DELETED POST

Development
1

Hi everyone. Thanks for your feedback i deleted my comments and images so others dont copy it right now before Im ready to release

2

hello, what did vcvrack told you about the reasons?

Greetings

Karl

3

Here is the exact quote (referring to the Grainfield module on the far right): “This looks like an interesting module, but the appearance is not yet up to the level of quality we are looking for in our third-party commercial collection. You might consider pairing with a graphic designer from the VCV communities to help with the visual quality.”

4

I think you could work on more on making the modules look more like they are from the same design DNA. Right now they have different jacks and screws and fonts, and a lot of the text is super small and in some cases partially obscured. The titles are all aligned different, in different sizes, which doesn’t give off a very polished vibe.

5

‘level of quality’.

I note that some ‘premium’ modules (including VCV) don’t support dark panels, not very premium imo.

6

Here is a nice tool that can help you prototype param and port placement on your module panels. Hope it helps!

7

Thanks

8

VCV should have given you some direction as to what needs to be fixed. I can’t read their mind, but I will tell you a few problems I see.

  1. Driftloom and Grainfield both have critical widgets and labels that will be covered by the CPU monitor black bar at the bottom of the module.

It looks to me like the top section of Driftloom has vertical space that can be eliminated so everything can shift up. This would probably require some adjustment of the wave graphics.

For Grainfield I think you can merge the Select|Mix|Page|Exit and Rec|Slice|Next control rows into one row. Also, the top section of controls could be moved up a bit, giving you even more room.

However, fixing point 3 below would probably lead to vertical space problems again. Some serious layout changes are probably needed.

  1. You haven’t provided any graphical differentiation between inputs and outputs. The development guide is pretty clear there should be an obvious way to distinguish between them. That being said, there are some existing premium modules that did not follow this rule/guidline.

  2. With a casual glance the modules look slick. But on looking a bit closer Driftloom and Grainfield look very cramped. Many of the labels are so tiny that I think they would not be legible at typical zoom levels. Also, having knobs literally touching ports does not look good, and would never work in the physical world. Likewise having labels (nearly) touching controls and linework looks pretty bad, and makes it hard to read the labels.

  3. The application of color in Driftloom looks haphazard. At first glance it seems like it could be informative, but on closer inspection, not so much. The colors end up being more of a distraction.

I don’t know what your design process actually was. But it looks like you used AI to design the modules without enough curation on your part. Coming up with a panel design that looks good yet is easy to fathom and work with is not easy. I often spend days figuring out how to layout and label a single module. And then during actual development I might get feature creep, which requires more controls, and perhaps an entire layout redesign.

9

Thank you for these details. I will keep working on it. I too wish i was given more input as to why they didnt meet the level VCV is looking for. Its guess work at this point. I agree too cramped. I dont want the current modules to go any wider to make space so having some trouble.

10

I encourage you to not fall into that trap. It is one I suffer from as well. Sometimes making the panel larger is exactly the correct solution.

11

Had there been one or two problems that could easily be fixed they might have provided more specifics. I suspect they saw too many issues to take the time to make suggestions, and instead suggested collaboration with a graphic designer. I can sympathise with them - they are getting flooded with new submissions of late.

12

Just to add a small extra to Dave’s insightful feedback, and unless I missed it, I think it would be important to have the “Brand” name (signature, logo, etc.) of the collection somewhere on the panel, i.e. something to show what module pack or developer they belong to.

13

Not to gum up the development discussion, but as an end user I could care less about what modules look like, especially in the polished/unpolished sense. Embrace the quirk!

Of course it’s Andrew’s game and my opinion is merely my opinion, but it makes me a bit sad to think that a premium DocB or Computerscare module would be rejected immediately on visual grounds.