PT 8 | Too hard on the Eyes | Digi Please Read

[25ghosts]

Hi,

I know there is another thread about the new PT 8 look. Thought, I'd start a new one, as I have a few, hopefully, constructive suggestions.

1) Let me start off saying that I really LIKE the new design a lot and on the first impression it succeeded being more easy going on the eyes.

But that was the FIRST impression.

The old interface had GREAT contrast relations but was overall way too bright (IMO) - nevertheless, the contrast was perfect. The new interface is dark and good and the backgrounds are very easy on the eyes. Only, the text and high glare buttons are forcing the eye to focus on that instead of relaxing while focusing on the background. As result, this interface is way more exhausting on the eyes. I know it might sound weird but it is the truth.

I came to this conclusion about a week ago. Since then I have shown the PT interface to 3 different professional photographers and they all agree. In addition, I have shown it to 2 graphic designers and are also in agreement.

This interface is beautiful at first and all the glare stuff are contributing to a very glassy look. This is nice but not very productive when sitting infront of the screen for 12 hours or longer, each day.

Most the backgrounds are very dark.

1) Overall Text - Dynamic & Static

The text is way too bright and not at all imbedded but stand alone and makes it very hard for the eyes to focus on the rest.

2) Static Text (Descriptions etc.)

Being able to read is one thing but all the static text like "Inserts A-E" really dont need to have that much light. Every PT user knows where the inserts are. So you could dim those lights a WHOLE lot. The lights alone from the Mixer window's description tags are brightening the monitor more than the WHOLE background.

3) Plug-In Containers.

Is it really necessary to have the containers showing which plug is inserted to be lit up that much? The importance lies within knowing WHICH plug is inserted. The container is VERY much secondary. All it does in PT 8 - is to confuse the eyes and make it hard to look at the mixer window.

4) Buttons on the Audio Tracks in the Edit Window

The glare on those buttons are so high contrast that is is blending the user. In my examples below I have duplicated the buttons in photoshop and the Levels from the contrast measurement panel were blown out of proportion. I reduced the contrast by 50% and the buttons are still looking glassy, only easy on the eyes and embedded. Again here, the tabs showing "Playlist" or "waveform" etc - are way too bright. They are ONLY containers and there is NO need for them to lighten up the overall interface like that.

5) Regions in Edit Window

It seems to me that ALL the important things are the ones that have received the least attention of the graphic designers. The regions should be having greater contrast and should be showing more light than a secondary info container button like the "read" on the audio track.

I have made a few suggestions. There are three. Each image contains the original PT 8 design and a modification that I have suggested.

I am not trying to make you change the design of PT 8 - cuz I think it is really great. Only, it IS in need of some prompt modifications in order to succeed in being easy on the eyes.

One guideline, and this something that is generally known in the graphic industry.

Stuff that varies need attention - stuff that is static does not

In PT 8 - ALL the static stuff has the most light and most attention and what varies, like regions, Plug-ins, etc - has almost no focus.

PT 8 is, first and foremost, a working environment - but with the attention that i.e static buttons get makes it look like a commercial ad that one would only look at for a few minutes and not 13 hours.

Here a few examples and suggestions.

When you study them - first look at the original and then the modification. Notice what happens to the eyes(Focus & Glare) and the muscles surrounding them.
Also, try to adjust your browser window - so that NO WHITE is surrounding the image.

1) Audio Tracks in the Edit Window

2) Inserts In the Mixer Window

3) Empty Sends in Mixer Window

Those examples are reflection everything from Audio Track Info Buttons to Plug-In Toolbar


Thanks for reading.

I really hope you take this serious as my eyes are aching A LOT after only 2 hours of working let alone after 14 hours of mixing. The old interface was not so great looking but I could go home without being dizzy

[crizdee]

Hi,

Well its all been said before! after a week of use here's my one line...

I've been switching back and forth between the 2 and i can work much faster on the original GUI,

Give us skins: classic and 8

Chris

[Craig F]

Originally Posted by crizdee

Give us skins: classic and 8

"Pro Tool Skin Job" sounds like something you rent out of the back room at the video store

[Natural Sound]

Green on grey is a bad idea (IMO)
Ditto for dark grey on darker grey.
I prefer the PT8 look to your "improved" version.
I usually sit about 4 to 5 feet away from the monitor, and digi has it right for that. I can't see your plugins from further than about 18".
But keep on trying - there has to be a magic combination somewhere that will get the most people on board.

[Sounds Expensive]

I always thought PT had the best GUI . . . but not now.

They've tried their own version of what Logic, Sonar and Cubase all do--confuse people with their GUI!

[25ghosts]

Originally Posted by Natural Sound

Green on grey is a bad idea (IMO)
Ditto for dark grey on darker grey.
I prefer the PT8 look to your "improved" version.
I usually sit about 4 to 5 feet away from the monitor, and digi has it right for that. I can't see your plugins from further than about 18".
But keep on trying - there has to be a magic combination somewhere that will get the most people on board.

It is not about "My" version. And what I have done is NOT something I would ever put out for a release. Human Interface Guidelines has something like DIN norms when it comes to light and contrast. Apple is someone mastering this. Whether you like the design is of NO importance. HIG - is a long term study which has been conducted way before PT was even borne.
Pro Tools 8 - is not following those "rules" at all. Changing PT 8 to be perfect is NOT a matter of taste. The Look of PT 8 is GREAT and here to stay. But the functionality is not quite there yet. But with a few trial and errors it could be - and that SOON. But we need more feedback and to raise awareness, how else, should digi know that there is a problem. If they had already known of this, they would have done it "right" the first time

Human Interface Guidelines

But if you look at my pictures, you will find that you can actually focus on what is necessary. Try focusing on PT8's design and you will find that it is impossible without going weary.

It is as difficult creating a great look for a software as it is creating a great mix.

However, it is possible.

[studiojimi]

i'd much rather be applauding you than complaining.

i'd have to use this thing if we are to stay on top of your growth plan.

please fix it back to comfortable.

love the soft synths.

what do you think of me?

[carlone]

Just go to the color pallet and turn the brightness back up (to about 75%). That gets you back to the original contrast of the old pro tools.

[25ghosts]

Originally Posted by carlone

Just go to the color pallet and turn the brightness back up (to about 75%). That gets you back to the original contrast of the old pro tools.

No it does not. It only turns up the brightness on all the aspects which are already being issued a faulty brightness.

[A1]

Originally Posted by carlone

Just go to the color pallet and turn the brightness back up (to about 75%). That gets you back to the original contrast of the old pro tools.

Originally Posted by 25ghosts

No it does not. It only turns up the brightness on all the aspects which are already being issued a faulty brightness.

Yes, exactly... everything becomes washy... not useful at all.