Ok, ok, you're a very good debater When I find some free time, I'll do some more iterations/variations/experiments with these and post 'em.ilac wrote:Thought I'd also quote Karim opinion which I agree with very stongly. I don't think the recessed text fields should have a gradient.
The problem still present is that (imo) there are still several different visual cues per different button and which adds noise! Lightness vs darkness is already a very obvious visual cue, so I wouldn't have a different gradient for the sliders or depressed buttons. After all the button is suppossed to be 'going in' but its not flipping over! So I would suggest working with only one gradient, and then varying the darkeness for pressed/unpressed. (plus the text is white too!)
Maayyy work, but I fear it would look very disruptive/cluttered. I guess it's worth a try just to see though. If it were a (subtle) horizontal gradient like [dark -> light <- dark], it may give it a slight impression of a jog shuttle, yeah.How about having a horizontal gradient on the arrow buttons? Would give feed-back for the 'sliding' issue. (Me currently having horrible flashes of gradients in my mind! ) Still It might work visually because it reflects the function of the buttons. A sort of jog shuttle?
Yeah that's right. That material buttons case is really a symptom of the disorganised and cluttered buttons layout in that window. When Ton first implemented it in CVS, we tried to think of ways to use a better approach within the current system, but there just wasn't enough space. This will have to wait until the layout and organisation can be re-thought.*** BTW had you seen my post to the funboard regarding sliders vs the arrow buttons? I suggest that whenever possible we replace the arrow buttons with siders. This is because the sliders give a visual feedback of the available range, the arrow buttons do not. I noticed this because of the new hardness settings in 2.28. I was suddenly at a loos of how much my setting was, as a number meant nothing when I couldn't see it in context! So whenever possible, I vote for sliders!
It's the 'wherever possible' that is the tricky part though - sliders shouldn't be used just to show the range of values, but when the range of values would be meaningful to show - when you are thinking in terms of a percentage value or ratio. For example the Xparts and Yparts fields have a range from 1-64, but showing the range from 1-64 really isn't that meaningful because what you are interested in is the number of parts itself. On some other things too if there is a large range of possible values, but you usually only want to deal with the numbers themselves, or increment/decrease by small values. In these sorts of cases, a slider would be cumbersome since it woudn't be fine-grained enough.
In any case though, there are many situations in Blender where sliders would be preferable over num fields.
Heh, nah I'd say more like the Avid interfaces are chunky gaudy and butt-ugly - don't blame the gradients! ;D Now DVD Studio Pro on the other hand... *drools* heheOn a side note. I've just spent a couple of weeks working on an Avid, and I re-confirm that high gradients are a real nuisance!!