F16: Let's improve the user interface ;-)

(Edit: Original post was unnecessarily snarky. Low blood sugar. Let's just say I had a candy bar and saw the error of my ways.)

In broad strokes I think most people familiar with Fusion would say quite a few things are missing, and
there is a substantial waste of screen real-estate, lack of customization and a some operations that are made unnecessarily cumbersome.

The good news however, is that Fusion 9 still works and upgrading to the beta is not compulsory so if there are things you can't live with in F16, just ignore it and stay with F9.

Snarky won't be useful, no. There is a lot to be desired, so please show what you need. As is evident from the steps that Resolve is taking, they do listen, but to a very large varied userbase. So if you want things to improve, you'll have to ask and show. I completely agree there's lots of things that can be done to improve the UI experience, so let's get to work. The fact that there is a new release now confirms that - at least for now - Standalone is alive. Let's keep it that way.

Overall I think the User interface uses too much real state there is nothing wrong with tiny buttons also undockable everything is something that I really miss from F9, performance improvements are welcome but the UI ins't inspiring at all.

For me, the main issue is that you can now no longer organise the UI how you like it.

Personally, I like the node graph filling most of the left screen, the timeline below it, the dopesheet / spline viewer below that. My right screen is just one big viewer, I don't use the 1/2 viewers except very rarely when comparing to reference.

Unless I'm missing it, the new version doesn't allow you to re-arrange panels like this. The timeline has to live under the viewer in the main interface, you can't put it under the node graph. The spline view has to live to the right of the node graph. You can make floating windows but trying to add multiple views to them doesn't work. When I hide the 1/2 views now, the timeviewer lives right at the top of the left screen, which feels very out of place.

I understand the thought process behind making Fusion and Resolve have the same visual language, but Resolve's limited user interface has always been it's main flaw. A one-size-fits-all approach doesn't work for a compositor that everyone customises.

As is evident from the steps that Resolve is taking, they do listen, but to a very large varied userbase. So if you want things to improve, you'll have to ask and show. I completely agree there's lots of things that can be done to improve the UI experience, so let's get to work.

I totally agree with Sander on this. I haven't had the time to test the new release yet, but if there is anything we don't like about it, we should just keep pushing for it to change.

BMD has proven that they do listen. It really looks like they considered killing Fusion standalone at one point, but decided against it because a lot of us kept arguing against it. At least this is what I inferred from the fact that Fusion standalone comes only as Studio now. Since most people who argued against killing standalone were the pro and power users of Fusion, it probably made sense to them to keep standalone alive only as a paid version.

Unless I'm missing it, the new version doesn't allow you to re-arrange panels like this.

For me, if this is really the case, I would also be against this design. I don't mind the new design of the nodes themselves (except for the limited number of Tile Colors). But I really need Fusion standalone to keep its customizable UI. When my comps get very large, I usually prefer to have my Flow and Spline views tabbed together on one monitor and my viewer on the other one. This way, I can have almost a full-screen Flow, to be able to navigate the comp easily.

Again, let's keep pushing for what we would like to say.

For now, I applaud the decision to keep standalone alive. Let's now focus on making it better.

For me, the main issue is that you can now no longer organise the UI how you like it.

Personally, I like the node graph filling most of the left screen, the timeline below it, the dopesheet / spline viewer below that. My right screen is just one big viewer, I don't use the 1/2 viewers except very rarely when comparing to reference.

Agree with this, I use a very similar workflow to this.

Anyhow cool stuff I've noticed (Note I hardly ever used Fusion in Resolve so this is compared with Standalone).

* Braw support
* Ability to adjust numeric values by clicking on them and dragging (great!)
* GPU processing seems less problematic, I have had no crashes yet and have been giving it a bit of a thumping (Usually have this off).
* Things that crashed F9 appear to work without fault (Camera Tracker, Planar Tracker ...)
* Feels faster (One quick test showed 2 times playback speed on a comp over v9!!!), it appears GPU is running more efficiently now as CPU usage is much less than V9. May be time to look into an RTX.
* Don't mind the new interface style, like the icons, but agree some of the vertical padding on the tool bars is not necessary. Think node flow is easier to read.
* This is a beta and there are a few glitches so be ready for that.

For me the biggy is the interface, I think anyone on dual monitors would agree this is not suitable with the flow stapled to the bottom. I've worked in a few VFX shops and nearly all comp'ers had one screen for the image and timeline and the other for everything else.

That aside, looks like a very promising release. Will wait for the SDK so I can redo my plugins!

I don't have F16 to play with, but with Fusion in Resolve 15 you can enable Dual Screen mode which puts viewers, node graph and properties on the main screen, and the other stuff on the second screen.

If you don't use the small viewers above the node graph you can drag the bar between them to resize the viewers down to nothing. This gives you nodes and properties on one screen, with your external viewer, plus the other screen for spline, keyframes, etc.

Assuming F16 standalone has similar options that might be a little closer to what you are looking for?

* Ability to adjust numeric values by clicking on them and dragging (great!)

Unlike in Resolve, in Fusion we routinely type things in that box. Like SimpleExpressions or relative changes. That's very difficult to do now.

* Don't mind the new interface style, like the icons, but agree some of the vertical padding on the tool bars is not necessary. Think node flow is easier to read.

You can't zoom in or out as far, and the nodes are only easy to read in a narrower range. The color coding is now hard to see while showing the node details.

Which icons are you referring to, the tile pics or the tool control icons?

Gonna second what everyone else is saying with the UI customization. I usually have my left monitor oriented vertically, allowing me to split it more efficiently (I like to put a copy of my flow there to have a wider view of the comp). At a bare minimum of UI changes we should be able to split and dock/undock windows like before
EDIT:
I see you can still add floating views, at least they kept this feature!

Unlike in Resolve, in Fusion we routinely type things in that box. Like SimpleExpressions or relative changes. That's very difficult to do now.

Not sure what the problem is, just need to click and not drag or dbl click to select all and your back to regular behavior. Also supports ALT for fine adjustments.

See what you mean about the zooms though.

I was talking about tool bar icons, 3 letter abbreviations are not the best way to communicate something.

Not sure what the problem is, just need to click and not drag

Try selecting the field using a stylus without changing the number. It's difficult to do unless you slow yourself way down and click it carefully. Disrupts the tempo of working. And it doesn't add any functionality to 90% of the controls since there's a slider right there next to the numerical field. The exception, of course, being Point controls.

I was talking about tool bar icons, 3 letter abbreviations are not the best way to communicate something.

So you're going to make an icon for every macro and favorite setting and script and Fuse? I can make three letters in about a quarter second, but making an icon that is distinct and illustrative might take me 10 minutes. If making icons was easy, F16 would have a complete icon set for the currently shipping standard tools (it doesn't).

[ And it doesn't add any functionality to 90% of the controls since there's a slider right there next to the numerical field. The exception, of course, being Point controls.

I don't have a problem with it being enabled on a per-input basis. Like IC_Scrubbable = true. When there isn't a slider, it is reasonably nice to have. I have no interest in scrubbing the GlobalOut or GlobalIn. I will ALWAYS type that in, because I don't just "eyeball" the global range. But scrubbing the current time makes a lot of sense.

As to the Point input, I think it makes sense to make that a 2D input, like a trackball or joystick action.

What also makes sense to me is scrubbing the LABEL of the input, not the text box. Right now clicking/dragging on the label of an input does nothing. If THAT was the hotspot of the scrubbing action, it wouldn't interfere with the legacy functionality in the text box.

So you're going to make an icon for every macro and favorite setting and script and Fuse? I can make three letters in about a quarter second, but making an icon that is distinct and illustrative might take me 10 minutes. If making icons was easy, F16 would have a complete icon set for the currently shipping standard tools (it doesn't).

You mean like every other bit of software out there does? By all means default to letters if there is no icon selected but icons are much more effective than text, let alone 3 letter representations.

Try selecting the field using a stylus without changing the number.

Fair enough, I don't use a stylus myself but I know that a lot do.

And it doesn't add any functionality to 90% of the controls since there's a slider right there next to the numerical field. The exception, of course, being Point controls.

You're right, perhaps we should get rid of the slider?

You mean like every other bit of software out there does? By all means default to letters if there is no icon selected but icons are much more effective than text, let alone 3 letter representations.

Not really. I can tell the difference between CCv and HCv as text instantly and I can invoke them from the keyboard using those same letters. It's good mnemonics.

Is it easy to tell these apart?

SomeCurves.png (1.04 KiB) Viewed 151757 times

Add these tools to your toolbar and have fun guessing what they are at 30 pixels tall and low contrast monochrome.

SomeIcons.png (4.91 KiB) Viewed 151757 times

And it doesn't add any functionality to 90% of the controls since there's a slider right there next to the numerical field. The exception, of course, being Point controls.

You're right, perhaps we should get rid of the slider?

Sliders are useful for quickly seeing relative changes. You might see the numbers in the box change, but you won't be able to tell how they change easily. That's why we don't just look at tables of number pairs but use curve editors. We have VU meters instead of numbers for the same reason.

Well all the UI research I worked on (many moons ago) pointed to otherwise. And its much easier to look at an icon of a curve to work out what it may mean than look at 'abc'. Although in fairness some people identify better with text but the majority do not. An icon is capable of conveying a lot more information in fewer pixels, just look at you OS/Phone for example, there is a reason for this.

Also from the point of Fusion trying to grow its user base this approach may help new users get there head around the daunting Fusion interface.

That's why we don't just look at tables of number pairs but use curve editors.

Sliders aren't used to represent curves, they represent a single number, not sure what you mean? I don't mind sliders but it doesn't give you any indication of the value, it appears to have a start, middle and end point but these are in most cases arbitrary and irrelevant. I can get by with a value field by itself, a slider by itself means nothing.

We have VU meters instead of numbers for the same reason.

Yes an audio meter makes sense because it goes from 0 to max, not all the parameters we work with do this.

An icon is capable of conveying a lot more information in fewer pixels, just look at you OS/Phone for example, there is a reason for this.

Well designed icons that are easily distinguished and remembered, yes.

But when all of the icons look the same?

IconsVsText.PNG (25.92 KiB) Viewed 151688 times

Without the text, you have very little to go on to figure out what the items are. Maybe you could hover over each one for 2 seconds to get the tooltip, but having the text makes it much easier to figure out. In fact, you could remove the icons entirely and not lose anything.

Also from the point of Fusion trying to grow its user base this approach may help new users get there head around the daunting Fusion interface.

Daunting? Expecting users to even realize there is any difference between

Icon1.png (692 Bytes) Viewed 151688 times

and

Icon2.png (733 Bytes) Viewed 151688 times

is pushing the expectations of the user. Expecting them to tell what the tools are based on those images is completely impractical.

And one of them doesn't even represent the UI for the tool at all.

That's why we don't just look at tables of number pairs but use curve editors.

Sliders aren't used to represent curves, they represent a single number, not sure what you mean? I don't mind sliders but it doesn't give you any indication of the value, it appears to have a start, middle and end point but these are in most cases arbitrary and irrelevant. I can get by with a value field by itself, a slider by itself means nothing.

The curves represent deltas. The HVS can understand the slope and we get meaning from that. You can look at the spreadsheet, but it takes longer to understand what's happening. Likewise you can see the sliders change and understand what is happening without any concern at all for the underlying number. And you can see the differences without even looking directly at them, something useful when your eyes are focused on other parts of the UI.

Just my 2 cent to the Icons

Text based or a good combination of clear Icons and text is way better than a purely "hover over to figure out what this icon does approach". If I would like that I would work in Maya

Professional software is not an Iphone APP.

Softimage has still, years after EOL one of the most intuitive and polished UI workflows out there.
Clear simple and when you've build up muscle memory no slowdown.
And when you look for things not used that often its very simple to find.


Then we got Houdini which is still a bit much in the UI but got a nice balance between text and Icons.
Also clear colors to separate the tools.
Just look how much Information is one 1 screen.


Fusion 9. Which basically took text and made them to Icons which is just genius.


and then there is fusion 16


Just look at how much space is wasted in this big middle block.

Why is the render button where it is atm. Makes no sense at all.

I dont need this toolbar with its Icons there. Why cant I switch it off. ?

Having the render and timeline range close together is a nice thought but having them left and right would just make much more sense.

So everything above is way better than Fusion 16. And also customizable.
In any way or form what ever for the given task gives you the quickest access to the tools you need atm.
So I really hope they will listen to all the people which are not happy with this UI.

Chad,

Tool tips allow users to get greater detail or explainations as part of the learning process, and a collection of folders is not a relevant argument. I studied used interface design as a software engineer there is a reason very successful software companies use these practices rather than following the thoughts of a few people on the internet. So Chad or Microsoft/Apple/Google... I know where I'd place my bets.

Just my 2 cent to the Icons
I dont need this toolbar with its Icons there. Why cant I switch it off. ?

You can though.

Just my 2 cent to the Icons
I dont need this toolbar with its Icons there. Why cant I switch it off. ?

You can though.

removed image from quote

Thanks for that, my bad.

You're welcome. We all need to help out each other is this new and very painful UI mess

So Chad or Microsoft/Apple/Google... I know where I'd place my bets.

You mean Google that has icon/text combos in Gmail, photos etc. Or Microsoft that has icon/text combos in Word, Powerpoint, Excel etc?
Also they've created Google +, Windows Vista so as for placing your bets, I'm with Chad for now

Really missing the ability to maximize a window to full-screen (such as nodes or viewer).

After two hours in Fu 16 I know that I like the new look

I just hope BMD has a second look at the vertical distribution of UI elements. A lot of real estate is used up for just a couple of buttons and toggles.

I'd also love to have a fast toggle to maximize the current view - the equivalent of F4 in Fusion 9.

The nodes in the flow become unreadable fast when zooming out. Somehow borders and lines take up more space. Also, what used to be a flat area now has a border. IMO lines that are not absolutely necessary just add to visual clutter.

Not UI related, but I noticed more speed on a good amount of comps. Not all, but it looks promising.

Why is the render button where it is atm. Makes no sense at all.

Try running it on a higher resolution monitor...

RenderButtonIsland.PNG (37.87 KiB) Viewed 151368 times

Tool tips allow users to get greater detail or explainations as part of the learning process,

Tooltips aren't a replacement for identifiable controls. RTFM also allows users to get greater detail or explanations as part of the learning process. That doesn't mean the UI needs to be difficult to use or slow.

and a collection of folders is not a relevant argument.

Then why are you making it?

So Chad or Microsoft/Apple/Google...

You literally argue that Microsoft knows what they are doing, yet they are the ones I point out as being a good example of text labels.

I studied used interface design

Great. But you aren't using your knowledge to support your position, you're ignoring the evidence presented to you. Explain to me how the icons I showed as examples are in any way representative of the good design you talk about. Heck, you can't even tell me what tools they represent and why. I'm not against icons, I'm against bad icons. These are bad icons.

Even when they aren't 30x30 pixels they're bad.

Wha.png (7.19 KiB) Viewed 151355 times

Huh.png (5.59 KiB) Viewed 151355 times

Many of the other UI changes in F16 (like moving from MultiButtonControls to ComboControls) is in direct opposition to what Grant said yesterday about BMD wanting to reduce clicks and improve the efficiency of users. Hovering over each icon for a second is exactly the type of thing you want to avoid.

Would like to have the View toolbar back:



RMB'ing and then going through menus doesn't equal less clicks.

Would like to have the View toolbar back:



RMB'ing and then going through menus doesn't equal less clicks.

Yes, this is one of my main bugbears.

The current color channel indicator (left) doesn't change and won't give you a clue about what channel you're currently looking at. Was fine before (right).

The current color channel indicator (left) doesn't change and won't give you a clue about what channel you're currently looking at. Was fine before (right).

I preferred the old RGB pale icon, because it was larger, but the anything is better than a grey color channel icon.

I think once you embrace the idea of a colored icon again, the floodgates will open on color diversity/tolerance. It's strange too, because Resolve 15 has color icons, so I'm not sure why Fusion 16 can't.

Old Armenian Diaspora, is that what its called? That one was fine too.

Why change "settings" to "version"? I use it to store different tool presets or settings. That section is also hidden now and needs an extra click on a cryptic icon to expose it. Not a click less.

Old Armenian Diaspora, is that what its called? That one was fine too.

Why change "settings" to "version"? I use it to store different tool presets or settings. That section is also hidden now and needs an extra click on a cryptic icon to expose it. Not a click less.

Yeah, Version doesn't make a lot of sense as a name, since it's still a setting, that's what it's called in the tool. And you don't increment as you would versions, you just have 6 settings to jump between for whatever reason you want. Bad terminology there.

What's funny is that there are six. You can actually have 10 settings. We only had 6 buttons though because there wasn't room for more when you had lock, passthrough, cache to disk, etc. on the same row. The others you had to access via hotkeys. But now there's plenty of room for the other 4 buttons.

Damn, I didn't know that! That's neat, I often want to store more settings. Thanks for sharing.

Hello everyone,
I use Fusion since V3, for almost 20 years now.

As I am getting 50
I have seen this in other softwares too,
similar UI "development" happened to Edius.

"New" user interface should make things "better", but it only:
1/ Makes screen look non-contrast and clumsy (nodes with a bar over it? Confusing with connection?)
2/ Waste screen place just for design reasons
3/ Breaks existing shortcuts (F5-F8 - should I define it manually now?)
Etc...

I will stick by Fusion 9, as switch to 16 makes me half productive and has no real advantages in my workflow.

In fact I believe, that people designing UI upgrade do not really WORK on their result.

Have a nice day,
Karel Holubicka

To me (a Fusion novice, but use it for simple stuff regularly), this is the most annoying thing. A row of identical icons for tabs that have completely different meaning. It used to be text, clean and simple. Now it's clean and impossible.

Screenshot 2019-04-09 at 21.48.53.png (232.12 KiB) Viewed 151110 times

I totally agree!

Yeah, the problem with moving from text to icons is that you need a LOT of icons. What's funny is that Resolve has had this from 15.0. Like it's been a year and they still haven't gotten around to making them.

But two other issues is that you can't have more than I think 8 tabs in a tool now. They just don't show up. And you can't set the icon when you add your own tab, it just gets the generic "wand icon".

EDIT: You can have more than 10 tabs, but only the middle 10 will show when the panel is the default width.

Many of the other UI changes in F16 (like moving from MultiButtonControls to ComboControls) is in direct opposition to what Grant said yesterday about BMD wanting to reduce clicks and improve the efficiency of users. Hovering over each icon for a second is exactly the type of thing you want to avoid.

The idea behind hovering is that it is a learning process, I don't know so I hover, I see the text, learn and make an association with the icon (a very economical use of space). I don't hover every time. It makes sense that existing users aren't going to like changes to things as they have to remap some very ingrained behaviour. These have become user interface staples for a reason, some may not like it, some may find it slower but they are their for the general user base.

Agreed Combo controls are a step backwards, one look and I don't even know what all my options are, its a speed/space trade off that will slow people down.

I would also like the interface team to try and work on dual 4K monitors as one of their test setups I'm sure going fwd this is going to be a reasonably common scenario.

PFTrack did the same thing a couple of versions back. Many of the text labels became icons , and even after using it for two years, I still don't know what some of them do. In an environment where you have maybe a dozen icons, I can see where the pictograms are a little faster to read. In an environment with several dozen to hundreds of icons, you're essentially learning a new language, which doesn't seem to me to offer any advantage. I'd rather spend my brain power on making VFX, not learning Blackmagicish.

Another example: 3DS Max has had an icon-oriented workspace for a long time. In the latest release, they changed many of the icons. In most cases it was a fairly small change, but it was enough that we had to relearn them.

So in three years, when Fusion again looks "dated" (to somebody; I still think the Fu9 interface looks acceptably modern), the icons will get updated, and we'll have to learn the pictograms all over again.

Honestly, if they'd just offer a switch: Icons Only, Icons + Text, or Text Only, they'd satisfy me. I was super annoyed that Resolve has two of those modes, and neither were the one I actually wanted.

The idea behind hovering is that it is a learning process, I don't know so I hover, I see the text, learn and make an association with the icon (a very economical use of space). I don't hover every time.

Really?

MysteryIcons.PNG (2.22 KiB) Viewed 151059 times

So you're going to associate the icon with the wand to "user" and the icon with the wand to "force" and the icon with the wand to "inter" and the icon with the wand...

And when someone needs help with a tool, are we going to say "click on inter, that's the one with the wand"? BMD's support staff shouldn't have to tell people to navigate by tooltips over the phone.

It makes sense that existing users aren't going to like changes to things as they have to remap some very ingrained behaviour.

Or existing users can recognize a bad design that slows down workflow while new users just see "modern user interface" in the release notes and don't care that it's slower.

These have become user interface staples for a reason... they are their for the general user base.

No, they aren't. No one, so far, has been able to make a single argument as to why the new changes have any benefit. Go ahead and enlighten us if you know what the benefits are, but so far no one has presented anything more than "I like new stuff" as a reason. I'm asking anyone to explain what the benefit is without using an appeal to authority. But really, it's BMD who hasn't made any explanation as to what the intent of the changes are. Grant says they do user testing to make sure the interface has as few actions as needed, but was that done here?

There's a ton of really nice stuff in Fusion 16, but so far the interface hasn't presented anything that says "this is a clear, objective improvement".

Actually, I take that back... You can now enter multiplication and addition (+ and *) operators into time code boxes. In previous versions, you had to do -- and /(1/n). That's a win for users on the UI front and appreciated. There is also a "hidden inputs" option that works reasonably well. That's also welcome, especially because it's entirely optional. I'd prefer that it handled UserControls better and could be assigned on a per-input basis and would reveal on selection, but the graphics for it are 90% perfect.

some may find it slower

Not some. All. It's not subjective. When a task involves more steps, it is usually slower. When those additional steps are the same steps as before just repeated, it will always be slower. 2+2+2 isn't sometimes more than 2. It's always more than 2.

Agreed Combo controls are a step backwards, one look and I don't even know what all my options are, its a speed/space trade off that will slow people down.

The ComboControl also doesn't have the ability to do toggle or tristate. Or the ability to use an icon, ironically. Some plugins and Fuses break because of this, and will have to be redesigned. And with a MultiButton, you can see what's selected without looking directly at it. You don't need to actually read anything, you can see the center button is pressed, for example, so you know don't need to focus on it more.

I would also like the interface team to try and work on dual 4K monitors as one of their test setups I'm sure going fwd this is going to be a reasonably common scenario.

Or mixed monitors. Not uncommon to have a 2160 and 1440 monitor mixed. Or to have a vertical monitor paired with a horizontal one.

But I'd also like them to use accessibility principles. Like the color scheme in the current skin has the text and background colors too close. You'd never see that used in a design for the public because it's too strenuous to read. Like full WCAG 2.0 compliance may seem extreme, but we're also talking about users spending 12 hours or more in front of 200dpi displays trying to complete difficult tasks, usually for money.

So in three years, when Fusion again looks "dated" (to somebody; I still think the Fu9 interface looks acceptably modern), the icons will get updated, and we'll have to learn the pictograms all over again.

You can switch skins in Fusion. They used to ship a new version with the new skin and the old skin, and users could choose. Like did you want Fusion 5, Fusion 6, or Fusion 6.1 skin? And if none of those were what you wanted, make your own using those as a template. You can still switch skins in Fusion 16, it's just that you are only given the choice of blue or not blue.

If they wanted, they could ship a "Resolvesque" skin and a "Legacy" skin and they could set which one to use by default based on whether or not Resolve was already installed when Fusion was.

Or they could have a contest to see who could come up with the best skin, and the winner gets a dongle.

As to the "dated" nature of the skins, I completely understand the desire to replace the 3.5" floppy disk icon with a rocket ship. What I don't understand is the desire to replace the rocket ship with a 5 pointed star.

Not sure what the problem is, just need to click and not drag

Try selecting the field using a stylus without changing the number. It's difficult to do unless you slow yourself way down and click it carefully. Disrupts the tempo of working. And it doesn't add any functionality to 90% of the controls since there's a slider right there next to the numerical field. The exception, of course, being Point controls.

Yes as a wacom user this is something that bugs me a lot. Perhaps there is a better solution for the sliding feature. Why not sliding using the CTRL key like you use for fine tuning?

To me (a Fusion novice, but use it for simple stuff regularly), this is the most annoying thing. A row of identical icons for tabs that have completely different meaning. It used to be text, clean and simple. Now it's clean and impossible.

Screenshot 2019-04-09 at 21.48.53.png

Yaarr, happy I am not alone on this. Mentioned this in my first video about Fusion in Resolve.
I still cant get used to this Icon disaster. It gives me scurvy. Don't know what the big deal is. Please add text to the icons, very simple! Other soft like Houdini does it and guess what, it works!
Fusion is about speed and efficiency...it is just a pity if one is working so fast, then bottle necked by some bloody icons.

Vito

Yes as a wacom user this is something that bugs me a lot. Perhaps there is a better solution for the sliding feature. Why not sliding using the CTRL key like you use for fine tuning?

What about MMB? I'd like to reserve ctrl for the fine tuning, as you say. Should still have gross, normal, and fine adjustments, and we need modifier keys for that.

So you're going to associate the icon with the wand to "user" and the icon with the wand to "force" and the icon with the wand to "inter" and the icon with the wand...

No but I see magnifying glass, a camera or a play symbol I have a pretty good idea what it will do.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, the above is just poor UI design, but this is a Beta and there is still plenty of work to be done. Toolbars are used in situations when there are a lot of things crammed into a small space, pretty much every compositing, 3D, tracking, editing app uses icons in this manner, there are literally hundreds on the screen (play, fwd, minimize, lock, ... ). Words take up too much space and clutter the interface, and yes an example such as a folder structure is a no brainer for the need for text and there are plenty of examples to the contrary but this is not the norm.

Well designed icons in logical groupings with explicit tool tips (and we can agree that F16 is not in this basket yet) in most cases is more efficient than text labels, the research proves it.

But I'll leave it here as we both seem to disagree and I don't think we're adding any more to the discussion other than a difference of opinions.

To me (a Fusion novice, but use it for simple stuff regularly), this is the most annoying thing. A row of identical icons for tabs that have completely different meaning. It used to be text, clean and simple. Now it's clean and impossible.

Screenshot 2019-04-09 at 21.48.53.png

Yaarr, happy I am not alone on this. Mentioned this in my first video about Fusion in Resolve.
I still cant get used to this Icon disaster. It gives me scurvy. Don't know what the big deal is. Please add text to the icons, very simple! Other soft like Houdini does it and guess what, it works!
Fusion is about speed and efficiency...it is just a pity if one is working so fast, then bottle necked by some bloody icons.

Vito

Not sure where it comes from either. BMD's other products all use text instead of icons. Check out the menus on their cameras and monitors. Look at the buttons on their panels and ATEMs.



This entire panel has 5 icons on it, a forward arrow, a back arrow, play, play reverse, and stop.





This has a few more icons, like volume up, volume down, command, etc., but most of those have text too, even if it's just F12 or CMD.




Two icons, up and down arrows. That's it. Oh, the back of the device has two icons as well, both are molded into the fuse covers on the power connectors. The rest of the device, front and back, is text.




Look at the screen. No icons at all. Look at the camera body. Four icons, forward, reverse, play, and power. That's it. Rest is text.

So you're going to associate the icon with the wand to "user" and the icon with the wand to "force" and the icon with the wand to "inter" and the icon with the wand...

No but I see magnifying glass, a camera or a play symbol I have a pretty good idea what it will do.

Agreed. The issue isn't that icons are bad. It's the bad icons are bad. I don't need a button that says "play" or "stop", but there isn't going to be a reasonable, instantly recognizable icon for "inter". And we shouldn't force users to make their own icons for everything they make, either. Fusion's icons for Common Controls and and Intool Scripting work fine because you learn them once and they appear in nearly every tool thereafter. But even those icons need to be visually distinct, which they used to be, but no longer are.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, the above is just poor UI design, but this is a Beta and there is still plenty of work to be done.

It's the same icons that have been in Resolve 15 for a year. That's not in beta and these icons are still there.

Toolbars are used in situations when there are a lot of things crammed into a small space, pretty much every compositing, 3D, tracking, editing app uses icons in this manner, there are literally hundreds on the screen (play, fwd, minimize, lock, ... ).

But this is the ONLY product that BMD makes (other than the Fusion tab in Resolve) that uses icons like this. Every one of their other products is mostly text. Their ATEM switchers have a nice icon set for wipes and DVE effects. And of course transport controls and menu navigation buttons like "up" and "down". But the company as a whole does not do icons much.

Well designed icons in logical groupings with explicit tool tips (and we can agree that F16 is not in this basket yet) in most cases is more efficient than text labels, the research proves it.

I think BMD should do some user studies. That's the only research that matters. There has to be a reason they don't do icons in their other products and people aren't complaining about that. And there has to be a reason that when the try to come up with a brand new interface they aren't successful at executing it.

But even if the icons were well designed, it still doesn't address the issue where no one wants to be making icons. Some users will, and they're allowed to. But if I am making a macro and I don't want to have to start designing an icon set for that, I can just get it into use with text just fine if it means getting my controls organized in 3 minutes instead of 60 minutes. Maybe if I have time later I'll come back and make icons. But right now, I no longer have the option of taking the 3 minute route. It's design an icon set, no other choice.

I think there is a lot to like about the newer interface but definitely a lot to be improved still

As an animator working with keyframes in F9 was a bit horrible, sliding layers and keys around was pretty clunky I felt, it feels improved here.

Most annoying thing so far - trying to drag the time indicator in the keyframe view is awful, just awful. Half the time I click I accidentally grab the magnify bar and change magnification.

If i want to place the time indicator somewhere in the keyframe viewer with a single click it doesn't seem like I can (if I can please tell me how this works), I have to go and fetch it from wherever it's sitting.

Most annoying legacy issue, trying to zoom and rotate with a wacom in a 3D view. Please adopt a sensible method of 3D navigation that resembles other 3d apps. ie a Modifier key + LMB, MMB, RMB and no three button combos please

If i want to place the time indicator somewhere in the keyframe viewer with a single click it doesn't seem like I can (if I can please tell me how this works), I have to go and fetch it from wherever it's sitting.

You can CTRL+ALT+Click to place the current time indicator with a single click.