An Open Letter to the Blender Foundation

Archive User Feedback
277

It was for that reason that I concealed the removal of the wireframe so that I gained a bad reputation among some. And I advocated a change in the way the UX was designed, which felt like a kick in the ass to a lot of people.

There’s no point in doing user testing if you make decisions like that.

I understand this procedure, in fact, it is something I have already said many times. The foundation expects people to spend their time, months, to do something and to present it, without any guarantee of any change, not even of attention.

And as a person who has made literally hundreds of UX proposals to blender and knows that they are usually not even read by anyone at UI. I know that it’s an impossible procedure if the lead of the module doesn’t want to.

1 Like
278

Should Blender establish User Experience as a core value?

Let’s be realists, UI/UX is a business tool to make money.

You make the UI better to give users a better UX, so that they continue to pay for your product and do not go to competitors. That’s why everyone and everywhere talks so much about UI/UX, and you know these specific, professional terms.

Nobody cares about users, no business will change/improve UI simply because it will make the product better if it does not increase profits. Professional UX designers will confirm it.

So, what we have; Blender is not about money, and Blender actually has no competitors, there is no other free 3D app, or at least quite cheap. For large studios that can pay thousands of dollars UI/UX is not in the first place, they choose Blender for other reasons.

As a personal example, I bought Affinity Photo instead of free Gimp, only for UI/UX reasons. But I can’t pay e.g. for C4D, so I will continue to use Blender with any UI.

So the answer to “Should Blender…” is it can, but doesn’t have to. There are no external forces that would lead to this. It all depends on the organization’s goals.

1 Like
279

By that logic Open Source would never exist in the first place as everything would only be driven by getting people to pay for your product and nothing else. I know Juan Linietsky from Godot cares deeply about UX and tries to imrove on it with everything he does and he urges people developing for Godot to do the same. He has nothing to gain from it but he cares. I guess people do have different motives for their actions. Otherwise people would never put money or effort into free software, either.

Guess it depends where a person falls on the spectrum between idealism and capitalism as I think there is rarely a clear cut separation, either.

2 Likes
280

I strongly disagree. I work with probably 15-20 UX designers, and they all care about the user, they are not all the best at their job though, like in any profession, some are better than others. In some cases my experience with actual users and solutions is bigger than theirs because they only have less experience etc.

There’s a lot of bad UX work being done, a lot of buzz wording and bullshit merchants, but there’s a lot of bad house building and mechanics work on your car too, doesn’t make the whole area of expertise bad in it self. Like mentioned you need the right people. And like Alberto points out, the right people need to be open for it after the work is done and on the way. Top down as Chipp says, I know the same from my work, you can do the best work ever, but if it’s not attached far enough up the chain, nothing happens.

I’m pretty sure that Ton wants as many corporations as possible to put their money and trust in Blender, so yes it’s about money, I have yet to find a thing in life that isn’t about money. You want people to download Blender and not close it and never use it again, like I did twice. I’m very impatient. And it’s the same for other applications, you need to give a good first impression. I compare it to a Youtube video nowadays, even if you have the best movie ever, you need something to grab you quickly. You can’t always be JUST a special interest thing. I think Blender moved past that with 2.8

3 Likes
281

@SpookyDoom @neXib

I don’t see what you disagree with me about.
Just like I said: “It all depends on the organization’s goals.”

If your goal is good user feedback on your product - UX is your goal in itself.
If your goal is money - UX is your main tool (if we talk about consumer products).

But you may have other goals, where UX is not the most important.

282

I don’t think your example really works for me. You could use Krita instead of Gimp. Krita has a more recognizable UI, whereas Gimp is very special interest (left is right, up is down), that I’d classify old Blender as too. As I interpret Gimp it’s not special interest because it’s free, it’s because they want to. It doesn’t mean they don’t want people to use it, it could just mean they don’t want to copy Photoshop.

Whether they are free or not, most product creators want their products to become popular or at least enjoyed by their user. They may have a boundary or rules to follow while doing that, but still what I disagreed with was that UX is important mainly for selling your software. I think the most purely effective 3D tool is somewhere between code and a lot of inputs. The reason Blender isn’t that is because they want people to use it that aren’t engineers.

283

It’s one thing to want more users or money, it’s another thing to want to do what it takes to make it so. Which are different things, even more so if they clash with the philosophy he wants for the project.

I myself have tried to explain to the foundation fundamental problems of blender that prevent its growth and use and I have found a wall of philosophy that makes it unviable to make decisions that for a normal company would be obvious.

Sometimes it’s that the developers don’t want to see it, everyone has their egos. And other times it is impossible to make another person understand something that you see clearly. The issue of UX, for example, there was no reason not to make its development different, someone simply did not want to take that path.

I’m going to give you an example of a piece of UX that I’ve asked for active and passive, which is a silly thing to implement for someone with knowledge. That when one positions the 3D Cursor automatically the pivot mode passes to 3D Cursor. That nonsense would help the usability what is not written. Well, I’ve been trying to convince someone of something so basic for about a year, even if it’s a volunteer developer. There’s no way.

2 Likes
285

Hi Howard,

Thanks again for taking your valuable time to engage. It is great to hear from “hands on” contributors.

And other than my monthly donations, I have only penned thoughts and ideas on how to improve Blender, and do not have any real “skin in the game.”

And that is perhaps your point-- a valid one at that.

I’m not suggesting I’m the right person for the job, only that if asked to contribute, I would. I personally think placing the right person in a full time leadership role, as Steve Jobs did with Jony Ivey, would affect change in the most positive of ways.

Perhaps you are correct, such a course might succeed, though my expectations is it would not.

I think a private undertaking, without support or agency, would certainly cause to question (and rightfully so) any recommendations or findings with respect to the validity or completeness of the research.

IMO, as soon as the Blender Leadership steps forward and places a priority and approves such an effort, will it have the chance it needs to move forward.

286

Sure, but if not you, then who? How could Blender leadership find someone who would do this job really well and also, as I said above, “mesh” with the team in a compatible or at least productive way?

From my observations, Blender finds its paid positions from people who have shown their stuff by volunteer contributions that are useful, show good abilities, and generally make people feel “yeah, I’d like to work with them.” This is not the only way in, I think, but by far the most common one. You will probably want to reply something along the lines of: well, first step is to make the decision to at least try to hire such a person, and then advertise on https://www.blender.org/jobs/ and interview/assess any candidates. I guess it is up to Ton et al. to decide if the coffers can afford another position, and if so, if this is the highest priority one to fill.

3 Likes
287

Howard,

My thoughts on:

Please add “IMO” to the beginning to each sentence :wink:

  1. First step is for Blender leadership to agree, User Experience should be a core value.

  2. Next, I would ask Blender to create a leadership position for someone with the experience, time and energy to help put together a plan. I’d not think it need be a paid position-- at least not at first. Talented consultants in UX and UI typically get $250+/hr for their work, so it may be better to seek out a similarly qualified volunteer.

  3. Assuming that person is familiar with 3D and hopefully Blender specifically, they would then spend a good amount of time researching how the Foundation works, what is the history of how UX and UI decisions have been made in the past, and who are the key contributors– and get to know them and their individual processes. The point is NOT to come on board firing away at problem areas (there are many), but instead try and understand how the current Blender came to be.

  4. The person should at the same time begin to work with the team to formulate an overall strategy with regard to settling the issue of priority w/regard to ease of use vs functionality. IOW, how important is it that Blender offer an easy on ramp experience vs slowing down advanced feature development? Perhaps adding features is more important and the UX should focus more on making them less obtuse? Or, perhaps work should be done to create an easier learning curve so that more people can use Blender? In either case, it would be good to create such a document-- not set in stone, but one that could be referenced later.
    This allows everyone a starting point for “being on the same page” when discussing UX ideas down the road.

  5. Then, after doing all the research into how the Blender team works, and having a basic understanding of the priorities around UX, the person should put together a roadmap for next steps including:

  • Outreach to both new and existing users for feedback.
  • Create a Customer Journey which tells the story of the customer’s experience: from initial contact, through the process of engagement and into a long-term relationship.
  • Use the results to move to the next step, where the team can begin to put together a more thorough strategy that encompasses the existing BF system of development and the requirements of users.
  • Identify and begin looking for any necessary resource requirements.This could mean approaching companies known for their UX work, like Apple, Google and others to see if they would help Blender with such an effort.

I would expect all of this to be completed in the first 6 months, assuming there are no unforeseen roadblocks.

4 Likes
288

Would it further complicate things that the many areas of Blender are designed for different fields with different requirements? Hard to imagine there can be a unified approach when for example looking at Grease Pencil which is intuitive an simple to use, VS Particle Nodes which has a far steeper learning curve from a technical point of view.

I’d also be interested if consultation from companies like Google and Apple with an experience in very different areas could benefit such a specialized discipline or if their input could cause harm due to their lack of production experience in the fields Blender is used at?

I’m genuinely interested, I know next to nothing about UX.

289

You could use Krita instead of Gimp.

Exactly, I can use Krita, Gimp, Pixelmator, Affinity Photo or even Photoshop it’s not that expensive. There is competition here - it is an external force that makes you care about UX even if you don’t want to. I don’t see this external force in the case of Blender, there can only be an inner desire that doesn’t exist right now. I just wanted to say that there is a need and there is just a desire, it’s different.

290

By resources, I’m mostly referring to capital ($$$) and perhaps access to testing facilities or other pro-UX connections they may have.

1 Like
291

Ah, got you. Thank you for clarifying.

292

Why do you think there is no such person amongst the UI team already?

And why do you think all that you mention, that is just a normal way to approach a new project analisys in any team, has not already been done?

And once and for all, why do you keep repeating:

When it has been said here many times that:

1.- It’s already a core value

2.- It has been worked and it’s contunuously worked in the UI team

And finally:

Do you value something the UI team that it’s present right now in the Core dev team?

Because for your words it seems that you don’t value them, their experience and their work at all, and you talk as if they were not part of the team and if they were not contunuously working and fighting for improving things, and I say fighting because sometimes it can be a real fight to reach a high quality result to the complex problems they face everyday.

UI/UX have room for improvement in Blender in many ways, from many points of view, but I don’t think trashing all the work that has been done and it’s being done already is a good way to focus on it.

I myself don’t agree with several decisions made, as some others, but that does not mean that the UI team, as the rest of the team, is not working hard and putting a lot of effort, or that they don’t know what they are doing, if there is some idea to improve UI/UX right now, great, but we have a great team working on it, so instead of trying to bring a new person that may or may not know what Blender is all about, specially if it’s a volunteer, because in such an important position a volunteer could decide to stop working at any time, it’s better if some good proposals, documents and ideas are properly presented to the current team IMHO, we have a great value in house, and often this gets over-watched.

5 Likes
293

Agreed, and that was what I was referring to when I said that I think that is one of the reasons chippwalters is not getting full-throated support from the whole Blender team here.

In particular, I think there is a more coherent set of organizing UI/UX principles that the UI team has decided upon and uses to drive their decisions than the group here at large may know. They certainly could do more to write those down and publicize them, but I see evidence of them when I interact with the UI team.

One thing that I see missing from what is being done today is systematic testing with representative users from all the expected kinds of Blender users. At the moment, there is observational testing with experienced professionals working on the Open Movie projects, but that is not at all representative of all users. Such systematic testing is hard to do or at least takes a lot of time, and is one of the things that a new person concentrating on UX could bring to the table.

8 Likes
294

IMO, It would be good to have them written down. Unless these goals and objectives are written down and prioritized, it’s not possible to claim UX as a core Blender value. In this case, written words matter.

I believe there also needs to be an understanding regarding expectations for onboarding new users and the priorities for setting their user experiences along with a strategy for adding new features to compete with Maya, After Effects, Substance Designer, Zbrush, Premiere, and Houdini.

If not, we risk creating on demand and ad hoc UI for each new feature as it’s added-- and it won’t be long until we have another UI mess on our hands like pre 2.8.

I’ve pretty much explained my position. Now I’m just rehashing it over and over. FWIW, I think unless there’s anything new, my contributions to this thread have pretty much run their course.

1 Like
295

Completely agree. All the improvements rolling out over the releases since 2.8 did have major improvements in UX as well. And the blogposts also seem like there are more planned. IT would still be super good if the team is willing to shere their plans for this just like for the other major features planned as well.

It might also put some users at ease as is, already. :slight_smile:

1 Like
296

Once more, you speak like if the UI team is not there.
Of course the objectives are set and written down, there is a medium/long term plan going on.

And once again it seems you are diminishing and ignoring the UI team work, that’s not happening, that’s one of the main things the UI team works in, like for example the asset manager is not here already because they want a solid UI/UX for it.

And I think that’s the wrong way of looking at it, Blender has never evolved because they go after what other software do, it’s based on production of different types needs, and in fact Ton himself asked a few weeks ago to stop looking at other softwares and start thinking by ourselves (it’s a resume).

3 Likes
297

Your assumption is that there are no design standards? Why do you assume that?

ADDING: I searched, with Google, and had no problem finding one.

1 Like