Claymorphism: Will it stick around? • Hacker News Board

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#11

Post by rjh29 » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 7:50 AM UTC

KaiserPro wrote: post #6

hulitu wrote: post #3

"Flat design and its more popular successor, Material design, have been dominating the web UI for quite some time, featuring a minimalistic aesthetic that eliminates visual clutter and favors user experience." Yeah. Unfortunately not everyone is masochistic enough to enjoy the Flat or Material design.

Google's Material Design is such a hostile system. "lets create action buttons well away from the action" "modal dialogues _must_ take over as much area as possible, regardless of triviality" For all the noise about research lead UX, it doesn't seem that people actually performed research on users, only other UX people.

The problem with UX is every single UX designer thinks they intuitively know what is best for users when studies show that to be completely false. So Google are right to listen to research instead. No UX design can please everyone.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#12

Post by ahartmetz » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 7:54 AM UTC

a9h74j wrote: post #9

Yes these claymorphic UIs appear childish, but the buttons are large enough to not present a choking hazard.

I don't like it much either, aesthetically, but you can kind of see where you can expect a click to trigger an action, so it has that going for it.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#13

Post by 0dayz » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:22 AM UTC

This style reminds me of late 90s early 2000th website style with those very overly round corners.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#14

Post by captainmuon » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:28 AM UTC

Neumorphism is just a style, not a complete design philosophy like skeumorphism, or the rejection of skeumorphism. It wouldn't even be compared to the two if its inventor didn't give it a clever name. It does look nice though, when not overdone. But Claymorphism? Sorry but it looks like the kind of buttons I made with the emboss effect in Paint Shop Pro in the 90s :-D. But it does give me nostalgia.

I think there is a lot of knowledge of how to make these effects that gets lost and rediscovered periodically. Both web designers and desktop theme designers had a lot of tricks. For example, you can make something look concave or convex with a subtle gradient (like in neumorphism). Or, you can make a button look more realistic with a 1px grey shadow around, grounding it to the background (like buildings in a RTS game might have. Or, you can use a gradient with a step in the middle to simulate glossyness and get an "aqua" style. It might be a fun and useful project to collect this kind of knowledge.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#15

Post by duskwuff » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:32 AM UTC

> On Apple’s iPhone OS 1, the YouTube app icon is a television instead of the iconic logo we know today!

Because that logo didn't exist yet! YouTube didn't start using their modern logo until 2017 -- before then, they were using a wordmark logo which wouldn't have made for a good icon.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#16

Post by rwmj » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:39 AM UTC

Ctrl F "testing", "usability" "a/b" etc shows nothing. Why isn't there a discussion about what's best for users?

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#17

Post by mano78 » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:47 AM UTC

I use the rather excellent (IMHO) Axentix CSS framework, and it has a few (optional) *morphisms. Worth a try, they are quite different.

https://useaxentix.com/docs/getting-started/ and choose "Trends" in the menu.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#18

Post by ilrwbwrkhv » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:49 AM UTC

rjh29 wrote: post #11

KaiserPro wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's Material Design is such a hostile system. "lets create action buttons well away from the action" "modal dialogues _must_ take over as much area as possible, regardless of triviality" For all the noise about research lead UX, it doesn't seem that people actually performed research on users, only other UX people.

The problem with UX is every single UX designer thinks they intuitively know what is best for users when studies show that to be completely false. So Google are right to listen to research instead. No UX design can please everyone.

Google also has some of the worst UX I have ever used. The only good one and the last one was google search homepage.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#19

Post by twic » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 8:52 AM UTC

We need a total and complete shutdown of web designers until we can figure out what is going on.

Re: Claymorphism: Will it stick around?

#20

Post by codeptualize » Thu, Mar 31, 2022, 9:02 AM UTC

Is this really a trend? I'm getting very strong neumorphism vibes from it: A contrived trend that never really worked, looked outdated from the start, and never got main stream.

The real vs Dribbble ratio of the examples in this post points in the same direction.

I do think the 3d graphics are a trend, which fair enough have often a sort of clayish aesthetic, but I am very skeptical that will become a popular all encompassing UI style.