Where the design community meets.
Joined about 10 years ago via an invitation from Seyi O.
Just wanted to say thanks for all your hard work.
I've long been meaning to learn animation and motion design, but never had the time or energy to fully invest in developing that skill. Do I pick up After Effects? Quartz? Maybe I should just learn JS from the ground up? Being prone to analysis paralysis certainly didn't help.
Well last week I took on a new project and decided to check out FramerJS again, noticed you guys had developed Studio. Looked easy enough, so I downloaded, browsed a few examples and jumped right in. A week into it and I've got my first fully animated design prototype and could not be more pleased with it and myself. And now I'm trying to think of new apps to design as an excuse to make more animations!
It's enabled me more in my work than any other (design) app I've used. (Sketch, I love you, but the relationship is still pretty unstable.)
Anyway, thanks again. You guys have helped this guy, and I'm sure many others, take their game to the next level.
Thanks for fixing some huge frustrations. I was wondering when you guys were going to release the update for non-App Store purchasers.
Good stuff, man. How'd you get to this point?
Ah, cool. Did many of the skills transition over, or was there a lot of self-teaching involved?
Design school -- degree in graphic design, etc.
Does anyone have any experience with Ballpark? http://www.ballparkapp.com
I learned a few weeks back that this site isn't about discussion of design philosophy, concepts, design critique, the role of design in our world, design interactions and human behavior, basically what Design really is, but more about dribbble shots, links to new apps, and photoshop scripts.
I played with Sketch before and found it to be a bit too dumbed down for me, but after reading this, I think I'll give it another try. I won't use it as an outright replacement for Photoshop just yet, but it'll serve as my wireframing tool now.
I'll throw one into the agreement box as well. LayerVault sounded like a super useful service to me, and I'd been considering checking it out for some time. So I eventually took the leap, registered, put in my cc info and tried getting acquainted with their interface. It was way too confusing for me. I want to use and love the product; I'm convinced it's something I'd find invaluable, but I don't feel comfortable with being lost and wondering what different components of the UI mean/do.
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.
First, I'll say the new app looks clean. A definite improvement.
But... and I may be being too critical. Google's Material Design ostensibly draws the bulk of its inspiration from the real world -- materials like cards, motions mimicking those governed by the laws of physics, etc. And yet they make some odd choices in their interfaces that, I think, work against the models they're trying to create.
As mentioned already, the main view is the draggable map, yet you can slide from the left to open the side drawer. To me that is not consistent with a design based on materials because the map is an endless canvas. It would make more sense if the main view were not draggable, and thus opening the side drawer would be akin to sliding cards away or into view.
I'm a little bothered by the placement of the hamburger icon. It lies within the element that is used for searching, but is in no way related to that, and it almost decouples the icon from the element it summons.
When you tap the blue direction button, a new view slides up, as a card would, from the bottom. On this view you're given a back arrow, indicating a horizontal motion, which is inconsistent with the vertical movement bringing the screen into view. Perhaps an X would be better.
Again, maybe I'm being too critical or my expected models are too literal, but Google is really pushing this Material Design concept, and personally I think the implementations have fallen short.