Cool! I wonder if there's a metaphor that allows you to maintain a glyph or icon based UI for both the buttons. Have you thought about a non-glyph lens icon embedded on the left?
Ya I guess the speed would be good at an event where you're constantly snapping or shooting. I can definitely see my clumsy thumbs mistapping a lot, but I'm a doofus.
@Matt Kump hey dude, toggling on the only major action, is very un-natural. Users looked for the standard toggle to switch from either picture/video (reference ios' camera app). The users tapped the wrong part constantly, and were really frustrated when they missed the moment because of the toggle.
@Nick Slogget That should depend on the type of app really. If the core feature of the app is the camera, and if it replaces the native camera app, there shouldn't be a problem with understanding the new UI when first starting the app (which you usually do immediately after purchasing). That way, users shouldn't struggle to adapt when they really need to use the app.
If, on the other hand, the camera is not the main feature of the app and you'll probably only try it when you really need it, it's probably a safer bet to go with the default UI.
As this seems to be a pure camera app, I think introducing a new UI should not be a problem. I do agree, however, that they are fairly close. Especially for one-handed use.
@Lennart Ziburski we literally did user tests that had thousands of people. Its a main button, there isn't a successful app of the market today that splits functionality like this, whether its a camera app or not.
@Nick Slogget Yeah, I'm just assuming here - I obviously haven't made any user tests as you were able to.
My point is this:
When introducing such an UI that works totally different than one of the basic UIs people are used to while looking similar to it, you either need to get the user to play around with the UI himself or explain it to him.
I assume that users of the Photobucket app did not try the camera UI before needing it because
a) there are a a lot of other screens to browse in the app and they assumed the camera UI to behave like the default one (because most apps don't change it)
b) using the camera in the Photobucket app seems to be associated with uploading pictures. Even though you might be able to snap pictures with it without uploading, that association probably prevented many from trying it out before real-world use.
So I definitely think such an UI is possible by either having an app that encourages trying out the camera or by explaining the UI to users before. Both could be possible with a pure camera app, as the camera UI is probably the core feature you market. I don't think the current app situation is an indication on whether this concept can work.
Again, these are obviously just my thoughts on this and I don't have much insight into how exactly your user tests looked like. Maybe you did exactly what I said and people are just that weird. ;)
20 Responses
Currently working on a camera app called Edgy.
Separation buttons for taking picture and recording video.
about 1 year ago
Interesting idea… what advantages do you see in having them so close like that?
about 1 year ago
u can record and take photos of everything with one tap
about 1 year ago
Cool! I wonder if there's a metaphor that allows you to maintain a glyph or icon based UI for both the buttons. Have you thought about a non-glyph lens icon embedded on the left?
about 1 year ago
Ya I guess the speed would be good at an event where you're constantly snapping or shooting. I can definitely see my clumsy thumbs mistapping a lot, but I'm a doofus.
about 1 year ago
actually have a lot of stats from working with photobucket that this is a bad idea from a ux standpoint.
about 1 year ago
Love the subtle transparency
about 1 year ago
Care to elaborate @Nick Slogget?
about 1 year ago
@Eli Schiff well I actually have thought about it. But I want to keep it native.
about 1 year ago
@Jackie Tran Cool. Looking forward to seeing how this shapes up
about 1 year ago
very nice!
about 1 year ago
nice!
about 1 year ago
@Matt Kump hey dude, toggling on the only major action, is very un-natural. Users looked for the standard toggle to switch from either picture/video (reference ios' camera app). The users tapped the wrong part constantly, and were really frustrated when they missed the moment because of the toggle.
about 1 year ago
Was working on a similar 'light' the day before. This is better.
about 1 year ago
@Nick Slogget That should depend on the type of app really. If the core feature of the app is the camera, and if it replaces the native camera app, there shouldn't be a problem with understanding the new UI when first starting the app (which you usually do immediately after purchasing). That way, users shouldn't struggle to adapt when they really need to use the app.
If, on the other hand, the camera is not the main feature of the app and you'll probably only try it when you really need it, it's probably a safer bet to go with the default UI.
As this seems to be a pure camera app, I think introducing a new UI should not be a problem. I do agree, however, that they are fairly close. Especially for one-handed use.
about 1 year ago
@Lennart Ziburski we literally did user tests that had thousands of people. Its a main button, there isn't a successful app of the market today that splits functionality like this, whether its a camera app or not.
A lot of assumptions in your comment :)
about 1 year ago
@Nick Slogget Yeah, I'm just assuming here - I obviously haven't made any user tests as you were able to.
My point is this:
When introducing such an UI that works totally different than one of the basic UIs people are used to while looking similar to it, you either need to get the user to play around with the UI himself or explain it to him.
I assume that users of the Photobucket app did not try the camera UI before needing it because
a) there are a a lot of other screens to browse in the app and they assumed the camera UI to behave like the default one (because most apps don't change it)
b) using the camera in the Photobucket app seems to be associated with uploading pictures. Even though you might be able to snap pictures with it without uploading, that association probably prevented many from trying it out before real-world use.
So I definitely think such an UI is possible by either having an app that encourages trying out the camera or by explaining the UI to users before. Both could be possible with a pure camera app, as the camera UI is probably the core feature you market. I don't think the current app situation is an indication on whether this concept can work.
Again, these are obviously just my thoughts on this and I don't have much insight into how exactly your user tests looked like. Maybe you did exactly what I said and people are just that weird. ;)
Feels weird to write long comments on Dribbble...
about 1 year ago
^ That sir is a damn comment haha. You are more than welcome to email me :D
people should write longer comments :) that way it promotes better design :D
about 1 year ago
weird name for a camera app ... great GUI design so far though :D
about 1 year ago
nice
about 1 year ago