PHENOMDESIGN
How is that not what Design Theory does specifically and best? Would you say that software engineering does that?

hMonkey
All I see is the ui and ux are getting worse and worse and less usable on account of those theories...

Guys, can I ask you to please take your conversation to Private Messages? Let's keep this thread relatively clean.

hMonkey
Also houdini is highly sophisticated and complex program, it can be approached as say... the mail app. the rules are different, sure there are some things that are applicable from theory but that's about it...

Yes, and that is why I recommended to use creative collaborative sessions using Houdini as the material and look for inspiration from theory for imagination. The whole thread I specifically described the uniqueness of the software and the history. There is also a future and I see that with the students I teach and the research I do for inventions. Design Theory is how this is codified into a systematic interface for customization while still holding together. It is how it is passed to other generations across time and then specified for the case. It is the codifying of quality both in quantitative and qualitative aspects of "Craft".

It does take something special for Houdini but I am most interested in the expressiveness and education for young adults and measure those things.

Actually Houdini is very simple. UI can be divided into:

- vieport navigation
- keyframe/bazier curves for animation
- parameter pane
- USD/Outliner

Rest is just bunch of hundret different nodes that share same UI

Its not like there is nothing to improve after 15 years

Small egzample is scalable and dynamic content of windows (like its possible with new node info)

Btw. a lot of things could be comunicated thru animated UI elements. Fe. Small red line animated around node shape as indicator informing that node is heavily using CPU/GPU. Usefull for debuging. Etc.

oldteapot7
Btw. a lot of things could be comunicated thru animated UI elements. Fe. Small red line animated around node shape as indicator informing that node is heavily using CPU/GPU. Usefull for debuging. Etc.

We have that it's called performance monitor, those concepts you are proposing are only useful for the small touch screens. are you running houdini on a 6" touch screen or is it multiple 6" touchscreens running houdini of of raspberry pi?

oldteapot7
Btw. a lot of things could be comunicated thru animated UI elements. Fe. Small red line animated around node shape as indicator informing that node is heavily using CPU/GPU. Usefull for debuging. Etc.

hMonkey
We have that it's called performance monitor, those concepts you are proposing are only useful for the small touch screens.

It would be good to know before I commit a node how it may perform before I use it so I am not stuck in a costly simulation.

hMonkey
those concepts you are proposing are only useful for the small touch screens. are you running houdini on a 6" touch screen or is it multiple 6" touchscreens running houdini of of raspberry pi?

You mean like on-site in a virtual production??? Or a 3D immersive interface?? Sounds very useful and relevant.

@hMonkey dont take this material design motion example literally it was just illustration to what i wrote about animation as UI element that could communicate some program states without using color or shape. Like in this mentioned performance monitor egzample.

Animated UI can be also used for highlighting node when performing UNDOs so you know in wich one action is taken or for highligting (flashing) FK keys etc. It was just quick example for brainstorming ideas

Am I the only one having problems seeing the incredibly weak highlighting of the active node if it is not without the display flag?

I personally love the idea of keys being shown on the actual frames instead of on the space in between, but diamond shaped a la After Effects is not something I'd endorse. Simple lines / thin rectangles work better IMO.

Ok, so here are my thoughts on the nodes so far:

1. Instead of coloring the node itself, which could clash with the flag colors, we will color only the node's outline, as well as the backgrounds and outlines of text labels.
2. We'll explicitly label the type of node. This labeling can be turned off in the node display settings, similar to how normal directions are toggled in the 3D Viewport.
3. The fun node shapes must retire to the same place Clippy from MS Word '97 did. Instead of 30 shapes, we can use thousands of free, open-source icons for any occasion from sites like FontAwesome.com — this is the modern way. Also, custom icons are naturally possible. As an exception and a compromise, can keep the X shape for the Null node.

Can I get some feedback on this?

Thanks.

ruffemotion
1. Instead of coloring the node itself, which could clash with the flag colors, we will color only the node's outline, as well as the backgrounds and outlines of text labels.
2. We'll explicitly label the type of node. This labeling can be turned off in the node display settings, similar to how normal directions are toggled in the 3D Viewport.
3. The fun node shapes must retire to the same place Clippy from MS Word '97 did. Instead of 30 shapes, besides custom icons, we can use thousands of free, open-source icons for any occasion from sites like FontAwesome.com — this is the modern way. As an exception and a compromise, can keep the X shape for the Null node.

I do not think these are solid Design decisions, have real meaningful logic behind the changes, or define what success is.
There is a actually visual language of icons that has grown and you propose to throw it away for a monoculture.

PHENOMDESIGN
I do not think these are solid Design decisions, have real meaningful logic behind the changes, or define what success is.

Haha, why?

There is no substance or logic simply icing.

PHENOMDESIGN
There is no substance or logic simply icing.

That's not what I would call constructive criticism. At least back up what you're saying by some thoughts or an argument.

EDIT: Please, please, please stop spamming this thread with the useless lectures and stuff 🙏.

P.S.: Attempt to take a look at her portfolio [www.sarahgibbonsdesign.com], I've got nothing more to add. She's a snake oil saleswoman.

ruffemotion
That's not what I would call constructive criticism. At least back up what you're saying by some thoughts or an argument.

It is difficult to be constructive without solid logic and the little amount of decisions that you are giving. I am happy to give you more feedback but you need to actually have solid logic. That is what I mean. You are not putting together enough of the UX to actually receive a good constructive criticism. There is not the material to reference or ideas to entertain. Therefore, what your proposal has not substance, yet.

Here is a good example of what is a UX/UI description that give enough Design work to get a meaningful criticism:

http://www.jjg.net/elements/pdf/elements_ch02.pdf [www.jjg.net]

PHENOMDESIGN

ruffemotion
That's not what I would call constructive criticism. At least back up what you're saying by some thoughts or an argument.

It is difficult to be constructive without solid logic and the little amount of decisions that you are giving. I am happy to give you more feedback but you need to actually have solid logic. That is what I mean. You are not putting together enough of the UX to actually receive a good constructive criticism. There is not the material to reference or ideas to entertain. Therefore, what your proposal has not substance, yet.

Here is a good example of what is a UX/UI description that give enough Design work to get a meaningful criticism:

http://www.jjg.net/elements/pdf/elements_ch02.pdf [www.jjg.net]

Oh, so basically, you think that I'm not worthy. That's ok too, why are you saying anything at all then.

EDIT: Please, please, I beg of you, stop spamming this thread with the useless ebooks and stuff 🙏.

---

If anybody else wants give some feedback, please.

ruffemotion
I'm not worthy.

No, I specifically said that you are not providing anything to reference. You are obviously worthy since I have been spending the time to share all the resources that plenty people pay for to get a degree in Design for. Never mistake a Design critique to be about your personal worth. As my references have pointed to I think you have more to contribute and am directing you forward.

EDIT: Nothing is spam as it is actually relevant. For example the gem from "Stop Drawing Dead Fish" is that Geometric lines for animation constrants is a UX/UI that could be used. Adding that APEX itself is an animation graph and turns into geometry and that numerously it has been stated that compile graphs are something to pay attention to, that is a completely new approach.

If you do not engage with the content that is fine but when you ask for feedback or me to explain and I provide context as well as information do not try and say it is spam.

RGaal
Am I the only one having problems seeing the incredibly weak highlighting of the active node if it is not without the display flag?

I do have a solution for that, I'll post it at a later date.

citizen
I personally love the idea of keys being shown on the actual frames instead of on the space in between, but diamond shaped a la After Effects is not something I'd endorse. Simple lines / thin rectangles work better IMO.

Sure, but that's a personal preference — I like the diamond shapes, for example. This can be fixed by a checkbox in Preferences.

ruffemotion


Ok, so here are my thoughts on the nodes so far:

1. Instead of coloring the node itself, which could clash with the flag colors, we will color only the node's outline, as well as the backgrounds and outlines of text labels.
2. We'll explicitly label the type of node. This labeling can be turned off in the node display settings, similar to how normal directions are toggled in the 3D Viewport.
3. The fun node shapes must retire to the same place Clippy from MS Word '97 did. Instead of 30 shapes, besides custom icons, we can use thousands of free, open-source icons for any occasion from sites like FontAwesome.com — this is the modern way. As an exception and a compromise, can keep the X shape for the Null node.

Can I get some feedback on this?

Thanks.

These look amazing! Beautiful and clear and drawing on Houdini's existing visual vocabulary.

I wish I had time to make more in-depth comments on this topic. Believe me, I've got a LOT of thoughts about Houdini's UI. For now I'll content myself with just cheering you all on.

I'll quickly add that I think there are two main issues with Houdini's UI:

1. Cluttered graphics (icons, outdated skeuomorphism) that make it difficult to quickly find what you're looking for at a glance. Maya does very well on this front, but C4D and Blender are also quite good.
2. The UI is just endless lists of stuff that are very unorganized in terms of which features/options are most commonly used. My go-to example of this is that the top UI element in Guide Groom is a button that says "Clear." That's right, the thing that you never want to click and that will delete all your work is literally the first thing on the list. It's real bad.

ruffemotion

LukeP
Agree with most points except… do you really think Houdini sales would go up if SideFX invested time to refresh the UI?

It will make Houdini less scary and intimidating and make the learning curve easier. Look at what happened to Blender after the 2.8 release, where they did a major UI overhaul. SideFX is practically leaving money on the table.

I agree, the UI could bring a significant change to improving the appeal with the software even if behind nothing change.