Live data from Hacker News

A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

blog.presentandcorrect.com

51–60 of 122 posts

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#51
post #37

Can you even imagine how relaxing it would be to have the same interface to your systems, every day, with all the parts in one physical location and never moving? Learn it once, then nothing changes for years and years, or if it does it's usually adding on, not replacing or re-arranging existing stuff? Man, that would be nice.

Especially if the interface was designed for high performance (unlike most UX today). One of my favorite was when I spent years starting to learn photojournalism on the side: the mechanics of using a camera is only a small part of it (it's mostly about understanding and conveying a story), but even at my student/amateur level, the muscle memory with pro DSLR and lenses was crazy-effective. I even got a shot that happ…

I'm in full agreement with you about the tactility benefits with a physical camera versus a smartphone.

I'm in a phase of life where I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be doing or even what I'm very good at. But I do have a camera and I can write passable amounts of code, so I've been preparing a website to host my work while I strongarm friends and family into taking pictures with me. Most of them have a nice phone with a good camera and so we often end up talking about what the benefits are of a dedicated set of camera hardware versus using a phone's camera. I like those discussions because it makes me think critically about my camera and why I'm using it.

The physical inputs and muscle-memory laden experience is what I've kept relying on as justification and it's nice to hear I'm not the only one. For those of us who have used guns, it almost feels like holding a rifle. The entire process is subconscious and the more I use it the faster I become, as well as the more finely-tuned I can set up the camera during that subconscious movement. It equips me to image things that, if constrained by time or scene stability, I straight up would not be able to do with a phone camera.

There's also the social benefit that comes with it. I've found that when I'm using my camera and rapidly fiddling with controls and settings, people around me get the sense that I am a professional (I'm not) who knows what he is doing (I don't). "Everyone" has a phone so those "every" are common to see holding up a flat slab to a scene but dedicated camera users are increasingly rare. My tools and my physical control over them grants me this silly air of authority. And honestly that authority presents me with fresh opportunities for impromptu shots; just recently I was at a live music event and started wandering into places and standing on things to get the angles I wanted. Nobody said a word to me, nor did I think twice about doing it. We all kind of understood, "that guy has a camera and he's using it well. I suppose we should let him work". Kind of interesting.

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#52

Can you even imagine how relaxing it would be to have the same interface to your systems, every day, with all the parts in one physical location and never moving? Learn it once, then nothing changes for years and years, or if it does it's usually adding on, not replacing or re-arranging existing stuff? Man, that would be nice.

Boring is best where the risk of nuclear meltdown is concerned, but I would expect operating the same system every day for years to be pretty boring vs. engineering changes to systems.

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#53

We still have control rooms like this (I think in use) in Tasmania Australia. They sometimes have open days for our Hydro Power Plants, and they are some of the most interesting tours around. The one I visited was like using a time machine to travel back to the age of Art Deco. Obviously some more modern control systems have been added, but the Art Deco vibe is still there!

I was lucky enough to tour a lot of hydroelectric dams around the western US as a child, thanks to frequent roadtrips and a dad who could talk his way into nearly any place, and a more permissive security culture[1]. As you say, a lot of the control rooms are beautiful in a certain functional way.

[1]Another thing ruined by 9/11.

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#54

I've operated in boiler room offices at large plants for almost 40 years, the mimic panel is a very valuable tool. With miles of piping carrying water and steam for various reasons, the panels help keep it all straight in your mind. These panels are in hospitals, chemical plants, data centers, Navy ships and subs and many other places similar to where I work. I can't imagine what it feels like to work in a nuke facil…

I was maintaining instrumentation is similar control rooms. The man behind panel. Petrochemical industry, recorders, indicators, alarms, tranducers, pneum. controllers. Mix of pneumatic and electronic technology (thermionic valves mostly). US technology from 50's/60's and it looked the same like this. Remember Taylor 700T chopper stabilized thermocouple transducer, Honeywell, Fisher instrumentation...

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#55

I've operated in boiler room offices at large plants for almost 40 years, the mimic panel is a very valuable tool. With miles of piping carrying water and steam for various reasons, the panels help keep it all straight in your mind. These panels are in hospitals, chemical plants, data centers, Navy ships and subs and many other places similar to where I work. I can't imagine what it feels like to work in a nuke facil…

The recreation of the control room in HBO's Chernobyl drama was impressive. Presumably it was fairly accurate/authentic - but also it's simplicity and explicit use during shots in the drama as a filmic device to explain the quite technically complex plot was amazing. From the dials, meters and warning lights made it all come alive.

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#56

Can you even imagine how relaxing it would be to have the same interface to your systems, every day, with all the parts in one physical location and never moving? Learn it once, then nothing changes for years and years, or if it does it's usually adding on, not replacing or re-arranging existing stuff? Man, that would be nice.

whatever would the bored 10x'er do! But of course, invent the LCD touchscreen. Now, excuse me while I throw up.

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#57
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Learn vi/vim/nvim. Interface hasn't changed much since 1976 (first version of vi).

I think a modal editor is somewhat at odds with an HMI consisting of dedicated, physical controls.

nomodes.com

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#58
They’re amazing. I can’t imagine the process to ensure all the metrics are correct. Seems like you’d have to check every single little dial for accuracy. Insane considering there’s hundreds.

I assume there was one of these rooms for every reactor too, crazy.

Re: A collection of Soviet control rooms (2017)

#59
post #48
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially if the interface was designed for high performance (unlike most UX today). One of my favorite was when I spent years starting to learn photojournalism on the side: the mechanics of using a camera is only a small part of it (it's mostly about understanding and conveying a story), but even at my student/amateur level, the muscle memory with pro DSLR and lenses was crazy-effective. I even got a shot that happ…

f8 and be there.

For the "f/8 and be there" philosophy of getting a usable shot at all, I agree with the simplicity of having a sensible default, and of course with the importance of being where the story is. In the digital era, and as a student/amateur who often kept the strobe in the bag, I'd modify that to "f/4 and be there".

f/4 with autofocus, aperture-priority automatic exposure, ISO 400 gave great images, with faster exposure (less likely to have motion blur when I didn't want it, and faster bursts, more forgiving of lower light) and shallower depth-of-field (for making the subject pop).

(I think of f/8 as being near hyperfocal distance for having anything in field of view in focus, and probably near an image quality sweet spot of the lens, but also often being slow for non-studio use unless you were using a strobe.)

Post reply on HN