But you are not transforming the gizmo, you are transforming mesh vertices.
And currently, position of vertices is updated in realtime when moving the pointer.
Maybe you want to take a look at Maya or Houdini to see how it can help. My take is it’s more useful in hard surface modeling or scene assembly than in sculpting, but it’s probably valid in all areas where there is a gizmo, which is why I’m vouching for it. Is vouching the right term ? Maybe not… you know what I mean !
Do you have any idea of what are you talking about? It’s pretty much impossible to precisely position the gizmo pivot in sculpt mode with it invisible.
Do you think we are asking for this just for the sake of asking? LOL
To me this is a high priority bug. https://developer.blender.org/T63743
And don’t compare modes like object/edit with sculpt mode, they are totally unrelated and they require a very different way of working.
You’re not talking about the same thing. @RonanDucluzeau means showing the gizmo while transforming, you mean setting the pivot point by hand.
Are you kidding me?
Please read carefully my post several times until you get it. Also check the quote to my old request post right there, to see what I’m talking about.
9/30/20 Update
I have made an approximate representation of how the above described would be distributed on the screen.
It’s about having the minimum Active Tools, three submodes and expose the method.
Active Tools: Sculpt, Transform, Simulate, Colorize, Mask, Hide, Crop, Face Sets, Sample, Annotate.
As in Edit mode I would add three submodes: Brush stroke, Shape Projection, Object affectation. And with 1,2,3 of the keyboard you would quickly access these submodes.
The Methods could be found under a Pie Menu too, on key 4.
There are many gaps, but the basis of the proposal is this.
2 Likes
I’m trying to help disambiguate, I would appreciate you didn’t insult me in return. If I didn’t get it right, there exist a number of ways to say it that are nicer than that.
@wevon this categorization makes sense to me ! so much clearer. Now I think Pablo meant to merge sculpt and paint brushes… so maybe he intended for all these to end up grouped in the same tool. I sculpt mostly for print so I don’t know too much about vertex painting anyway.
Why does the stroke method enum get to sit in the header ? For lack of space maybe ?
1 Like
Hey stop stop stop, we ain’t on BA
To use it as a sub-sub mode, and make the attributes of the tools and presets dependent on this sub-sub mode, but I don’t even see it very clear myself, I think it could stay in the tool settings, but giving it more visibility .
In the ShapeProjection submode I propose, the shape used, should be visible at first sight (rectangular, lasso …) without entering any mode.
Perhaps in the same way that the size of the brush is exposed, the method could be exposed too, and it would be enough.
How are you able to move the gizmo without moving the mesh ?
Are you using an addon ?
There is absolutely no option to reposition the gizmo that way in Sculpt mode.
Except if you mask the whole mesh and hide mask overlay, to do that.
Currently in Sculpt mode, move gizmo is only supposed to move mesh vertices. You don’t have access to Affect Only Origins like in object mode.
And that would be a lot more logical to ask for some thing similar than an ugly trick implying to mask the whole mesh.
I understand that is a problem if you are out of blender standard who is to reposition gizmo by repositioning pivot using a shortcut.
But there is no way to understand that if people are assuming that you are referring to how blender currently works.
And by reading the task, I am sure that developers are understanding the request like me.
The task does not mention the repositioning of pivot. It is only talking about the gizmo.
It is about an animator’s request.
When Pablo added transform tools in Sculpt mode, more than one year ago, he was using shortcuts to reposition pivot. I am saying that, at least, having the same by default, should minimize problem.
But if people are requesting to reposition pivot in Sculpt mode by using gizmo, I am fine with that. But they should say it using the right words.
That’s what I did in the video. But again, while the gizmo disappears while transforming, the transform tools are pretty much unworkable in sculpt mode.
No, they are aware. People have been asking for this for a long time now, even for edit mode.
1 Like
That’s right, and both here and on BA we like respectful, constructive replies, not starting with…
or
Thanks in advance.
2 Likes
I see nothing wrong with that. Full grown men should be able to handle real talk like that just fine, unless I’m talking with children. If that’s the case then sorry.
And that’s the reason I don’t visit BA anymore. The amount of nonsensical crying and people defending bugs is just too much. I hope this forum don’t get infected by that type of mentality!
In written discussion, words are easily interpreted in a harsher way due to a lack of facial expression, voice intonation and other feedback. All I’m asking is for you to be aware of that. Understanding and acknowledging that is what I expect from a mature person. Thanks.
7 Likes
Now, I get what you are expecting. I see how that simple change would help you.
If Pablo mentioned it, he get it.
But you should not take for granted that developers will add this :
If description of task is not updated to take into account interest in sculpt mode, to have a tool that does not force to mask the whole mesh, first : that means there is no warranty that will be done.
The thing is, if this stuff is not done, then I guess it would be better to just remove the transform tools altogether from the sculpt mode. No point keeping it there if it can’t work as expected.
horizontal toolbar
But please only as an option. On the modern ‘Lowscreen’ monitors vertical space is scarce and I personally much prefer the double-row vertical toolbar to a horizontal one at the bottom.
A horizontal one at the bottom is going to run out of space eventually as well, and then you’d have a double row at the bottom. Which is even worse. I’d even prefer a quadruple vertical row to a double horizontal one I think.
1 Like
Monitors are getting wider, not taller. But don’t worry, it should be optional of course, even though if I had to choose one, the horizontal would win. (future proof) 
1 Like
Hence ‘Lowscreen’. 
I doubt screens will be getting wider faster than tools will be added to the sculpt mode though. 
I don’t really understand why the horizontal one would be more futureproof. Vertical space is a lot scarcer. And it’s only getting worse with the ever widening monitors.