node.
• More intuitive when the main purpose of the node remains the same, but the behavior is slightly tweaked.

Benefits of many nodes

• Easier to see available behavior from add menu.
• Easier to add different behavior with search and link drag search.
• More intuitive when the modes change the fundamental operations of nodes, changing available input or output sockets for example
• More scalable, especially in combination with user created node groups, which can fit in well with the design of builtin nodes.
• Design is simpler and less arbitrary when some operations don't fit with the overall name of the node. For example, some of the modes above are "separations," but most are just conversions.

The downside of making it harder to switch behavior (switch modes) can be lessened by improving or adding a "switch node" feature, so it's not a fundamental downside.

Proposal

• Use modes when the overall operation is the same, and the inputs and outputs have the same meaning
• Use separate nodes when the operation is different, or the inputs and outputs change significantly
• Make it easier to switch nodes, as a builtin feature
  • Each node can contain a manually built list of similar nodes for easier switching

Consequences

• Split math operations to separate nodes that each handle multiple types

The group of nodes above raise the question of consistency with the other somewhat similar "Separate Color" and "Combine Color" nodes. Though the rotation nodes are arguably more like "creation" or "conversion" nodes rather than "separation" or "combination", either way they make it clear we should have a better understanding of when we use a single node with multiple modes or many nodes.  **Benefits of a single node with many modes** - Easy to switch behavior after adding the node. - Easy to see available behavior after adding the node. - More intuitive when the main purpose of the node remains the same, but the behavior is slightly tweaked. **Benefits of many nodes** - Easier to see available behavior from add menu. - Easier to add different behavior with search and link drag search. - More intuitive when the modes change the fundamental operations of nodes, changing available input or output sockets for example - More scalable, especially in combination with user created node groups, which can fit in well with the design of builtin nodes. - Design is simpler and less arbitrary when some operations don't fit with the overall name of the node. For example, some of the modes above are "separations," but most are just conversions. The downside of making it harder to switch behavior (switch modes) can be lessened by improving or adding a "switch node" feature, so it's not a fundamental downside. **Proposal** - Use modes when the overall operation is the same, and the inputs and outputs have the same meaning - Use separate nodes when the operation is different, or the inputs and outputs change significantly - Make it easier to switch nodes, as a builtin feature - Each node can contain a manually built list of similar nodes for easier switching **Consequences** - Split math operations to separate nodes that each handle multiple types   

image.png

38 KiB

image.png

37 KiB

image.png

42 KiB

image.png

25 KiB

Hans Goudey added the

Type

Design

Interest

Geometry Nodes

labels 2023-07-11 14:27:52 +02:00

Hans Goudey added this to the Nodes & Physics project 2023-07-11 14:27:53 +02:00

Iliya Katushenock added the

Interest

Animation & Rigging

label 2023-07-11 14:32:02 +02:00

Hans Goudey referenced this issue 2023-07-11 14:47:15 +02:00

Geometry Nodes: Initial basic rotation socket nodes #109030

Nika Kutsniashvili commented 2023-07-11 22:39:03 +02:00

Contributor

Copy Link

Blenders Geometry Nodes node-trees are already a cluttered as it is, especially compared to other softwares. Splitting Combine & Separate nodes into different modes is gonna make the matter much worse. I agree with every benefit of single nodes, and I don't think separate nodes have any pros.

Seeing "Combine Color" in add menu makes sense to you, seeing all this 5-6 options that supposedly do same thing are just confusing and make Add menu place to avoid.

Also when I want to combine color or XYZ I search for combine. This just ruins muscle memory, and makes searching for things harder too. Combine just shows you two nodes that combine stuff. Searching for Color, XYZ, RGB give you much broader list of nodes. More clutter.

Splitting Combine and Separate once again will mess with older tutorials and make things harder for beginners, who will be searching for Cimbine node and will either see nothing or 9 nodes with different names. It will change nodes in older versions of Blender, needing forward/backward compatibility.

Most importantly, it will be different from Shader Nodes and Compositor, and having ANOTHER incosistency between node editors is not ideal.

And lastly, especially with color, I want to try different methods to see what result I can get. Having to add second node to see Lightness value instead of Value is also not ideal. I hear about switch operator, but just why, when it's already here in enum list.

Blenders Geometry Nodes node-trees are already a cluttered as it is, especially compared to other softwares. Splitting Combine & Separate nodes into different modes is gonna make the matter much worse. I agree with every benefit of single nodes, and I don't think separate nodes have any pros. Seeing "Combine Color" in add menu makes sense to you, seeing all this 5-6 options that supposedly do same thing are just confusing and make Add menu place to avoid. Also when I want to combine color or XYZ I search for combine. This just ruins muscle memory, and makes searching for things harder too. Combine just shows you two nodes that combine stuff. Searching for Color, XYZ, RGB give you much broader list of nodes. More clutter. Splitting Combine and Separate once again will mess with older tutorials and make things harder for beginners, who will be searching for Cimbine node and will either see nothing or 9 nodes with different names. It will change nodes in older versions of Blender, needing forward/backward compatibility. Most importantly, it will be different from Shader Nodes and Compositor, and having ANOTHER incosistency between node editors is not ideal. And lastly, especially with color, I want to try different methods to see what result I can get. Having to add second node to see Lightness value instead of Value is also not ideal. I hear about switch operator, but just why, when it's already here in enum list.

Iliya Katushenock commented 2023-07-11 22:47:15 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

And lastly, especially with color, I want to try different methods to see what result I can get.

If you're doing this while solving your task, chances are you just don't know what you're doing. It's as if you chose different math operations.

> And lastly, especially with color, I want to try different methods to see what result I can get. If you're doing this while solving your task, chances are you just don't know what you're doing. It's as if you chose different math operations.

Nika Kutsniashvili commented 2023-07-11 22:50:48 +02:00

Contributor

Copy Link

And lastly, especially with color, I want to try different methods to see what result I can get.

If you're doing this while solving your task, chances are you just don't know what you're doing.

I would like if once I had interaction with you in which you just weren't rude to me :)

If developers would like user's and add-on developers opinion about possible API-breaking changes it is there.

> > And lastly, especially with color, I want to try different methods to see what result I can get. > > If you're doing this while solving your task, chances are you just don't know what you're doing. I would like if once I had interaction with you in which you just weren't rude to me :) If developers would like user's and add-on developers opinion about possible API-breaking changes it is there.

Iliya Katushenock commented 2023-07-11 23:01:06 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

Seeing "Combine Color" in add menu makes sense to you, seeing all this 5-6 options that supposedly do same thing are just confusing and make Add menu place to avoid.

On the one hand, there are requests to add all math operations to this menu. On the other hand, as you say, adding different modes to this menu makes it worse. I wonder if it's just a search list. You don't need to scroll it. So what is the problem with a large number of elements?

Also when I want to combine color or XYZ I search for combine. This just ruins muscle memory, and makes searching for things harder too. Combine just shows you two nodes that combine stuff. Searching for Color, XYZ, RGB give you much broader list of nodes. More clutter.

And now you will be search XYZ and will be find both and separate and combine.

Splitting Combine and Separate once again will mess with older tutorials and make things harder for beginners, who will be searching for Cimbine node and will either see nothing or 9 nodes with different names. It will change nodes in older versions of Blender, needing forward/backward compatibility.

Changing anything, this argument is correct. Not sure if this makes sense?

> Seeing "Combine Color" in add menu makes sense to you, seeing all this 5-6 options that supposedly do same thing are just confusing and make Add menu place to avoid. On the one hand, there are requests to add all math operations to this menu. On the other hand, as you say, adding different modes to this menu makes it worse. I wonder if it's just a search list. You don't need to scroll it. So what is the problem with a large number of elements? > Also when I want to combine color or XYZ I search for combine. This just ruins muscle memory, and makes searching for things harder too. Combine just shows you two nodes that combine stuff. Searching for Color, XYZ, RGB give you much broader list of nodes. More clutter. And now you will be search `XYZ` and will be find both and separate and combine. > Splitting Combine and Separate once again will mess with older tutorials and make things harder for beginners, who will be searching for Cimbine node and will either see nothing or 9 nodes with different names. It will change nodes in older versions of Blender, needing forward/backward compatibility. Changing anything, this argument is correct. Not sure if this makes sense?

Nika Kutsniashvili commented 2023-07-11 23:11:42 +02:00

Contributor

Copy Link

On the one hand, there are requests to add all math operations to this menu. On the other hand, as you say, adding different modes to this menu makes it worse. I wonder if it's just a search list. You don't need to scroll it. So what is the problem with a large number of elements?

That is a good point, for math node I too would like the ability to be able to search Greater and Less Than, but if they were in different nodes that would quite ruin my workflow. But I'm not sure if different modes of Combine/Separate nodes need to be searchable, as it's not used as often as math node, which can often times be 2/3 of node tree.

Changing anything, this argument is correct. Not sure if this makes sense?

I have number of addons that either import Geometry Nodes setup from blend files, or create from scratch. Changing api will break all of those, and I would consider if breakign api is worth replacing 2 nodes with 6

> On the one hand, there are requests to add all math operations to this menu. On the other hand, as you say, adding different modes to this menu makes it worse. I wonder if it's just a search list. You don't need to scroll it. So what is the problem with a large number of elements? That is a good point, for math node I too would like the ability to be able to search Greater and Less Than, but if they were in different nodes that would quite ruin my workflow. But I'm not sure if different modes of Combine/Separate nodes need to be searchable, as it's not used as often as math node, which can often times be 2/3 of node tree. > Changing anything, this argument is correct. Not sure if this makes sense? I have number of addons that either import Geometry Nodes setup from blend files, or create from scratch. Changing api will break all of those, and I would consider if breakign api is worth replacing 2 nodes with 6

Colin Basnett commented 2023-07-21 07:19:56 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

Overall, I agree with the proposal. Having the inputs and outputs change dramatically based on the type drop-down is confusing, especially to new users. I am favour of more explicit nodes except in special cases (such as generic "math" nodes where there are only ever 1-2 inputs and outputs, all of the same type).

Easier to see available behaviour from add menu.

Arguably, this is more of a deficiency with the search algorithm. For example, I want be able to type "Add" in the search menu and have a list of all of the nodes where there is an "Add" in the operation or type (or whatever the primary "operation" switch is), similar to the behaviour of dragging output nodes and and having it auto-suggest a new node and socket to connect it to.

Overall, I agree with the proposal. Having the inputs and outputs change dramatically based on the type drop-down is confusing, especially to new users. I am favour of more explicit nodes except in special cases (such as generic "math" nodes where there are only ever 1-2 inputs and outputs, all of the same type). > Easier to see available behaviour from add menu. Arguably, this is more of a deficiency with the search algorithm. For example, I want be able to type "Add" in the search menu and have a list of all of the nodes where there is an "Add" in the `operation` or `type` (or whatever the primary "operation" switch is), similar to the behaviour of dragging output nodes and and having it auto-suggest a new node and socket to connect it to.

Charlie Jolly commented 2023-07-25 19:25:31 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

This is a topic I always struggle with even though I've provided many GN and Shader node patches to improve what is available to users out of the box. Blender nodes are currently a mixture of low level and high level nodes. With GN it seems there is a move to having many low level nodes and expecting users to combine these and create node groups if they want new or different functionality. This contrasts to the idea of high level nodes with different modes and settings. I'm somewhere in the middle of these paradigms. For consistency I'd really like to see a Blender Node Style document that could set some design guidelines across Shading, Compositing and GN node systems for the benefit of developers and end users alike.

This is a topic I always struggle with even though I've provided many GN and Shader node patches to improve what is available to users out of the box. Blender nodes are currently a mixture of low level and high level nodes. With GN it seems there is a move to having many low level nodes and expecting users to combine these and create node groups if they want new or different functionality. This contrasts to the idea of high level nodes with different modes and settings. I'm somewhere in the middle of these paradigms. For consistency I'd really like to see a Blender Node Style document that could set some design guidelines across Shading, Compositing and GN node systems for the benefit of developers and end users alike.

👍 1

Hans Goudey commented 2023-07-25 19:41:20 +02:00

Author

Member

Copy Link

Agreed about the importance of documenting this once it's written down and agreed on. I'll just emphasize the importance of node group assets in this design though-- the long term expectation isn't always that users will have to combine nodes themselves to get higher level behavior.

Agreed about the importance of documenting this once it's written down and agreed on. I'll just emphasize the importance of node group assets in this design though-- the long term expectation isn't always that users will have to combine nodes themselves to get higher level behavior.

Hans Goudey referenced this issue 2023-07-26 14:39:57 +02:00

Geometry Nodes: Initial basic rotation socket nodes #109030

Shmuel Israel commented 2023-08-01 13:24:40 +02:00

Copy Link

btw, why is the input of the rotation type displayed as an Euler when it takes in a quaternion?
(and why is it named simply rotation?)

btw, why is the input of the rotation type displayed as an Euler when it takes in a quaternion? (and why is it named simply rotation?)

Shmuel Israel commented 2023-08-01 13:31:08 +02:00

Copy Link

regarding the design, I don't think the converter nodes should be in the same node as the separate nodes, unless those nodes are renamed to convert node (or the like) and are the conversion to a float. then it could make sense to have a convert node that you set the "from" and "to" conversion from two drop-down.

regarding the design, I don't think the converter nodes should be in the same node as the separate nodes, unless those nodes are renamed to convert node (or the like) and are the conversion to a float. then it could make sense to have a convert node that you set the "from" and "to" conversion from two drop-down.

Hans Goudey referenced this issue 2023-08-23 16:22:47 +02:00

Swap Node Operator #111438

Hans Goudey commented 2023-08-23 16:32:02 +02:00

Author

Member

Copy Link

Created a followup task: #111438

Created a followup task: #111438

Jacob Merrill commented 2023-08-23 16:57:31 +02:00

Copy Link

I did not know that vector rotate node had a euler mode for quite some time.

the operation

object.orientation.inverted() @ (World_Point - object_origin)

puts a point of space into local space for a object - (useful for texturing and all sorts of AI logic)

perhaps we could have some 'higher level nodes' - that are groups of nodes already in blender?

I did not know that vector rotate node had a euler mode for quite some time. the operation object.orientation.inverted() @ (World_Point - object_origin) puts a point of space into local space for a object - (useful for texturing and all sorts of AI logic) perhaps we could have some 'higher level nodes' - that are groups of nodes already in blender?

Hans Goudey referenced this issue from a commit 2023-08-24 14:59:03 +02:00

Geometry Nodes: Initial basic rotation socket nodes

Charlie Jolly commented 2023-10-03 17:26:57 +02:00

Member

Copy Link

I'm guessing node vs modes is no longer a proposal. This creates a UI divergence with existing nodes.

Is the Swap Node Operator #111438 going to be a target for 4.1?

I'm guessing node vs modes is no longer a proposal. This creates a UI divergence with existing nodes. Is the Swap Node Operator #111438 going to be a target for 4.1? 

Hans Goudey referenced this issue 2023-10-08 14:26:15 +02:00

WIP: Geometry Nodes: Add Quaternion Math node #109893

Shmuel Israel commented 2023-10-11 00:40:10 +02:00

Copy Link

what do you guys think about adding Rotors and Matrices?

what do you guys think about adding Rotors and Matrices?

Sign in to join this conversation.

No Branch/Tag Specified

Branches Tags

main

brush-assets-project

universal-scene-description

fix-121021

blender-v4.1-release

blender-v3.3-release

blender-v3.6-release

blender-v3.6-temp_wmoss_animrig_public

temp-sculpt-dyntopo

gpencil-next

anim/animation-id-113594

blender-v4.0-release

blender-projects-basics

bridge-curves

sculpt-blender

asset-browser-frontend-split

asset-shelf

tmp-usd-python-mtl

tmp-usd-3.6

blender-v3.5-release

blender-v2.93-release

realtime-clock

sculpt-dev

bevelv2

xr-dev

v4.1.1

v3.6.11

v3.3.18

v4.1.0

v3.3.17

v3.6.10

v3.6.9

v3.3.16

v3.6.8

v3.6.7

v3.3.14

v4.0.2

v4.0.1

v4.0.0

v3.6.5

v3.3.12

v3.6.4

v3.6.3

v3.3.11

v3.6.2

v3.3.10

v3.6.1

v3.3.9

v3.6.0

v3.3.8

v3.3.7

v2.93.18

v3.5.1

v3.3.6

v2.93.17

v3.5.0

v2.93.16

v3.3.5

v3.3.4

v2.93.15

v2.93.14

v3.3.3

v2.93.13

v2.93.12

v3.4.1

v3.3.2

v3.4.0

v3.3.1

v2.93.11

v3.3.0

v3.2.2

v2.93.10

v3.2.1

v3.2.0

v2.83.20

v2.93.9

v3.1.2

v3.1.1

v3.1.0

v2.83.19

v2.93.8

v3.0.1

v2.93.7

v3.0.0

v2.93.6

v2.93.5

v2.83.18

v2.93.4

v2.93.3

v2.83.17

v2.93.2

v2.93.1

v2.83.16

v2.93.0

v2.83.15

v2.83.14

v2.83.13

v2.92.0

v2.83.12

v2.91.2

v2.83.10

v2.91.0

v2.83.9

v2.83.8

v2.83.7

v2.90.1

v2.83.6.1

v2.83.6

v2.90.0

v2.83.5

v2.83.4

v2.83.3

v2.83.2

v2.83.1

v2.83

v2.82a

v2.82

v2.81a

v2.81

v2.80

v2.80-rc3

v2.80-rc2

v2.80-rc1

v2.79b

v2.79a

v2.79

v2.79-rc2

v2.79-rc1

v2.78c

v2.78b

v2.78a

v2.78

v2.78-rc2

v2.78-rc1

v2.77a

v2.77

v2.77-rc2

v2.77-rc1

v2.76b

v2.76a

v2.76

v2.76-rc3

v2.76-rc2

v2.76-rc1

v2.75a

v2.75

v2.75-rc2

v2.75-rc1

v2.74

v2.74-rc4

v2.74-rc3

v2.74-rc2

v2.74-rc1

v2.73a

v2.73

v2.73-rc1

v2.72b

2.72b

v2.72a

v2.72

v2.72-rc1

v2.71

v2.71-rc2

v2.71-rc1

v2.70a

v2.70

v2.70-rc2

v2.70-rc

v2.69

v2.68a

v2.68

v2.67b

v2.67a

v2.67

v2.66a

v2.66

v2.65a

v2.65

v2.64a

v2.64

v2.63a

v2.63

v2.61

v2.60a

v2.60

v2.59

v2.58a

v2.58

v2.57b

v2.57a

v2.57

v2.56a

v2.56

v2.55

v2.54

v2.53

v2.52

v2.51

v2.50

v2.49b

v2.49a

v2.49

v2.48a

v2.48

v2.47

v2.46

v2.45

v2.44

v2.43

v2.42a

v2.42

v2.41

v2.40

v2.37a

v2.37

v2.36

v2.35a

v2.35

v2.34

v2.33a

v2.33

v2.32

v2.31a

v2.31

v2.30

v2.28c

v2.28a

v2.28

v2.27

v2.26

v2.25

Labels

Clear labels   

Interest

Alembic

  

Interest

Animation & Rigging

  

Interest

Asset Browser

  

Interest

Asset Browser Project Overview

  

Interest

Audio

  

Interest

Automated Testing

  

Interest

Blender Asset Bundle

  

Interest

BlendFile

  

Interest

Collada

  

Interest

Compatibility

This issue affects/is about backward or forward compatibility

  

Interest

Compositing

  

Interest

Core

  

Interest

Cycles

  

Interest

Dependency Graph

  

Interest

Development Management

  

Interest

EEVEE

  

Interest

EEVEE & Viewport

  

Interest

Freestyle

  

Interest

Geometry Nodes

  

Interest

Grease Pencil

  

Interest

ID Management

  

Interest

Images & Movies

  

Interest

Import Export

  

Interest

Line Art

  

Interest

Masking

  

Interest

Metal

  

Interest

Modeling

  

Interest

Modifiers

  

Interest

Motion Tracking

  

Interest

Nodes & Physics

  

Interest

OpenGL

  

Interest

Overlay

  

Interest

Overrides

  

Interest

Performance

  

Interest

Physics

  

Interest

Pipeline, Assets & IO

  

Interest

Platforms, Builds & Tests

  

Interest

Python API

  

Interest

Render & Cycles

  

Interest

Render Pipeline

  

Interest

Sculpt, Paint & Texture

  

Interest

Text Editor

  

Interest

Translations

  

Interest

Triaging

  

Interest

Undo

  

Interest

USD

  

Interest

User Interface

  

Interest

UV Editing

  

Interest

VFX & Video

  

Interest

Video Sequencer

  

Interest

Virtual Reality

  

Interest

Vulkan

  

Interest

Wayland

Issues relating to Wayland windowing support.

  

Interest

Workbench

  

Interest: X11

Issues relating to Xorg/X11 support.

  

Legacy

Blender 2.8 Project

  

Legacy

Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser

  

Legacy

OpenGL Error

  

Meta

Good First Issue

  

Meta

Papercut

  

Meta

Retrospective

  

Meta

Security

Issues relating to security: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Process/Vulnerability_Reports

  

Module

Animation & Rigging

  

Module

Core

  

Module

Development Management

  

Module

EEVEE & Viewport

  

Module

Grease Pencil

  

Module

Modeling

  

Module

Nodes & Physics

  

Module

Pipeline, Assets & IO

  

Module

Platforms, Builds & Tests

  

Module

Python API

  

Module

Render & Cycles

  

Module

Sculpt, Paint & Texture

  

Module

Triaging

  

Module

User Interface

  

Module

VFX & Video

  

Platform

FreeBSD

  

Platform

Linux

  

Platform

macOS

  

Platform

Windows

  

Priority

High

  

Priority

Low

  

Priority

Normal

  

Priority

Unbreak Now!

  

Status

Archived

  

Status

Confirmed

  

Status

Duplicate

  

Status

Needs Info from Developers

  

Status

Needs Information from User

  

Status

Needs Triage

  

Status

Resolved

  

Type

Bug

  

Type

Design

  

Type

Known Issue

  

Type

Patch

  

Type

Report

  

Type

To Do

No Label

Interest

Alembic

Interest

Animation & Rigging

Interest

Asset Browser

Interest

Asset Browser Project Overview

Interest

Audio

Interest

Automated Testing

Interest

Blender Asset Bundle

Interest

BlendFile

Interest

Collada

Interest

Compatibility

Interest

Compositing

Interest

Core

Interest

Cycles

Interest

Dependency Graph

Interest

Development Management

Interest

EEVEE

Interest

EEVEE & Viewport

Interest

Freestyle

Interest

Geometry Nodes

Interest

Grease Pencil

Interest

ID Management

Interest

Images & Movies

Interest

Import Export

Interest

Line Art

Interest

Masking

Interest

Metal

Interest

Modeling

Interest

Modifiers

Interest

Motion Tracking

Interest

Nodes & Physics

Interest

OpenGL

Interest

Overlay

Interest

Overrides

Interest

Performance

Interest

Physics

Interest

Pipeline, Assets & IO

Interest

Platforms, Builds & Tests

Interest

Python API

Interest

Render & Cycles

Interest

Render Pipeline

Interest

Sculpt, Paint & Texture

Interest

Text Editor

Interest

Translations

Interest

Triaging

Interest

Undo

Interest

USD

Interest

User Interface

Interest

UV Editing

Interest

VFX & Video

Interest

Video Sequencer

Interest

Virtual Reality

Interest

Vulkan

Interest

Wayland

Interest

Workbench

Interest: X11

Legacy

Blender 2.8 Project

Legacy

Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser

Legacy

OpenGL Error

Meta

Good First Issue

Meta

Papercut

Meta

Retrospective

Meta

Security

Module

Animation & Rigging

Module

Core

Module

Development Management

Module

EEVEE & Viewport

Module

Grease Pencil

Module

Modeling

Module

Nodes & Physics

Module

Pipeline, Assets & IO

Module

Platforms, Builds & Tests

Module

Python API

Module

Render & Cycles

Module

Sculpt, Paint & Texture

Module

Triaging

Module

User Interface

Module

VFX & Video

Platform

FreeBSD

Platform

Linux

Platform

macOS

Platform

Windows

Priority

High

Priority

Low

Priority

Normal

Priority

Unbreak Now!

Status

Archived

Status

Confirmed

Status

Duplicate

Status

Needs Info from Developers

Status

Needs Information from User

Status

Needs Triage

Status

Resolved

Type

Bug

Type

Design

Type

Known Issue

Type

Patch

Type

Report

Type

To Do

Milestone

Clear milestone

No items

No Milestone

Projects

Clear projects

No project

Nodes & Physics

Assignees

Clear assignees

No Assignees

7 Participants

Notifications

Subscribe

Due Date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#109965

No description provided.