3:02 PM

Small icons, big decisions!

posted under by Pinheiro | Edit This
Well not that big of a decision, but I have started today to work on the small icons for kmix (bit tired of the timevault pixel pushing). I ah been putting this ones off my to do list cause they are way more difficult than what they seam to be. 22x22 icons are a pain to make even more than 16x16.....

So I have a design I'm mostly happy with for the master Chanel but I cant make up my mind on what works best of a series of versions made, so what do you think 1 2 3 or 4.... how does it look in your screen?

My personal preference goes for 2 but... Not sure.... so I thought what a good opportunity to listen "read" our users.

72 comments

Make A Comment

72 comments:

Lex said...

Number 2 is better :)

Jesper said...

I'd say that 4 is the better one. The others seem unnecessarily cluttered.

Fatih said...

#4

Med said...

I prefer number 4 too. I find it more clear. The ticks on the others make them look a bit overloaded IMHO.

Andreas Roedl said...

2

behavedave said...

1.

Anonymous said...

#1 definitely too cluttered

I think I prefer #4 as well, since it's less cluttered than the others. In kmix the icons will usually be show several side by side, and in that case I think #2 and #3 will be too cluttered as well.

pprkut said...

#4 is the one most easy to recognize for me. All others are nice too, but contain too much visual distraction

Pinheiro said...

4 was the first one I made but it looked to generic so I made the little lines, i was not sure about it so....

Mário Martins said...

I vote 3.

I think it makes easy to compare with other levels.

Anonymous said...

#4, because it is less cluttered. However, I like the idea to "lighten up" the greyed out bar at the top as it is done in #3. If you just have a short look or look at it out of the eye's corner it is hard to differentiate the green bars from the grey bars.

Maybe you can combine #3 and #4?

#1 is however a definite no-go because it is much too cluttered.

Zoran said...

#4

reldruH said...

4, please

Jan said...

Personal prefarence: 4

Jackson Williams said...

4. The others look too busy/crowded.

Anonymous said...

Definitely 4! Though as a previous comment said, maybe experiment with a 3/4 hybrid.

Just out of curiosity, is the icon static or does it change to reflect the current volume level?

FiNeX said...

I like 4 too :)

Anonymous said...

#4, at that size other details are confusing

Chris said...

3!

sebas said...

Can you try a version that is basically 4, but has small lines on op and bottom? The balance of the slider seems too "centered", small lines on the ends are less cluttering than the tickmarks, but I think they do provide that balanced feel.

Nice work by the way :)

Num83rGuy said...

Being colorblind I find 3 to be the easiest to see the difference between the "on" and "off" lights.

However, this is only important if the icon actually indicates the volume level.

Anonymous said...

#4!

Could you try #4 with lighter bars as in #3?

Vinod Khare said...

Number 3!

1 - is too cluttered

2 and 3 -- these are almost the same, except for a lightening of one of the levels. I think 3 is better because it emphasizes that something is changing. In two, the 'lit' and the 'unlit' levels have almost the same contrast, making it harder to see the change.

4 - doesn't have enough detail


nº 4, I haven't read the text when I already preferred it :-)

mobilehunter said...

I prefer 3.
For my eyes, easier to see the level

Anonymous said...

why do those icons need to be quadratic? i'd consider that slider to be obsolete and therefore some space in the systray (mine is always too large) could be saved.

#4

Soap said...

I like 3 the best.

Even if the actual level won't be displayed, the lighter bar at the top looks better: more contrast from the other bars.

IvanGaravito said...

#3 is the best when recognizing the visual levels. #4 as you said Pinheiro, "it looked to generic". I think that simplicity for the user must be prefered. Also #3 seems ergonomic, which is most.

Edd said...

I like #2 best, I think it look more real.

Anonymous said...

3/4 hybrid. Nice work!

Milan said...

#4

Nice work

Lukasz said...

4 please, with a lighter grey on top as in 3

Anonymous said...

2 is best, but 4 is also fine (little "noise")

Ivan Čukić said...

I'd vote for 2 or 3.

There is a small request, though. The /old school/ volume meters (I don't know whether it is still the case - I'm using 10 years old audio equipment) had the top bars coloured in red (the maximum volume one).

Anonymous said...

anyone with a tick mark, preferably 2.

bear.sh said...

#3

Anonymous said...

3 please

Christian Loose said...

I prefer #2

Anonymous said...

3 ftw! :-)

Anonymous said...

a little bit off topic, but: will the mixer gui reworked, too? it is really ugly.

Quintesse said...

Combination of 3 and 4 (as I see has been suggested many times before, great minds DO think alike! ahem ahem)

Solid said...

4 ;)

Jurģis said...

#2

Anonymous said...

nr. 2 with a scala and sharp shape

Anonymous said...

I like #2. 4 looks like the slider just is there out in space...

Anonymous said...

I definitely like the lighter grey of #3 as well. It gives better contrast between the green leds and the grey one.
Other than that, I can't decide between #3 and #4. Perhaps the suggestion someone made to add only one tickmark on top and below to #4 is a good in between.

Anonymous said...

for me the better one is #3

arno said...

4, nice and clean

Anonymous said...

The icons do look nice. And the difference between them is just marginal. I just wonder about the relation to kmix. The slider is ok. But what are the buttons right of the slider? My kmix does not have such buttons. So perhaps just two sliders side by side would be more kmix related?

Temet said...

Everything but #1 :)

Enrico Ros said...

In my monitor #2 is more recognizable than the third. The fourth hasn't enough detail, looks like a slider, not a mixer.

I vote for #2, maybe with another background it's different..

Anonymous said...

4 is nice, as its not so cluttered, but 3 is cool too, as its easily readable. What about a 3,5? :)

Stefan Sarzio said...

2

purplebobby said...

The icon is quite pretty.

Is this just a static icon, or does the slider reflect some value?
At first I thought the green blobs were buttons, not feedback of the level chosen.
The level can be indicated by tick marks or LEDs: both seems unnecessary.
Level, but level of what? Perhaps the icon should include a musical note or a crescendo sign (sideways V) or a mixer symbol (X) (circle with an X in it), but then you have an icon in an icon.

Anonymous said...

please keep it simple, therefore 4

Gareth Doutch said...

3 for me!

vespas said...

4 looks better from a distance

maninalift said...

#4

It would be useful and also funky if the icon could reflect the actual volume level.

LnxSlck said...

Number 1

Anonymous said...

Looks nice ;)
Number 4 please :)

GortiZ said...

Number 3

mutlu said...

I would go for #2 as well.

Bille said...

I agree with purpleblobby - having a slider (that people expect to indicate a value by its position) and a stack of LEDs indicating the value is too complex.

In my opinion small icons should be as functional as possible, without considering resembling real world objects.

How about a speaker cone shape that is shaded gray, that fills up with white segments from left to right as the volume increases?

Anonymous said...

Hi Pineiro,

I tested a bit with GIMP, because i didn't like that vertical line ... here are my tries ... maybe it's useful:

http://ochsenreither.de/screenshots/KMIX.PNG

Marco said...

definitely version 4. i think it is the most scalable version.

Flavio said...

#4
Less clutter!

Vladislav said...

2 or 4

Tom said...

They are all awful. Sorry, but I really don't like them. Just give us normal "speaker" icon with sound waves going from it. Vista and MacOS have nice and usable icons.

Pinheiro said...

@Tom for all of them? Is a speaker a chanell?

kowal said...

#4 rocks.

Tom said...

@Pinheiro: Looks I should've read the whole post :-) I thought this is for systray.
I vote for #4 then. It looks the best on my EIZO LCD. #1 & #2 are too sharp, #3 is too blurry. #4 is sth between.

Anonymous said...

The first option is the best, because is more realistic than the others. You can see it at: http://images.google.com/images?q=dj%20mixer

top