is it official? Nice one, not sure why add long shadow though, especially on the second icon :)
5 months ago
It's for practice, the long shadow is for experimentation and I agree it looks a bit odd on the seccond one.
@Virgil Pana Niiice. Honestly, I like better the second one :)
I'm partial to the left icon. It's less busy.
Don't use long shadows. It's like adding random gloss 3 years ago. All it does is ensure that your design's gonna look dated the moment a new trend surfaces–it doesn't actually make the icon communicate anything more than it would otherwise.
I'd go with the right background, but maybe move the glyph around a bit so that the visual weight gets balanced [right now it's centered by bounding box, which doesn't work for asymmetrical stuff]
I actually like the simplicity of the left icon. I agree with the long shadow comments too, although, I've been tempted myself!
I don't think long shadows are all that bad. Just because it's a trend doesn't mean it can't be used. I mean if there's a point to it, why not?
nice! my .02 -- squint test reveals right as more dimensional over distance. browser zoom -> 25% concurs. as i assume it's for mobile ...
close up, however, it begins to look overwrought. the darker purple diagonal band, gives the shadow depth ... the other stuff is noise.
I agree with Ollin. I love the colors in this design, but the long shadow is a design cliche at this point and the most overused treatment I've seen in forever. Literally, everyone on Dribbble is copying it.
I vote left design, I think it's simpler and more legible. The right one's background competes with the shadow too much and appears busy
mix of both! left too simple...right to complicated!
I think long shadows give the icons depth (while also keeping the flat design esthetic)...without using the regular old dated drop shadows that we are used to seeing. Isn't everything in design a "trend" anyways? I don't understand why there are so many long shadow haters. I like the more simple one on the left by the way.
@Ollin "Skeuomorphism" was a trend...and now it looks dated. Should Apple have never started the skeuomorphism trend because it would eventually become dated when compared to the new "flat" trend?
The second one, but without the shadow :D
@Bouké @Sean Tremaine
> Just because it's a trend doesn't mean it can't be used. I mean if there's a point to it, why not?
If there's a point to it, sure! By all means! I've used Aqua gloss in my Quicktime Player icon, for example. Aqua gloss was a trend at one point. But I'm not using gloss because it was a trend. I'm using it to communicate the connection between this icon and the app it represents [which features a glassy, black UI with similar gloss]. I didn't use aqua gloss in the QP7 icon. There was a conscious decision there to only include elements [trendy or not!] when they communicated something relevant to the user. That's more or less what design is all about–saying as much as you can with as little noise as possible
So, I agree, saying one technique is bad "because it's trendy" would be like saying some other technique is bad "because it's not trendy". But I'm not saying that. I'm saying that in this instance, the use of the long shadow technique is not helping the design communicate any better, it's just getting in the way, and that fact will become more obvious as new trends develop.
> Isn't everything in design a "trend" anyways?
Hell no. Design is about communicating effectively. While the language changes–we've gone from print to web, from black and white to color–the methods of argument don't. And they won't change. They'll be refined, and applied in new ways, but they won't change completely until the human brain changes. Because design is a science based on psychology. Not an art.
For example, Fitt's law [large, close things are easier to click!] was created in 1954. We've been through plenty of artistic shifts since then. But large, nearby things are still easy to find! That's what I mean when I say design's a science and not an art. If there was some reason why adding a long shadow or aqua gloss or brushed metal texture made every design ever easier to understand, there would be a "law of long shadows" in every design textbook, with experimental data verifying and maybe even a nifty formula, instead of all that stuff about "use depth cues effectively" and "avoid unnecessary elements" and so on.
> "Skeuomorphism" was a trend...and now it looks dated. Should Apple have never started the skeuomorphism trend because it would eventually become dated when compared to the new "flat" trend?
Skeuomorphism is a technique where you make a new media interact with the user like an old one, so it's more intuitive/comfortable for the user. Like the bookshelf in iBooks. And there's actually plenty of skeuomorphism in iOS7 [frosted glass and faked 3D sheets? How much more skeuomorphic can you get?] I'm not sure it's trend. It's certainly something that has been used more in recent times, but that's a consequence of us having all of these weird pieces of new technology that people don't know how to use intuitively. It's not something someone at Apple picked because all the other companies were making lists look like bookshelves and, hey, why not. There was a purpose there.
A better question [that, I think, still carries your message] would be "Should Apple have never started the 'brushed metal' trend because it would eventually become dated?"
And, uh, yeah. Absolutely. Unless you're communicating something relevant with an element in your design, it should be removed. No exceptions.
@Virgil Pana Sorry to wall-of-text all over your shot comments, man, especially when you said yourself that this was an experiment. I totally support experimenting with anything you like, and popular trends are a decent place to start. My above rant applies to non-experimental/production designs only, so carry on :)
Second one is cool too. It's vital that we experiment.
But from what I did read (just like... a few of the first words...), I agree. I'm not saying to do a trend 'cause it's a trend. Just sayin' just 'cause whatever solution you apply IS a trend, doesn't mean it's auto-bad design ew.
Yeah, the long shadow was just an experiment with the current trends just like the background that goes a bit against the current trends of light gradients used in IOS 7 icons.
As a side note on the long shadows, I tried them in a few projects in the last couple of months and all revisions that had any type of long shadow were rejected by the clients.
Damn, too much pink in my folio lately! I need to try that iOS 7 neon green
@Ollin Whoa, I just got schooled. LOL I'm seriously going to read those links. Definitely agree with a lot of your points, but I have to say I still like long shadows for some reason even though they might just be added for aesthetic appeal. What if long shadows were carried into other elements inside of the app and not just on the icon, would you agree that long shadows would be ok to use for that purpose?(Not trying to be a dick, just actually wondering what your opinion is on this.)
@Sean Tremaine If the app used lots of long shadows in its interface, yeah, it would definitely make sense to do the same in the icon!
The question is: why would there be long shadows in the UI of the app? [Assuming we're trying to follow design principles here, and we've not just been contracted to do the icon after some other designer is let loose on the UI]. We run into the same question of "what relevant information does it communicate?"
Did some searching for examples of a long shadow being useful, maybe here and here, but those are illustrations and not UI...
I guess if I had to contrive a scenario where I would say "whoa, that long shadow version works way better", it would be something like an icon for a game that is illustrated in a style with lots of flat colors and noticeable vector, hard-edged length shadows like that [Games can be art with unique, trendy visual styles. They don't have to do everything purposefully like design does]. In such a case, having that stylistic element in the app icon would communicate an important connection to the game and make the icon do its job better.
>Unless you're communicating something relevant with an element in your design, it should be removed. No exceptions.
I'm in agreement with your overall point, but I think you're still too far towards artificially limiting the palette of what should be considered relevant design elements. Style and aesthetic appeal in themselves are relevant to creating the unique taste that a design brings to its users. Therefore we cannot simply cast ornamentation aside.
>That's more or less what design is all about–saying as much as you can with as little noise as possible
In the same way, I disagree here. Tasteful amounts of noise as such can be entirely appropriate to the communication of a message in screen design.
>Skeuomorphism is a technique where you make a new media interact with the user like an old one, so it's more intuitive/comfortable for the user.
Skeuomorphism is not just a metaphor relating to an 'old' medium. It is simply a reference to any interaction that has been used before. Almost every interaction we have on the screen is skeuomorphic in this sense. A small, but important clarification.
>A better question [that, I think, still carries your message] would be "Should Apple have never started the 'brushed metal' trend because it would eventually become dated?"
Brushed metal was likely used for the specific purpose of communicating the impression that the interface itself was luxurious, an extension of the veblen-good status that Apple products embody. The implementation may not have been done with precision, but the rationale was not necessarily wrong-minded.
Right one looks like it has massive banding - I'd go with the left.
keyboard shortcuts: ← previous shot → next shot L or F like
Show and tell for designers
What are you working on? Dribbble is a community of designers sharing screenshots of their work, process, and projects.
Copyright © 2009–2014 Dribbble LLC. All screenshots © their respective owners. Shipped from Salem, Mass. USA.