www.kraytracing.com

Better this version withouth the gray "K"

About Physky i see on tab you can set hour, minutes, seconds. Nice is you specific on the plugin what is the sun light and autoposicioned this. And graph editor to change hour value

Last two tabs ...

I do like these two last UI ideas. The carbon fibre header is cool!

The other various scripts in Kray ...

I like it, it looks pro.
Good to see it frome the eyes of a UI design master
I think it shouldn't be that hard for them to achieve this result and it wold look more pro

Not sure about the master part! But thanks anyway!

Definitely easy to do, because I've done them! I've been modifying the actual LScripts, these are ready to be used, they're not Photoshop mockups!

Anyway, this is what the full set looks like.

Looks really good . Maybe we can have a skin chooser for kray that we can pick on the fly.

Yes looking good. No big changes and clean.

Matt! Nice work.

I would suggest you put the logo etc at the bottom of the layout tho, not only is the title bar doubling the info, but then I can position it OFF the bottom of the screen when desktop realestate is expensive (on my laptop screen) ..

Or make it ever so .. thinner?

Nevertheless, looking slick.

Keep it up!

I'm liking it Matt. Modern, striking, & clean. What do you say Jure & G.?

I'm shaving off some space between the gaps as I type, should compact the windows down a little more, but I wanted to have things 'breathe' a little.

Superficially they look nicer, but I think you have missed an opportunity.

For example, the Override dialog is the same width as the others for consistency (to what extent is this really important though - particularly in terms of taking up screen real estate), but it doesn't make good use of the width. Again we have a big monotonous row on undistinguished menu items. Let's take the 'Pure color' and 'Pure diffuse' options - couldn't they be placed on the same line? The same applies for 'Disable transparency and 'Disable translucency'.

Grouping similar items onto the same line would enable you to add dividers between sections.

From an overall conceptual starting point I think this approach is flawed. There is only one underlying concept - making things look neater. This only works if it is clear that this is a drawback to the current layout and that at the moment it has no other benefits e.g. speed at which you can identify the various controls and visual comfort in terms of readability.

I don't think the redesign is based on a strong enough starting point. Let's face it, anyone can redesign something and claim it looks nicer (and the new headers are attractive IMO) but if someone doesn't like it, your whole rationale is out the window. I think the physical sky dialog for example is much bulkier and uglier just to have the same width as the other dialogs and keep the common header.

IMHO if anyone wants to revise anything, whether it is a film, an architectural style or concept or a piece of music, I think the new version should add something to the original. Your proposals add a superficial aesthetic 'gloss' but at the same I think they take away from the familiarity and some of the comfort and functionality of the original.

I don't mean to be unnecessarily critical, because your dialogs look nice, but from a design point of view if people value the comfort and readability rather than the aesthetics - you're screwed You have an opportunity not only to make the dialogs look nicer, but also to make them less bulky and easier to deal with.

Barack Obama's (or Hillary Clinton's - depending) expression "lipstick on a pig" springs to mind. It's not that I think Kray is a pig to use (although it is complex), but it illustrates the point of applying a (perhaps inappropriate) superficial gloss to something.

I think if the UI is redesigned it could be more fundamental. At the moment I think it is the UI equivalent of a (good)boob job and (good) fake tan.

Damn bigstick! you're tough...
Matt did that on free time to make it look nicer...

Aesthetic is more important than you think, LigtWave's interface pushed many people away while they are always amazed to see what we can do with it.
I feel you on some notes, design has to be smart, in terms of ergonomy, readability. But I don't think Matt intended to rebuild Kray from the ground up...
Abviously, Kray is a complex plug-in as it implies pretty complex phenomenons and algorithms. To make it understandable, of course it would need more in depth renaming , grouping of functions. But we can see that it's a plug-in that has been made by a developper and not necessarly a designer. So of course, a little bit like blender, we don't expect to see a crazy UI that makes everything easier (like OSX compared to windows).
But Matt to me made something usable rigt away by Gregorz, and tried to make it look more pro.

To shine like Kray should, some work is still needed to look mor PRO, like different renders (not only ArchViz), a nice website (look what Fryrender did in a short time), more exposure and marketing, AND of course a "PRO look" for the plug-in.
So at least we should be thankful to Matt for contributing that fast...

I don't mean to criticize your criticism but it just sounds tough and like you underestimate how important it is for a software to look PRO (by using LW, you should be more aware of that parameter as well).

keep it positive

I think bigstick didn't come from a graphic design background. Maybe more technical archi background. Though I finished architecture degree I find it well too technical. I worked in a print magazine and a patent company and picked up some tricks. Patent documents rely heavily on balancing out and presentation for no reason whatsover just to make it presentable than functional.
Matts design follows print design layout imho. Keeping things balanced even if there's no need to fill in space you just do so in print design so it aligns with graphics, text, etc. It makes things look cleaner when evening out text or graphics than having them left justified like grocery to do list .

Whoah bigstick, you certainly brought your big stick with you!

bigstick wrote:Superficially they look nicer, but I think you have missed an opportunity.

Not if the point was to make it look sexier / tidier, nothing more, nothing less (please re-read the thread title again, Re-Layout Test, not Re-Design test)

bigstick wrote:For example, the Override dialog is the same width as the others for consistency (to what extent is this really important though - particularly in terms of taking up screen real estate), but it doesn't make good use of the width. Again we have a big monotonous row on undistinguished menu items. Let's take the 'Pure color' and 'Pure diffuse' options - couldn't they be placed on the same line? The same applies for 'Disable transparency and 'Disable translucency'.

Once again, the purpose was to make things neater, if on the Override dialog I had left them all only the width they need to be, you end up with something that looks like a toothless grin. Screen real-estate, while important, is less so on things you only call up, check some things then dismiss it again. Do you really work with the Override dialog open all the time?

bigstick wrote:Grouping similar items onto the same line would enable you to add dividers between sections.

This has already been done, after speaking with Jure.

bigstick wrote:From an overall conceptual starting point I think this approach is flawed. There is only one underlying concept - making things look neater

Once again, this was all this was at this stage, so saying it's flawed is missing the point of this.

bigstick wrote:This only works if it is clear that this is a drawback to the current layout and that at the moment it has no other benefits e.g. speed at which you can identify the various controls and visual comfort in terms of readability.

Nothing is perfect, and I'm sure some changes can be made to make this better for you, but I don't think it's any _worse_ than the existing layout. You might think so, I don't, here we will just have to disagree.

bigstick wrote:I don't think the redesign is based on a strong enough starting point. Let's face it, anyone can redesign something and claim it looks nicer (and the new headers are attractive IMO)

Yes they can, why not have a go yourself?

bigstick wrote:but if someone doesn't like it, your whole rationale is out the window.

If the majority think so, yes, if one person thinks so, no.

bigstick wrote:I think the physical sky dialog for example is much bulkier and uglier just to have the same width as the other dialogs and keep the common header.

I disagree, I think it makes for a 'package' or 'suite' of products.

bigstick wrote:IMHO if anyone wants to revise anything, whether it is a film, an architectural style or concept or a piece of music, I think the new version should add something to the original. Your proposals add a superficial aesthetic 'gloss' but at the same I think they take away from the familiarity and some of the comfort and functionality of the original.

There is nothing wrong with 'gloss' as you put, it all adds to marketing / image of the product. The original dialogs were simply not attractive, quite frankly they make the plugin look less like a professional package and more like something written by a user of LightWave (the images tell a different story clearly).

The look of the UIs actually _put me off buying Kray_ when I first saw it.

Example:

You're looking to buy something from the web. you've found two sites that sell what you want. They both have the exact same price / services etc. Except that one site looks nicer, has nicer graphics, a better layout etc. The other, although has the same functions, is less tidy, looks very web 1.0 etc.

Which do you _feel_ more comfortable ordering from? If like most people, it's the better looking one. Why? Because it helps reassure you, it looks more professional, and without thinking you start to presume that the ordering may be better, their delivery more on time, their customer service better. If they care enough to have a decent website, they may care about the rest of their business, right?

This is what I'm doing here, attempting to make Kray _look_ a little more 'front of house'. That's all, I never made any claims as to re-design it so it's so simple to use that suddenly everything makes sense about all the options. I do happen to believe a tidier layout does improve things beyond just aesthetics, but that's just me.

bigstick wrote:I don't mean to be unnecessarily critical, because your dialogs look nice, but from a design point of view if people value the comfort and readability rather than the aesthetics - you're screwed You have an opportunity not only to make the dialogs look nicer, but also to make them less bulky and easier to deal with.

You're contradicting yourself here. You want them to be attractive and easier to read, yet you want them to be less bulky and take up less screen space. Having breathing room around items is just as important. I could and have already tightened up the space, personally, I think it makes them less easy to isolate items.

bigstick wrote:Barack Obama's (or Hillary Clinton's - depending) expression "lipstick on a pig" springs to mind. It's not that I think Kray is a pig to use (although it is complex), but it illustrates the point of applying a (perhaps inappropriate) superficial gloss to something.

The 'gloss' is not superficial, it serves a purpose to make the product look more professional (IMO). That helps people react to it more positively, and in turn may help, just a bit, attract more users, or make it easier for people to click the buy button.

bigstick wrote:I think if the UI is redesigned it could be more fundamental. At the moment I think it is the UI equivalent of a (good)boob job and (good) fake tan.

Quite frankly I don't think you're giving me any credit here.

I also think you're taking this way to seriously, all it is was a brush and scrub up, I didn't start moving all the controls around specifically for the reason that I didn't want to alienate existing users, although that would need to be done to bring about the changes you're suggesting.