Get rid of 'Free Rotate'

was just going to post this, my sentiments on Free Rotate as well, make it in option.

maybe you ought to add "for me" after that cause it definitely doesn't work every time with the chat bar closed for me and i have friends who have the same problem. it seems to depend on your session so you log out and come back and it works again. for a while....

I just used Free Rotate 18 seconds ago.

Did you back up your work first?

I hate free rotate. That's my two cents.

Free rotate needs to click-stop, every 5 degrees, maybe. Otherwise, the control factors make it nearly worthless.

Disagree. Making it so you can't fine tune it would make the feature worthless.

I use this all the time to get an approximate rotation, and then adjust it from that as I need.

I support the "Make it a selectable option" approach, always.

I'm intrigued however that some people say that they've managed to use that mode successfully. How?

The instant that you move the grey ring, you've lost all control since it is impossible for your movement to be precisely aligned with its plane. Maybe some people really want a random result, and that's fair enough. But outside of randomizing the orientation, how can you make that mode do anything useful?

This is a genuine query. I'm intrigued. Maybe there's a trick to it.

I've discovered a few "tricks" to using free rotate successfully. These seem perfectly obvious to some, but seem to completely baffle and escape others, hence the debate here, so I guess I should explain. (By the way, I realize this a fairly long post, but it's almost a tutorial so it has to be. Anyone who wants a solution to his or her rotation problems should read it. Those who just want to bitch at LL for providing tools they don't understand how to use, which sadly is all some people seem to care about, can just ignore this entirely.)

1. Camera angle is everything - I am always flabbergasted by comments like "I hate having to fiddle with camera angles just to rotate something." Constant camera movement for proper alignment in SL or in any 3D modeling application is crucial. In the real world, a sculptor constantly moves his or her head naturally during the process of sculpting. Constantly changing the point of view is what allows the sculpture to be built in 3 dimensions. It is impossible to sculpt otherwise.

The digital sculptor must do the same thing. It should never be thought of as "fiddling" because your camera should ALWAYS be in motion while modeling. Constant camera movement is what allows you to build 3 dimensional objects successfully on a 2-dimensional screen, period. Those who consider aligning the camera at any given moment to be a chore will NEVER be able to model in the same league with those who consider it habit. In fact, most good 3D artists are not even consciously aware of their camera movements while modeling because they do it so much. I would be willing to bet (without exaggeration) that most 3D artists make at least 50,000 to 100,000 individual camera movements while building even the simplest of models, without even realizing it. It's like driving. You don't think about every movement of the steering wheel, the gear shift, the pedals, etc., you just do what needs to be done in response to what you see and feel.

Anyway, how the camera relates to free rotate is simple. First, that white ring so many have complained about here (and so many others have lept up to defend) is a useful tool for those who understand its function. At any given moment, the rotate tool gives you 4 constrained axes to work with. (That's right, four, not just three CONSTRAINED axes.) They are X, Y, and Z, plus the white ring in question, which is always perpendicular to the camera. This fourth axis exists simply as a shortcut for those who wish to use it. You are of course free to use it or just ignore it. It's there because some people prefer to "see" the solution to a rotation problem while others prefer to "calculate" it step by step. "Step-by-steppers" will use the X, Y, and Z rotational axes one at a time to "calculationally" construct the desired total rotation of an object. "Seers" will just look at the prim in question from the proper camera angle and then use the white ring to move a prim all at once. Both methods work just fine. Which one to use just depends on which type of person you are, which method naturally occurs to you. For example, I usually work with the step-by-step method myself, but every once in while that white ring comes in really handy to just force-fit something into place. Other people work oppositely, using the white ring to quickly lay everything out and then using the other 3 for fine tuning. As I said, it's all a matter of preference.

Second, the blank area on the rotate tool between the axes can be useful. When used incorrectly, the results are unpredictable, as many people have mentioned here, but when properly utilized it can be a tremendous time saver. The key is to use the camera as an alignment tool and to use very, very slow hand movements. Just as the white ring operates perpendicular to the camera, the blank area can be used almost as a fifth axis that is inline with the camera. If you have an object you are having trouble fitting into an oddly angled space, try this: Look at that space it from straight on with the object right in front of it. Grab the blank space on the rotate tool that is most dead center in your present point of view, and move the mouse (slowly) straight up and down. You will see that the object will rotate totally in line with the camera. Just don't go too fast or you will lose the alignment and the object will have tendency to flip over.

2. Invest in a good mouse - A lot of the people who complain that the manipulation tools in SL are too fast, too rough, etc. are actually suffering because the sample rate on their mouse is too slow. SL's tools are actually quite precise (even the blank area on the rotate tool) when controlled by a good quality input device. I highly recommend the Logitech MX 510. It retails for about $50 US, and to my knowledge it is the fastest mouse on the market today. I started using one about 2 and a half months ago and it has made an unbelievable difference. Previously I had been using a Microsoft Intellimouse, and since switching to the 510 everything in SL is so much more fluid and controllable, from the camera to the manipulator tools. It's also great for Photoshop by the way. Pixel by pixel movements are so easy to accomplish.

3. Understand that the rotate tool is a solid sphere - Some people have complained that they end up grabbing the white part of the rotate tool even thouhg they have the mouse directly over one of the colored rings. This is due to the fact that the tool iteslef is a sphere. Think of it as a glass ball with 3 rubber bands around it. Because the glass is transparent, you can see each rubber band in its entirity. It's obvious though that only half of each band is actually facing you and that the other half faces away as it wraps around the ball. You can still see it because the ball is transparent, but you can't touch it unless you move your hand behind the ball.

In the computer, you can't just simply move your hand (the mouse pointer) behind the ball because the pointer is always in front of whatever you are looking at. It is always going to select whatever is directly beneath it, in this case the "front of the sphere". Because the blank white area is transparent, you can see each roataional axis ring entirely, just as you could see each rubber band entirely, but you can only select the part of the the ring that is facing you. Clicking over a part of a ring that faces away is actually clicking on the "glass", the blank area of the tool, which is in front of that part of the ring.

It's not hard to tell which part of a ring is facing you and which part is facing away. The parts facing away are fainter, since they have the surface of the grayish white sphere in front of them. The parts directly facing you are unobscured and are colored brightly. Make sure you always grap the brightest part of the ring. Never try to grab a faint part or you'll end up free-rotating your object instead of constrain-rotating it and you won't like the results.


4. Never blame the system for your own mistakes - It amazes me how many people here are complaining about the free rotate getting in the way of their constrained rotate. I can't imagine a scenario where this is possible. The X, Y, and Z rings are always right there, plain as day, very simple to grab hold of. Sure, you can mistakenly grab the space in between them instead of one of the rings themselves from time to time, but that's your own mistake. The blank are did not jump up in front of that bright red ring you were going for to sabotage you. You, all by yourself, clicked on the wrong part of the screen. It happens. No big deal. Sometimes I open IE when I mean to open Firefox because the 2 icons are right next to each other on my quick launch bar, but I don't go around blaming Microsoft that they should eliminate the feature that allows me to make that mistake. The quicklaunch bar is very useful, just as the free rotate ability in SL is useful. If you click it by mistake, that's your own fault. Just hit ctrl z and do it over again. It's not the end of the world. Maybe spend some effort learning to control where you click with a little more precision.

There are arguments here that LL should increase the width of manipulator rings to decrease the chance of accidentally clicking elsewhere. Maybe they should, but keep in mind that SL already has the widest manipulator rings I've ever seen. In most programs they are just hairlines. SL already has them as fairly large 3-dimensional cylinders. How much bigger can they go before it gets ridiculous?

5. Practice, practice, practice - If you are one of the people on this thread who despises free rotate, ask yourself if you've ever really tried to master it. Have you legitimately tried to develop a technique for using it or do you just find yourself accidentally clicking on it, producing results you didn't anticipate because you thought you had clicked on one of the rings, and then getting mad about it? I would suggest spending some time actually using the free rotate tools before you dismiss them. As I said, they ARE useful. Challenge yourself. How about seeing if you can build a dome out of triangles using nothing but free rotate? That should give you more than enough practice. You'll probably spend the first few attempts wanting to tear your hair out, but eventually you'll learn something valuable. If not, no big deal. Just make sure you keep clicking on the red, blue, and green, and just ignore the white and gray stuff. It's not gonna hurt you if you leave it alone.


Okay, so there's my 2 cents on free rotate. I hope that helps some people.


Edited to add point number 3, about the spherical nature of the rotate tool.

Like others have said, I'ld like the option to switch free-rotate off in favor of a contrained rotate. OR just make those red/blue/green bands bigger...whichever. Not that i've never used free rotate or don't find it useful, but for building on the most part, it's a nightmare.

even though someone said "don't blame the system" i'ma blame the system hehe. there are alot of view angles where you can put your pointer definitely no doubt on a colored ring but when you click you get free rotate. sometimes half the ring really works and the other half is only there for looks and gives you free rotate. i don't feel bad at all blaming the system for that.

That's called existence in 3D space. The half that you say "doesn't work" is not "only there for looks". It just happens to be BEHIND the blank area of the tool, making it unselectable. Just select the half that is IN FRONT of the sphere, not the half that is in back.

By the way, it is imperative to understand that the rotation tool is a sphere. You can't click on a sphere and expect the computer to somehow know that you mean to select the back of it. You're gonna end up selecting the front of it, whether the front be an axis ring or a part of the blank space. Wherever you click, rotate tool or otherwise, you are ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, going to end up selecting whatever is in front. It's a fundamental rule of the universe, and it's part of the reason mastering camera movement is so important.

That having been said, it's not very hard to tell which part of the rotate tool is closest to you. It's pretty plain to see when one part of a ring is discolored because it is behind the whiteness of the sphere and the rest of it is the color it's supposed to be. However, since there obviously is some confusion here, maybe coloration is not enough of an indicatior. Maybe they should change it so that the back part is dotted instead of solid or something.

ANyway, I thought this was common sense, which was why I didn't mention it in my earlier post, but apparently it's not. I hate to say it, but I'm starting to get the feeling that some people's brains are just not naturally built for 3D modeling. Let me put it this way, not to single anyone out in particular, but if you are someone who can't look at something like the rotate tool and instantly know it is a sphere that like all spheres will always have half facing you and half facing away from you, then you either should not be attempting 3D modeling at all or else you should head over to a local college and maybe take a class or two in it. There is a fundamental understanding of how 3D works that you are just missing entirely. I wish I could be of more help, but there's only so much you can explain without actually showing.

haha, if we don't like free rotate we're not good enough to use it. sorry Free Rotate for insulting your function. i guess it's not all obvious and common sense or we wouldn't have this thread would we? unless we're all too dumb to figure out 3D or whatever. blah blah blah, i think we got to the "make it an option, don't cut it out completely" stage a long time ago so don't feel like you gotta make implied insults to save free rotate hehe.

Zuzi, I think you misunderstood my meaning. Sorry if that was because you read my post before I re-edited it to chage a couple of sentences. I was not trying to accuse anyone of being dumb or trying to "save" free rotate. What I was, and still am, trying to do was to help by offering people better understanding of how to use the thing.

The "make it an option" idea is already in play. You have the option to click on it or not to click on it. It's there for your use if you want to use it and it's free to ignore if you don't want to use it. The problem is that people who don't understand the nature of the tool (and believe me it works pretty much the same in all modeling programs) are having trouble using it. What I'm trying to do is offer some understanding so people can avoid the problems they are having.

It's an all too common theme that when some residents discover things about SL they don't understand how to use, their first instinct is to demand a change to the system, when in actuality the system is fine and all that is necessary is a little education on how the thing in question works. There are many things that really do need changing and many that don't. Whatever the case may be though, I believe the best solution is ALWAYS to learn to master the current situation. We can complain all day long that certain things may not meet our instincts for how to use them and ask that they be changed, and if they do get changed, great, but in the mean time we have to work with what we already have.

You can choose to bitch at me for trying to help people use what is available now instead of jumping on the Let's Complain Until It Changes band wagon (like others have in the past) or you can slow down and realize (like a great many more have) that if you make minor chages in your own techniques while you're waiting for the changes to the system you can have much better results and much more peace of mind. The choice is yours.

On a related note, I am missing something -- where is "Rotate To Grid" (specified by # of angles at a time)... also, where is "Stretch To Grid"?

*chuckles* Just so you're aware, I am perfectly aware of how the Free Rotate tool works. The problem is, that this function right and truly does indeed suck at the moment; it likes to work when I don't want it to. I don't want to click on it, ever. It covers and blocks access to the majority of the constrained rotate rings, making them more difficult to use, and I don't think I'm reaching when I say that the majority of users want constrained rotate, not free rotate. I'm not even going to touch the horror that lag turns this feature into.

Hehe, I realize some people do use this evil, horrible, nasty, awful thing (nope, no loaded language here! ), so I suppose they ought to keep it around, but for heaven's sake, let me turn it off.

Thanks Chosen!

I learned a couple of things. I didn't know that there was white constrained movement and your explanation of free movement was helpful.

I like the free rotate feature, when rotating prims I often get confused as to which way is what and end up spending several minutes trying to punch in angles by hand. And helps in getting those pesky avatar attachments to look right and change the angle of attachments when using animations too.

It's more handy than it seems.

I use both constrained rotations and free rotations sometimes. Holding down an extra key to toggle between being allowed free rotate and not would be an acceptable change to me - there are times when I click the wrong part or don't look closely enough and do something daft, swear, cntl+Z and do it properly. Giving me a keyboard toggle would slightly improve my productivity... Giving me a checkbox toggle seems easier, but actually means rebuilding the edit window which is already pretty full.

If we are going to do that, similar ones for 'stretch both sides' toggling and 'snap to grid' would be a welcome addition - I toggle both of those quite often too.

Free Rotate works fine for me. Something I use quite often in combination with numerical rotation numbers.

Free rotate helps me understand the vectoring better of an object.

But thats just me...Id be sorely upset if it were ever removed as its a fast and functional tool that would take twice as long otherwise.

Shadow's .02$

Chosen, that was a very good "tutorial" type post, you clearly put a lot of effort into it, thanks.

Unfortunately, it didn't address the key question that I thought I'd raised about free rotate, and on rereading my post I can see why --- I assumed that the problem was obvious when I used the word random instead of explaining the actual issue, but it's not, as nobody else has mentioned it. Sorry, let me try again.

I don't have any problem whatsoever with only accessing the grey ring when I need to, or with grabbing the right part of the glass 3D sphere, or finding the 3 constrained rings when I need them, or anything like that. Those are issues of UI ergonomics and nobody can ever agree on ergonomics. No, what I was trying to point my worry finger at was a completely different issue. It's this:

Let me try to explain what I mean by comparing it with its cousin, free translational movement.

If you grab an object with the rotate key pressed but outside of the grey sphere then you're in free translate mode, ie. completely free 3D movement of the object with its current rotation fixed. Notice that there is total continuity of motion. Whatever kind of mouse movement you make, in whatever direction, and however small or large, the object moves in a corresponding and completely proportional fashion. If you make a movement in one particular direction, you can always reverse the change this has made to the object by an identical movement in the opposite direction.

And it's entirely free translational movement so unless you're pixel-perfect (mouxel-perfect?) in your movements then you cannot expect perfect adjustments in the object, that's understood: but because of the total and complete continuity and proportionality, you can always get where you want to eventually by a process of successive approximation.

This is not true with free rotate.

When you grab an object within the free rotate sphere, the point by which you grabbed it will follow your pointer with total continuity and proportionality --- that's the same as in free translate. Unfortunately, no other point on the object obeys continuity. Not even the tiniest and most precise movement with a high-rez mouse (afaics) can make the object move its unconstrained axes in either a predictable or a proportional way. The grabbed point will always move only infinitessimally for an infinitessimal mouse movement, but the other axes can move an arbitrary amount, in either direction, and you cannot control which. Even worse, once they have moved in that direction, reversing the mouse motion does not reverse that movement (except by accident), instead it's random yet again.

This is hard to explain without pointing to a screen while you look over my shoulder, but the general lack of continuity should be apparent from the relatively rapid random and jerky motion of the unconstrained axes despite a very slow and smooth motion of the mouse. The lack of continuity is actually a product of the lack of proportionality in the movement and the non-determinism in which of the unconstrained axes actually decide to move.

I don't think that I can explain it better than that. I'm all for free-form controls, they have a very valuable role in specific types of manipulation. But continuity, proportionality and determinism are necessary properties of any tool for humans (unless it's a randomizing tool), and those three properties are absent in free rotate, unlike its properly working cousin free translate.

I'm still hoping for a trick that forces free rotate into free but proportional and deterministic rotation, but it wasn't given in your tutorial. The choice of camera angle is very important as you say, but good choice of camera position only yields smooth proportional movement of the grabbed point, not of the free axes. They remain totally out of control even under the best, least tangential camera position. If there's a special camera position that avoids the free axes slipping out randomly then I'd love to know about it!

i've noticed that the selection area for the green/blue/red rings is a little bit smaller than i think it should be. they are then hardered to select than they should be and it makes it easy to accidentally click them, i think if they just made it a little easier to click on those rings, it would probobly get rid of most of these peoples problems

In my caffine deprived state I think I actually understand that...

This would make a nice option. I frequently have to undo rotations because my mouse slipped a pixel and missed a ring before clicking to rotate. I rarely use free rotate, so I would probably leave it unchecked most of the time.

The rings can be very hard to grab sometimes, even when it appears that my mouse is over one and it should highlight.

Personally I find free rotate to be a paint-in-the-you-know-where. But as some seem to like it, I'd say either have a (persitent , please!) checkbox to enable/disable it, OR make the white ring a much different size to the RGB rings, so we can miss it more easily.