Hello,
I started working on a welcome screen proposal. The idea is quite classical nowadays, it is a screen that shows at start time, and provides users with some key features that are very often used (file creation, load a file among the most recently used…), and to key information resources (tutorials, forum…).
Here is a picture of current status of the UI. It is a view from the developer editor, so it is not exactly what would be displayed (build revision would be written, white frames would be pictures of the tutorial…).
For some reason the discourse forum has some difficulty with expanding images.
Can you upload a png, svg, or pdf of this image so we can look at the details?
You can right click on the image and select your browser’s equivalent to “open image in new tab” or “view image” in order to see the full-sized image. It’s slightly annoying, though.
I’m not familiar with programming but just designing models. In my opinion, having a more orderly and intuitive start page in the choice facilitates navigation. In my opinion and a great idea. If I learn to use the program well then I can contribute to the growth of the forum. At this time I find it difficult to find the help or information I need.
However thanks for the program and the nice job you are doing.
Excuse my English but write with the translator
Laura from Rome
I think the welcome screen should contain pattern wizards that can aid the creation of simple blocks such as tops, sleeves, and trousers in a matter of seconds. This make it easy for newbies to get a quick understanding of how things work, as well as facilitate the work process.
Opening page - great idea. Especially for a newbie, but also for experienced users.
Information on the available sources, forum, bitbucket etc. and what each is for would be great.
I’m hoping to upload some basic blocks to the pattern share website soon. The proposed startup page could enquire of the list of available starting points using a web service and then permit opening them directly, without the user needing to go to the pattern share website.
Excellent, perhaps we could exchange ideas on what kind of blocks to provide, as well as how they would be drawn using Valentina to enable easy editing. I look forward to seeing how you draw your blocks.
Though I should further explain that the pattern wizard I have in mind is a tool for creating a generic block where you can enter specs such as neck width, armhole depth, clothes length etc., and a pattern is generated based on these info. Think of it as automation for drawing in Valentina. It probably won’t be too hard to implement, even now I can use an external program like Auto hotkey to mimic the process, though an internal script would be better.
As an example I’ve just posted the very simplest block from Winifred Aldrich’s book.
(I’ve gone to some lengths to ensure that we can attribute the authors and books appropriately where we create Valentina representations of blocks from books. It would be good to get authors and publishers on side, it should lead to more book sales, not less.)
In this case, the skirt length is an increment.
By using a combination of Valentina’s standard body measurements and increments to drive pattern specific details quite complex pattern features can be fully automated.
I use 4-way stretch fabric and so use increments do drive negative ease as a percentage. (Apologies if I’m using the wrong terminology, I’m quite new to this.). Increments can also be used as switches, e.g. to control whether a dart is included or not.
Which patternmaking system do you want to implement? Please study how to make blocks using several different systems, then decide which one you think implements the least amount of ethnic body-shape bias and perfect-body assumptions.
(you’ll want to use the system which utilizes the most individual measurements, and the least amount of ratios and body proportions. It’s the body proportions which cause patterns not to fit very well, and to require manual fittings.). And you’ll need to state that the block being created is from “X” system.
We don’t want to mislead users into thinking that a simple-to-create block using only a few measurements will fit.
The plan years ago was to implement this feature for ALL patternmaking systems.
But the current implementation of the patternmaking system templates don’t perform the function that would enable this feature.
So I do like this idea, it’s something we’ve wanted, but pick a system to start with and then we can implement it with the understanding that the user will eventually be able to pick their preferred system and generate that system’s blocks. Or pick their own system from the list (!) and generate their blocks.
I’m fully aware that a single pattern system won’t do for everyone, it’s just like commercially produced clothes, their intention is for it to fit the maximum amount of people, but in reality it fits no body perfectly.
With this I mind, I would suggest not implementing a pattern system at all, since many pattern systems relies on one to two body measurements (bust circumference is used a lot), making it impossible to fully implement them, one would have to decide whether to keep a ratio or use a body measurement. Another thing is that certain systems are kept secretive, making them open source may lead to copyright issues…
Agreed, one should use either their own body measurements + ease or rely on a pattern system that they picked for themselves that suits their race/ethnicity.
Therefore I’m proposing a pattern generator that uses precalculated specs, not involving drawing methods. If one wishes to use a specific bodice block, they’d have to draw it themselves, after all each system follows very different methods, even in the same system, the block for men and women may use, for instance, two different ways to determine the shoulder slope.
I want to discuss with people on the forum who have experience in pattern making to help establish the necessary fields required to complete a standard top, sleeve or pants. I have a list of fields already in mind which I’ll post back if my idea is well accepted.
To give anyone who is interested in getting an idea of just how impossible it would be to use a ‘one-sizing-system-fits-all’, may I suggest perusing this study?
Hmmm…I’m truly not trying to be obnoxious here, really I’m not. However…
None of the over 50 pattern system books on my shelves use only one to two measurements, so which systems do you refer to? I’m curious…
If you’re using formulas to make patterns then you’re using a pattern system, even if you came up with with your own system. Everyone who uses Valentina is using a system whether they realize it or not.
Also the Introduction to “End of Average” is a “look inside” chapter. It lays out how the Air Force learned this lesson decades ago, but the fashion industry still hasn’t paid attention, so we have crappy fitting clothes.
https://www.amazon.com/End-Average-Succeed-Values-Sameness/dp/0062358367
@alexw32 The block generating feature is in our roadmap.
Starting with one system’s block generators is basically what you’ve proposed.
I’m not trying to shut you down, but to expand your suggestion so that it is useful to the most people.
There actually ARE pattern systems which produce blocks that DON’T create lumps in the armscye, that aren’t too small in the neck, and that don’t require manual adjustment for each individual’s bra cup size. However, many systems have these flaws plus additional ones.
As far as implementing instructions from a book into code, this has been explored frequently in the courts. The printed page and artwork is copyrighted, not the content or the instruction steps. It’s important to give attribution to a system, but if significant changes have been made to it then it’s the programmer’s call to cite the system or not. Knuth’s work is a good example!
So to sum up, it’s okay to code up instructions from a book.
Is it possible to focus on the initial topic : implementing a welcome screen, and choosing its initial content. It is my first attempt for a significant contribution in Valentina, and the project recently lost its lead developer, so please stick with pragmatic feedback…
Here is a picture of current status of the UI. It is a view from the developer editor, so it is not exactly what would be displayed (build revision would be written, white frames would be pictures of the tutorial…).
What do you think?
I really like the idea of a welcome screen. The concept @yannlossouarn suggested looks like a good concept.
I would suggest that one of the first steps is that somebody build new binaries from source and test them (on each platform) to see that they have not regressed from the last build from the dismine repository.
IMHO, only after we have a new baseline would it be reasonable to add ANY new feature. This may not be a trivial issue. The documentation on how to do a build in each environment is not readily apparent. (at least to me). Please do not respond to the issue of a new build in this thread. I will start a new thread under developer for that discussion
(Please forgive any appearances of presumption. My coding days were looong before Github/etc., and never with a team.)
When I was coding and wanted to add a new feature, there were two things I needed to know right from the start: what does this depend on, and what could depend on it. As long as nothing depends on@yannlossouarn’s intro screen, can he not start coding it right now, and fill in dependencies when it is ready for prime time? If this is like most projects I’ve looked at, a simple compiler directive could -by default- disable it for everyone who didn’t explicitly enable it when they were compiling.
