Image Designer Archive
Thread: Let's talk about: Image Design User Interface
I was under the (false)impression that you wanted the customer to see and have useof thecontrols section, AI slider bars and paletes. I'm not sure why,and don't feel like reseaching or care why 
Let's just be happy we all agree
Message Edited by Sir_Voor on 03-09-2004 01:28 PM
Odim wrote:
Bam theres a third person advocating for exactly what i described and was flamed for.
MUSoprano wrote:
As usual, I love n'Jessi's ideas. I am desperate for a well-lit interface where I can zoom in if needed, the customer can see changes as they're made, and a customer clicking the "accept" button automatically renders payment from them. Secure payment method is sorely needed. ID isn't like a set of doc buffs or getting a mind buff from a dancer. In those cases, you KNOW what you're paying for so payment in advance is the norm. With ID... someone might come in for a quick hair color change and leave looking TOTALLY different. So asking for 1 or 2k up front would be counterproductive to the image designer.
Actually Odim, I should be thanking you. That post of yours has helped me to crystalize the wishes I posted here long ago. Let me explain: what it sounded like you were advocating was not an instant update of the client-side interface, what it sounded like was a display almost exactly resemblings ours on the client's side, but unchangeable by them. In the same way that I changed my view on the perfect interface because of n'Jessi's comments, I've rethought because of yours.
I still like the general overview of features I put up—and Sir Voor's most recent list (although it would be neat to have changes-per-commit raised on a per-skillbox basis instead of just master/non-master)—but I'm starting to rethink the update of the image on the client's side. So…here's what I'm wondering now. As long as the client can't see the sliders/palettes, would it do any harm to have them be able to see an up-to-the-second avatar in a well-lit window? Probably not. It wouldn't remove the creative interaction, since you'd still have to narrow the ranges of choices before beginning the changes, and there would still be that give and take of tweaking the slider changes, it would just go faster.
I guess what I'm saying is that I'm sorry. I misunderstood what is was you were asking for, and I jumped on you unnecessarilly because of it. Please believe that we really aren't an ego-centric, power-mad community…just a small one very passionate about what we do. I'll also admit that many of your posts rub me the wrong way—but that doesn't excuse my behavior earlier. So, public mistake, public apology. I hope we can all put this UI ugliness behind us and work together to further strengthen what I see as one of the stronger communities on these forums.
Enough rambling…on with the new stuff for us
Sir_Voor wrote:
Ummm? Now what is the difference between "present image" and the "commet"buttons? ( With this UI... )
As I understand it, "present image" would update the client-side UI image, whereas "commit" would give the client the option of paying for and finalizing the changes. 'Course, I could be way off base here.
Message Edited by Sir_Voor on 03-09-2004 03:09 PM
Syzygy-Gorath wrote:
As I understand it, "present image" would update the client-side UI image, whereas "commit" would give the client the option of paying for and finalizing the changes. 'Course, I could be way off base here.
Odim wrote:
What?? Why was I met with so much resistance on this.... now everyone wants it?
Message Edited by Gyopi on 03-09-2004 03:47 PM
Syzygy-Gorath wrote:
I still like the general overview of features I put up—and Sir Voor's most recent list (although it would be neat to have changes-per-commit raised on a per-skillbox basis instead of just master/non-master)—but I'm starting to rethink the update of the image on the client's side. So…here's what I'm wondering now. As long as the client can't see the sliders/palettes, would it do any harm to have them be able to see an up-to-the-second avatar in a well-lit window? Probably not. It wouldn't remove the creative interaction, since you'd still have to narrow the ranges of choices before beginning the changes, and there would still be that give and take of tweaking the slider changes, it would just go faster.
I think I would personally prefer that the image designer have the option to update what the client sees just to keep the "normal" way of doing image design from becoming just starting the sliders at minimum and increasing them until they say stop. If they asked to be a little fatter, I would prefer just to make them a little fatter and then showing them what I did so that they can say if theylike it or would like to be a little thinner or I should go a little further. That encourages interaction with the customer and allows me to be creative. I would really hate an image design session like the following though.
Customer: I would like to change my look. Can you help me?
Me: Sure!
Customer: Ok. Let start with the hair (which is what I always do last because of the haircolor bug).
Me: {Clicks through the hairstyles one by one}
Customer: Stop!
Me: Ok.
Customer: Now I would like a tan.
Me: {Clicks through the skin colors one by one}
Customer: Stop!
Me: Ok.
Customer: And maybe I should be a little taller.
Me: {Goes to the height menu and presses the right arrow}
Customer: Stop!
Me: OK.
Customer: OK. Thanks.
This would probably be the worst image design session I can think of since I would just be a proxy for the customer using their mouse. Just the subtle difference between having a "present image" button and realtime changes makes all the difference here.
As an ID customer (and someone who sits next to one), I think the proposed changes would be great on the customer end. Being able to peek over at his screen and see more detail of how he was trying to change my avatar helped alot. I hope Odim's blood pressure goes back down to normal now 
Gyopi wrote:
I think I would personally prefer that the image designer have the option to update what the client sees just to keep the "normal" way of doing image design from becoming just starting the sliders at minimum and increasing them until they say stop. If they asked to be a little fatter, I would prefer just to make them a little fatter and then showing them what I did so that they can say if theylike it or would like to be a little thinner or I should go a little further. That encourages interaction with the customer and allows me to be creative. I would really hate an image design session like the following though.
Customer: I would like to change my look. Can you help me?
Me: Sure!
Customer: Ok. Let start with the hair (which is what I always do last because of the haircolor bug).
Me: {Clicks through the hairstyles one by one}
Customer: Stop!
Me: Ok.
Customer: Now I would like a tan.
Me: {Clicks through the skin colors one by one}
Customer: Stop!
Me: Ok.
Customer: And maybe I should be a little taller.
Me: {Goes to the height menu and presses the right arrow}
Customer: Stop!
Me: OK.
Customer: OK. Thanks.
This would probably be the worst image design session I can think of since I would just be a proxy for the customer using their mouse. Just the subtle difference between having a "present image" button and realtime changes makes all the difference here.
Syzygy-Gorath wrote:
As I understand it, "present image" would update the client-side UI image, whereas "commit" would give the client the option of paying for and finalizing the changes. 'Course, I could be way off base here.
After you press the "Commit" button it would be nice if you went to a trade window. The ID could be a data disk labeled Image Design in the trade object area. By going to a trade window we could not only do IDs for credits but also objects, safely!
Also have it so the ID resets to original/pre-ID settingsif you or the customer goes LD, /disband or moves away before the trade is OKed.