The 1990s called and they want their dialog box back
This is perhaps my favourite feature in Lightroom. You press ⇧T, you draw a few lines, and presto – your photo is now even: This is doubly magical to me. The first part is that this is even possible – that you can straighten the photo in both dimensions after the fact , and save for some parallax nuances the viewer won’t know any better. For decades, this has been the domain of tilt-shift lenses , but if you ever tried to use one, you know how harrowing of an exercise this is. A tilt-shift lens looks more like a medical device and less like a piece of photography equipment: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/2.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/2.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> The “obvious” way to emulate a tilt-shift lens in software is a bunch of sliders, and Lightroom has those also… …but that’s still pretty cumbersome in practice, abstracted in a strange ways, like piloting a plane by pulling the linkages connected the flying surfaces: you will admire someone who can do that, but won’t ever want to do it yourself. = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/4.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/4.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Hence the second magical moment: The team created the new interface I showed at the beginning, where you point to things that should be straight directly , and the necessary tilt-shift calculations happen behind the scenes. Alas, Lightroom didn’t fully stick the landing. The interface is a bit jittery, and missing nice transitions that could help understand what’s going on. But what brought me here was this unpleasant interaction: What’s wrong with it? If you want to play along, stop here and ponder: How would you improve it? Because this is a classic UI exercise where there are symptoms, and there are problems, and there are principles under the hood of it all. The first possible improvement: Don’t do a dialog like this. These are ancient and so annoying. Every time I see a centered dialog covering everything, popping up in response to a delicate mouse operation, I want to shout “read the room!” It’s better to drop a little tooltip next to the cursor that automatically disappears: more modern, and more “compatible” with mousing. = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/6.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/6.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/7.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/7.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Then: Why am I allowed to start and finish an action that the machine already knows won’t go anywhere? Disable the drawing option, put a little “verboten” icon on the mouse pointer, or do something else that will prevent me from drawing a line to begin with. = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/8.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/8.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> But that brings us to point three, and how I would approach this as a designer. Because I would – counterintuitively – go the other way and allow the user to draw as many lines as they wanted, and just didn’t permit to commit the entire operation if there were more than four lines on the screen. Why is that? It’s the same principle as you see in all the social media composing fields, and in well-trained forms: do not constrain the editing process . This field is limited to 300 characters, but it’s clever enough to only enforce its limits when you try to post. There is no downside to allowing you more room in the editing process. Maybe you write by constructing a few sentences first and only then combining them into one, maybe you want to see two riffs one below the other to choose the better one, or maybe – this is most likely – you’re not even paying attention and your motor memory is doing the editing for you, instinctively. Use any text editor for just a few months, and cut, copy, and paste, word swapping, and splitting sentences become second-nature gestures – that is, until the UI starts throwing in some arbitrary barriers. Above in Lightroom, it might actually be easier for me to draw a fifth line and then delete a previous one, instead of doing it in the precise order Lightroom desires, or by dragging an existing line to move it instead of creating a new one. Maybe an overarching principle would be this: If you are aiming to build something so delightfully direct manipulation as Lightroom did here, you have to fully commit to that stance, even deep in the weeds. Because every time I see a 1990s dialog appear when my fingers are flying fast, I feel like this: = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/10.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-1990s-called-and-they-want-their-dialog-box-back/10.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> And something tells me others will too. #flow #interface design #mouse #principles #text editing
Hardware
Security
Frontend
Web Development
Design
JavaScript
Gaming
Performance
iOS
API
Entertainment
Culture
Movies
Open Source
Programming