If we are showing the possible state of a single thing then there might just be two icons, on and off. In that case it makes sense to make “on” look prominent and the “off” less so.
But when we are looking at a large table of options for multiple things, I’d rather highlight exceptions. So if the default state of multiple items is “on” then it is the few “offs” that are the most important at that time. But if the default state is “off” then I really want to notice the ones that are “on”.
As for color coding them, I agree. That is something currently lacking in the source: being able to easily draw the icons in an arbitrary color when needed. We do technically have that ability, but it is a bit too low down, only something that can be done at the very moment you draw the icon. Icon color needs to be brought up a bit higher so it can be used in more places more easily. Every time I look at that problem I get a bit buried in my wishlist of options and how to implement them.
The exception is the definition of a minority. What You can name an exception relies on local dependencies. I can imagine workflows, where enabled objects are smaller part of a whole setup.
The point is to design system, that has clearly defined contrast, so that each state is instatly recognizable. Your concept meets the requirements, so does my design. Which is better is a matter of aesthetic preferences and internal coherence of visual style and design paradigmes with the rest of icons.
Yep, it’s odd, but You knew it’s an eye. Didn’t You?
On a serious tone - I made it like that to give it the same weight as the rest of active icons in this set. Standard eye looks much lighter and does not match other active items.
All multi-state icons collected together and tweaked to make their states equal in style and contrast.
Revamped on the left, old on the right. Squint your eyes slightly to see the difference more clear.
Figured some people viewing this might be interested, the colour/outline adaptation I was working on is almost finished, only missing modifiers + the second sheet that has files/folders on it.
New, simpler icons for 3D Cursor (ObData and Object).
Two different icons for each: 3D Cursor Transform Orientation and 3D Cursor Pivot Point.
I hope You can easily spot them in the set.
Wow, I really like the “3D cursor transformation orientation” icon!
Looking at it, I realize that both it and “normal” seem the most clear of the set, while the rest become a sea of multiple axes. I think it is because those two whittle down “orientation” to a much simpler “which way is up?” Yes, I realize that neither of those arrows is “up” but that is relative, which is exactly the point with orientation.
Could this be applied to the others? Just a single arrow on something, rather than a set of axes? So global could be something like the grid used for “3D Viewport” but with a single arrow somewhere in there instead of an object. Local could be a little square with one side extending into an arrow. View could have something to represent the view with an arrow inside. Gimbal would then work great as it is.
With the multistate icons, for me personally, it seems like the “off” states reveal little information about their state. Probably the sole exception being lock/unlock which clearly shows each state and so works independently. The others seem more like “disabled” (unchangeable) than “off”.
So I prefer the “breaking” chain for “not linked” versus just having the gap. And I like seeing the little “x” for “muted sound” because it more clearly tells the story. Maybe I just look at these things wrong, but I like to see just the “off” state and know what it is without having to compare it with “on”…
All transformation orientation icons share a specific visual style that makes them all belong to one family. Most of transformation orientations are determined by the mutual relationship of the coordinate system axes, and sometimes by the relation of the entire coordinate system to space. So, bunches of arrows in different configurations is the best way to depict a problem. Each of those icons quite precisely and vividly represents different causes of transformation orientation in space.
Personally, I don’t have problems with all those arrows and I think that further simplification won’t be a good thing.
Regarding the “off” state of two-state icons - I avoid strikethroughs because they unnecessarily unify icons, that should stay visually different. That’s why “on” eye is open and “off” is closed (really abstract BTW). For similar reason I removed the “x” from muted speaker icon - the silhouette of “on” and “off” pictograms were way too similar.
It’s extremely difficult to find symbols that can be legibly presented in the form of contradictions, without using strikethrough or x-deletion. For this reason, I came up with the idea that the “off” state will be represented by the maximum possible extinction and simplification of the pictogram silhouette. The treated icons are clearly different from ordinary dim. In this way, I could avoid problems with symbols that do not have an obvious representation of opposite states. Breaking chain was too busy, so I drew the icon with middle chain link removed; I opened the arrow and leaved just two lines that define the shape; the muted speaker does not emit a sound wave, thus the waves were removed; colour chart had all colour/fills removed; and so on…
On the other hand I really like Your “exclude from rendering” icon, since the “x” is less obtrusive than the lens’ circle and clearly suggests that the camera is blind.
I’d be more than glad if You could lean over some of icons, which “off” state depiction isn’t as good as it should be:
the pin;
the colour chart;
the modifier (this one is especially hard, and I think it will have to stay as is).
It might just be me then. But I really can’t see anything in Global, Local, and Gimbal that sets them apart in a way that I can make sense of. To my eyes they just look like three axes in slightly different orientations, but not in a way that says “local” versus “global” versus “gimbal”.
All icons that have to be tridimensional were drawn in oblique cabinet projection.
Having this in mind:
Global - X, Y and Z axes reflect a standard arrangement of axes in the Euclidean space - the Z axis is vertical and perpendicular to the plane defined by X and Y axes that are perpendicular to each other.;
Local (custom) - generally the same as above, but skewed in space, so that Z axis ain’t vertical. The skew angle depends on individual object’s coordinates. I agree that this one ain’t perfect. It could use generic Object symbol somehow. I’m no sure…
Gimbal - the selected axis changes its position relative to the others. Try it with gizmo on and You’ll see, that this one is quite good.
Whether that “pin” is better or not… damn, you really are good at this!
All icons that have to be tridimensional were drawn in oblique cabinet projection
In my “global” I kept that projection, but just made it look more like the global axes. Removing two of the arrows seems like a nice way to make them more unique, and is something you did for Normal and Cursor.
When I play with “Gimbal” it is more likely to look like my version, but probably because I don’t know what it is doing. LOL.
It is true that my “local” broke the “oblique cabinet projection” rule, but it was just an (ugly) suggestion that still says “local” to me. Part of the problem with your “local” is that you kept it aligned too much - that left axis is too horizontal so it implies that there is relation to the global axes that doesn’t exist. Local should be wonkier.
This is more on the right track in my opinion, having looked over literally every icon in the set and scrutinised it, I can tell you the multiple axis orientations can’t be told apart easily enough.
Great job!
