Jump to content
Joachim_L

E.g. Outer Shadow Offset Tool = Inconsistent UI?

Recommended Posts

There are currently two (?) options to add effects to elements. You can add the FX from the Layers panel and you can add the FX from the Effects panel. Why is there a difference (see image)? Is the extra panel for Effects really needed if we can add FX from the Layers panel? And we can clearly see if a effect is added through the icon. I have no idea about programming, but me thinks that redundant functions / code could have an impact on the overall performance of a software?

fx.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand this UI difference as a service to deliver "Basic" versus "Detailed" options in the sake of easier access to the basic options by showing less complexity.
Usually the additional options in "detailed" are used or changed less often than the basics, which offer settings which are mandatory to get a shadow at all.

Notice: you can access the detailed option from the basics by click on the cog icon.

But I do NOT understand why from layers panel I can not access the basics but the detailed layout only.
I would expect + appreciate it vice versa: Basics from Layers panel –> Detailed from Effects panel.


macOS 10.12.6,  Macbook Pro 15" + Eizo 24"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my point of view the mixed basic-versus-detailed thing is irritating. As an example I was pretty sure I can move the outer shadow manually, but did not memorize where it was. Getting the FX from the Layers panel was my normal way of workflow, so I had to search for, where the Offset Tool was. Sounds silly, I know. But perhaps more could be irritated?

But I have nice argument for you for NOT splitting the FX into two places: Just work with the "basic" Effects panel and give an image a white outer shadow. Best of luck! ;)

 

Edited by Joachim_L
Oh my God, it is full of typos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a duplication of functions or code, but simply an alternate view for the same information. You are free to use either or both, as you prefer. You will find examples of UX duplication all over these and many other apps. For example, items in the contextual menu bar are often found in a specific studio and/or in the menus. The point of the duplication is that a) some people prefer different approaches, perhaps even different approaches for different situations, and b) when you can't remember how to find the feature you are looking for, more approaches means you are more likely to hit upon it by looking around in the logical places.

My preference is to hide and ignore the Effects Studio entirely. An effect is inherently a layer effect, and the Effects Studio does not indicate which layer I am affecting at a given moment, and I find that a little disorienting to my way of thinking. And generally, the Layer Effects panel from the Layer Studio shows everything and more than the Effects Studio. It seems the Offset Tool is the exception. I could wish it were also in the Layer Effects panel (and maybe it should be), but what it does is essentially still available by altering offset and angle by the numbers.

These different approaches do not have any real impact on software performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

These different approaches do not have any real impact on software performance.

I am not convinced fully. When it is an alternate view, then there has to be additional code for the different presentation. And even if this is only an alternate view, it carries its own bug or better said not-thought-to-the-end design decision.

As mentioned, add a white outer shadow effect to an element with the Effects panel. Won't work, because the underlying Blend mode - which is not visible in the Effects panel - is set to Multiply which does not work with white.

If there is an Effects panel why not add an Adjustments panel to make it complete? KIS and leave the effects only to the Layer panel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Joachim_L said:

Just work with the "basic" Effects panel and give an image a white outer shadow.

:D – That's why I said "Basic" to this limited edition. This your task makes me wonder why we have got a glow effect at all, which can't become a direction assigned. Instead it needs to be set as white shadow to shine in a direction.–  I don't get your point yet. Are you going to slim down the UI to its absolute needs, to a Spartan minimum?


macOS 10.12.6,  Macbook Pro 15" + Eizo 24"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this time I don't get your point. :D I just wanted to make clear, that it is impossible to give an element a white shadow from inside the Effects panel. Have a look at the image. The black rectangle was made with the Layer panel where you can change the Blend mode from Multiply to Normal. In the Effects panel you can not do that, see the result in the orange rectangle.

So my question was: Why splitting one functionality into two areas while it is not sufficient working in one area.

Maybe I just have to refrain from my good ideas and let Serif do their work. ;)

whiteglow.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Joachim_L said:

I just wanted to make clear, that it is impossible to give an element a white shadow from inside the Effects panel.

Yes, you already mentioned it, more or less in your two posts before. - Again: so what? A shadow is usually black and the best color mode is multiply. Basically.
So far the basics: Shadow + Black + Multiply = Effect window.

Your task to colorize  a shadow in white, or mine to give a glow a direction, simply and obviously are not part of the "Basics" but of "Details" window – or lets call it "advanced" ;)
So, if your goal is to slim the UI (to reduce code, make the app file smaller or whatever idea behind) then you consequently should go for eliminating the glow effect, too, because its results can be achieved with a shadow in white, too.

 

57 minutes ago, Joachim_L said:

So my question was: Why splitting one functionality into two areas while it is not sufficient working in one area.

See above, keyword "Basic". And, as garrettm30 pointed out: because of more flexible usability and because it is more often that way in the UI.
Notice the number of UI places where one can assign a fill color. Or compare gradient in the fill color option versus the Fill tool.

I agree to garrettm30: "My preference is to hide and ignore the Effects Studio entirely." – Do the same!  :19_kissing:


macOS 10.12.6,  Macbook Pro 15" + Eizo 24"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

Please note the Annual Company Closure section in the Terms of Use. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.