Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Every Frame Perfect

tonsky.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 293 posts

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#101

Post by jchw »

fasterik wrote: post #89
jchw wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are taking it a step too far. First of all, unlike film, we are not recording reality in any way, every pixel that appears on screen is there because we put it there . I'd argue a closer parallel is a cartoon. And something like cartoon inbetweening is not an example of imperfect frames. These are in fact, perfect and even carefully crafted frames. It's one thing if the frame halfway through an animation…

We're not recording reality, but we're trying to create convincing and aesthetically pleasing effects for brains that evolved in reality.

The point is that if a pixel is in a nonsensical place the only thing that is to blame for that is the code. It doesn't matter if it looks pleasing; there's no good reason for something to be wrong just because it looks acceptable.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#102

Post by mrandish »

fasterik wrote: post #55

I agree that some of the examples the author provided are instances of bad animation. But I don't agree with the premise of the article. Computer graphics is all about exploiting features of the human visual system. We perceive things differently when they're moving vs. when they're standing still. It's very possible that a "wrong" frame in isolation is the best looking one in a real-time context. We can also pick ap…

I initially thought "Every Frame Perfect" meant a strict avoidance of any jank or stutter in motion, which I'm fully on-board for but as a film, video and 3D technologist, you're spot on calling out motion blur and similar temporal artifacts. In motion, they not only look 'most correct' to the human visual system, they are the most interpretable.

Adding the correct blur to motion makes it appear clearer but seen as a still, it's obviously not clearer. The nuance is correct motion blur appears clearer while guaranteeing it's as clear as the human visual system can perceive moving details at that speed, so no perceptual detail is actually lost. It's a method that objectively improves perception which only works in motion. If frozen, the method breaks. Thus, evaluating motion blurred stills for clarity or interpretability is incorrect.

The rest of the article focuses on details of proper implementation while missing the opportunity to question whether some of these animations should exist at all. IMHO, motion can be a valuable affordance in limited doses but it's reached a point of overuse and, in some cases, outright abuse of the user's visual field and cognitive load. Designers (and their PMs) see it as a badge of 'Refined Modern UX' but it's devolved into a trendy gimmick aping good design without being good design.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#104

Post by lukeschlather »

tsunamifury wrote: post #5
ikesau wrote: post #4

I'm sure a UI that had none of these imperfect frames would feel better, but now I really want someone to edit each of these clips to show what it would actually look like. At the same time, why does everything need motion? My understanding is that motion should be used if an action subtly changes the UI in a region that's different from where the action was triggered (e.g. toasts) I think many of these transitions a…

Motion is critical for reorientation after transition. Often with out it your brain has to rescan the entire page on each refresh.

The OS shouldn't be making many big changes that force me to reorient. When I'm moving between different UIs I often want to compare them; animations make it harder to compare state A to state B. I can detect very fine differences between two images by switching between them within a second, if there's a 1-second animation it not only means it's going to add a second, it adds a bunch of visual noise which might make it impossible to be able to distinguish what's an actual difference and what's just noise introduced by the animation.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#105

Post by tosti »

akersten wrote: post #82
namuol wrote: post #72

Would be nice if there were some _positive_ examples to go along with all of the negative ones. All I’m really getting from this is that I should avoid animations, which I don’t think is what the author is actually trying to say.

> All I’m really getting from this is that I should avoid animations Wouldn't be the worst takeaway from the article. You should avoid animation for animation's sake in general. Imagine if we animated letters flying up from your phone's keyboard into the text field as you type them for example.

I think it would be hilarious if you'd combine that with the clacking sound of a typewriter.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#106

Post by helterskelter »

lukeschlather wrote: post #104
tsunamifury wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motion is critical for reorientation after transition. Often with out it your brain has to rescan the entire page on each refresh.

The OS shouldn't be making many big changes that force me to reorient. When I'm moving between different UIs I often want to compare them; animations make it harder to compare state A to state B. I can detect very fine differences between two images by switching between them within a second, if there's a 1-second animation it not only means it's going to add a second, it adds a bunch of visual noise which might make…

Try using a tiling window manager. I generally dislike animation in my UI, but when a window, especially an unexpected one opens up and changes your layout it can take a second or more to reorient and it can really interrupt your flow. Animation would alleviate that.

That said, I still prefer sway over the animated alternatives for other reasons.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#107

Post by hollerith »

jstanley wrote: post #94
tsunamifury wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motion is critical for reorientation after transition. Often with out it your brain has to rescan the entire page on each refresh.

True in 3d CAD when switching between work planes. I can't think of another application.

It is easier for me to play speed chess with smooth animation of each move rather than when a piece instantly teleports from origin to destination, but I have reason to believe that I'm unusually intolerant to frequent activation of my orienting response.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#108

Post by eqvinox »

The application of "every frame perfect" to the mouse pointer ranges from neutral to actively harmful. It causes roughly 1 frame of delay, which can be enough to bump the display-eye-hand-mouse loop out of whack (this seems to be different from person to person). It also causes pointer stutter when the system is under load side the pointer can't be independently updated.

Re: Every Frame Perfect

#109

Post by ezst »

SarthakGaud wrote: post #93

New Principle and I love it, however its hard to do on move dynamic and populated sites like youtube. Gonna follow this from my next project.

Re: YouTube example, the issue (as I understand it, and I'm what you could describe as the opposite of an expert in that) is that the video and the playlist blend with transparency over one another. Had the playlist appeared sliding from the right side of the screen, it would have worked (I guess).
Post reply on HN