I really like the interface as it is actually. I’m used to it I guess! 🙂
A lot of people say The GIMP is confusing but I found it very easy to learn, just like Photoshop. Now that I got the trial of CS3 working(Intellipoint issue) the interface tweaks are really nice! I like the droplets and the single-icon toolbox.
Some will argue otherwise, but I see absolutely no need for the commands you mentioned (nor any similar, common commands) to be present in the Options Bar, nor in any other screen-hogging bar, panel, palette or widget.
Except for "Flatten Image" (Shift + F13 on my systems for over 5 years), they’re the most basic and often used commands in software, and I think most folks use keyboard shortcuts for them.
If they don’t, they should.
I like the Photoshop interface. I like the one is CS2 and I will get used to the one in CS3. I think they are both clean, easy and efficient. More so than in programs like Paint Shop Pro, Painter, etc.
Robert
the PS UI is still complicated too much
PS is a complicated program. People who want a simpler interface are usually ones who want a simpler program. Adobe has already done that … Elements. The interface is fine, if you invest the time to learn to use the program.
Well, I’m not going to say much here about customizable toolbars, buttonbars, or whatever one chooses to call them, but I remain firm in opinon that such a feature would greatly enhance the user-friendliness and usability in general of Photoshop. Keyboard shortcuts are good, but unwieldy in many cases, where a single-click button is far more efficient to use.
The changes made for CS3 don’t particularly impress me, especially if you like using the roll-up application window which then requires floating the palettes and losing their fly-out design when docked. However, while I do like keeping the desktop relatively free of clutter and the compact, docked palettes are nice in that regard, I’m more likely to just use the normal tab-to-hide approach, leaving the palettes fully visible unless they’re in my way.
I’ve seen people comment how they’d like to see Photoshop take on InDesign’s tabbed approach, but after looking at a demo of InDesign, I personally hated that GUI style. The text of the tabs is very difficult to read at a quick glance, especially given that it is rotated and – on a high-res monitor – rather small. Buttons, while not always intuitive, at least do generally provide a larger graphical icon that one can pick up and learn rather quickly what it means.
Regards,
Daryl
There are always skills level values and these may often be offset by intuitive workflows accommodated by a user interface.
Unfortunately these are often favoured one way or another by personal preference and that is probably as wide as the user base itself.
I have yet to try PS CS3 so I look forward with anticipation.
My own view (and I assume it is of no more/lesser importance than other posters) is: – a UI should be invisible (it helps one do what one wants to do without too many intervening stages)
– immediacy is important
– I find flying, juggling, moving or dynamic interfaces a bit distracting as they tend to interrupt my concentration and what i am trying to do (interference factor but maybe one can adapt to that?)
– one of the things that I love in PS CS is that the layer blend modes are click-in so once in the blend mode list one may arrow through the list looking onscreen rather than click list > scroll > select > click list > scroll > select > …
– pallets (I love ’em) They are nice, stable and tend to be (in Adobe products) user defined should one wish. They also tend to stay put and are predictably there when needed.
– easily compacted, draggable any where onscreen, stackable, draggable in stack, expandable in stacks (see CH E3 for a reasonable example)
Deebs,
I tend to agree with you about dynamic interfaces. While they may look slick, I just prefer a "click it and give it to me now" approach. In Windows, one of the first things I do after setting up a new installation, is customize the GUI to turn off any window animation, sliding things into view, etc. I also reduce the mouse delay for menu activation so that menus fly out pretty quick.
I do like the palettes of PS, and even more once I learned they could be docked together so that multiple palettes could be positioned as a single element. Being I’m not at home to see CS3 right now, I think there was something about how the docking of palettes is indicated that I favor over CS2. One thing I miss though, is being able to orient the toolbox to a horizontal layout; I thought I’d rememebered the CS3 Beta as offering that, but perhaps it was never anything more than a 1- or 2-column view. I think it would be nice if the toolbox could be oriented to the user’s preference, either horizontally or vertically.
Daryl
As one of Daryl’s customers I can’t resist posting my interface on CS.
This was perfectly practical to use, even on a laptop and of course, like the palettes, the customisable toolbar could be hidden with a click if it was in the way.
I never understood why no effort was made to make the CS2 interface compatible.
<
http://img409.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshotbg1.jpg>
pixentral does NOT throw up pop-under windows in IE where imageshack does. grr… 🙂
And what about customizing Options palette, or some Favorites palette where I could put my favorite tools and options? I think it is an interesting idea.
Btw, I like idea of possibility to put panels on the bottom of the screen. Anyone who is used to former Macromedia products would like that feature, I think…
Cheers.
With bigger screen real estate applications that reduce user working area get a thumbs down from me. (It’s time to put the developers to task 🙂 )
One hidden beauty about The Gimp is that it seems to prepare one for the Mac (first time Mac user).
