States Panel Light UI Contrast Issue

[prophet]

Excited to try out the new Sates panel, but couldn't figure out how to get to the Query options. Had to do some googling for a walkthrough and found my stumbling block was the often mentioned poor contrast UI. I couldn't see the little expander triangle.

[ronnyb]

I believe this issue has been logged for the UI team to look into, but perhaps a Serif team member can comment....

[Old Bruce]

2 hours ago, prophet said:

found my stumbling block was the often mentioned poor contrast UI. I couldn't see the little expander triangle.

Ah, that is why I have been having so much trouble figuring this out.

Serif you have to fix the poor contrast issue. You have to. It is making has made your software far more difficult to use. 

[stokerg]

Hi @prophet,

Thanks for reporting this.

@ronnybis correct and this is something we already have logged with the Developers.  

I've updated the report with link back to this thread so you'll get a notification from the Serif Info Bot when this has been resolved   

[Pšenda]

4 hours ago, stokerg said:

is correct and this is something we already have logged with the Developers.  

Hi @stokerg, I know I probably won't get an answer, but I'll ask anyway - how is this even possible? Especially with a light UI, there are a lot of these bugs of minimal or even zero contrast (see link/aspect ratio symbol in Document Setup). Don't developers verify this during the application development and testing process? Or are they using specific monitors with specific brightness and contrast settings so these bugs are not visible?

[Granddaddy]

There are two points to be remembered when considering lack of contrast in the Affinity UI. Both points imply there is no reason to hope for changes that might help those of us struggling with the Affinity UI.

1.) Lack of contrast is not considered a bug by Serif because the code obviously is producing the intended effect. The required UI elements are in place, though some users may find them difficult to read. Thus, lack of contrast is a design feature of the Affinity UI. To request "improved" readability is to request not just a simple bug fix but a redesign of the UI itself.

2.) Affinity users have been requesting a more readable UI for nearly a decade. Sadly, with Affinity 2 the readability issues that trouble some users were made worse. I asked about the principles behind that design shortly after the release of Affinity 2. See, for instance, my post linked below and the many ensuing discussions in numerous other threads. 
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/173835-what-ergonomic-design-principles-call-for-minimal-contrast-and-reduced-readability-in-user-interfaces/

Given that Affinity now lags significantly behind several competitors in the basics of modern photo editing, it remains to be seen whether users struggling with the UI will continue to find compelling reasons to purchase any future upgrades that might become available.

 

[Patrick Connor]

1 hour ago, Pšenda said:

Don't developers verify this during the application development and testing process?

The developers may not do no but my testing team should and found this issue while testing UI variations. Sometimes issues (like this one in fact) are found before release, but not 100% are necessarily fixed for a 2.X.0 release, as towards release we focus on those bugs with the highest customer impact (and lowest risk). 

We will likely tackle this with a number of similar light-UI problems at the same time 

[debraspicher]

29 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:

The developers may not do no but my testing team should and found this issue while testing UI variations. Sometimes issues (like this one in fact) are found before release, but not 100% are necessarily fixed for a 2.X.0 release, as towards release we focus on those bugs with the highest customer impact (and lowest risk). 

We will likely tackle this with a number of similar light-UI problems at the same time 

These aren't bugs or "issues", this feature is unfinished. It should be immediate priority.

[Pšenda]

33 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:

but not 100% are necessarily fixed

Of course, as a developer/programmer, I know that testing and detecting bugs and problems is very challenging. And in many cases, when it comes to specific scenarios of operations and configurations, this is not even realistically possible, so the detection coverage will never be 100%.
However, easily "visible" bugs in the UI? - after all, nothing could be easier to detect, because the bug is immediately visible! So these bugs could really be avoided.
P.S. Thank you for your response 🙂

[Old Bruce]

It is rather like those of us that use the light user interface have 99% of the available functionality. If we cannot see a button or a switch or a lock then we cannot use said item.

A possible solution would be to just trash the light user interface if you cannot fix it. I loathe dark interfaces, always have and most likely always will, but if the light user interface cannot be fixed then trash it. I will proceed with an interface I hate but one where I can use 100% of the tools you have made. I am beyond tired of having to switch back and forth to see if something has been removed or is just newly rendered as invisible every-time there is an update.

[bbrother]

5 hours ago, Patrick Connor said:

as towards release we focus on those bugs with the highest customer impact (and lowest risk). 

Serif should understand that without an efficient UI, one that keeps users engaged for long sessions and provides them with a pleasant experience, there will be no success. In fact, only companies that take UI and UX as seriously as other elements of development will reap the most benefits when building their apps, brand, and reputation.

@Patrick Connor do you have a person or team at Serif dedicated exclusively to UI/UX, e.g. creating UI style guides for developers, collecting and processing information about user needs to create UX plans? Someone that's involved more to UI/UX than to developing code?

[Patrick Connor]

25 minutes ago, bbrother said:

do you have a person ot team..... more to UI/UX than to developing code?

Yes

[loukash]

4 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

A possible solution would be to just trash the light user interface if you cannot fix it. I loathe dark interfaces, always have and most likely always will, but if the light user interface cannot be fixed then trash it. I will proceed with an interface I hate but one where I can use 100% of the tools you have made. I am beyond tired of having to switch back and forth to see if something has been removed or is just newly rendered as invisible every-time there is an update.

You're perfectly describing my own situation.

But for what it's worth, I'm keeping the beta versions in Light UI in spite of the UI bugs, so that I can also differentiate more easily which version I'm currently using.

[PaulEC]

5 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

A possible solution would be to just trash the light user interface if you cannot fix it.

I'd much rather they didn't!  Although it could be improved, I don't have any real problems with the light UI, and I don't want to have to start using the dark version.

[bbrother]

56 minutes ago, Patrick Connor said:

1 hour ago, bbrother said:

do you have a person ot team..... more to UI/UX than to developing code?

Yes.

 

Great, this means there's still hope for us
BTW, could you tell the person or people who created the ADe, APh, APub icons that they did a great job. They are fantastic in their simplicity.