[HN Gopher] UI elements with a hand-drawn, sketchy look
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       UI elements with a hand-drawn, sketchy look
        
       Author : nickca
       Score  : 670 points
       Date   : 2024-05-31 22:23 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (wiredjs.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (wiredjs.com)
        
       | ayhanfuat wrote:
       | rough.js is great. It is also powering excalidraw.
        
         | j45 wrote:
         | It's also important to appreciate and congratulate someone who
         | started and finished something they wanted to complete and
         | release.
        
           | ayhanfuat wrote:
           | True. I am not sure how that relates to my comment though.
           | Did I seem unappreciative somehow?
        
             | kvmet wrote:
             | I don't think they were saying you were unappreciative.
             | They were just adding on that finishing a project is worth
             | celebrating.
        
           | throwaway290 wrote:
           | It was finished and congratulated 6 years ago:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17146451
           | 
           | The same author also made rough.js.
           | 
           | So it looks like the commenter you replied to has more
           | context than you.
        
         | majikandy wrote:
         | Ah that makes sense now. I nearly said it was like excalidraw,
         | which is really nice for architecture diagrams more than for
         | ui/ux I find.
        
         | elric wrote:
         | I never really used Excalidraw until I discovered the Obsidian
         | plugin. Now I have tons of markdown notes with embedded
         | Excalidraw doodles. It's good stuff.
        
       | airstrike wrote:
       | Previously https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17146451 (650
       | points, 121 comments)
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Thanks! Macroexpanded:
         | 
         |  _Show HN: Wired-elements - UI web components with a hand
         | drawn, sketchy look_ -
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17146451 - May 2018 (120
         | comments)
         | 
         | I feel like there were other threads, either about this or
         | something very similar. If anyone finds them, we can add to the
         | list.
        
       | seattle_spring wrote:
       | Really nice! Not sure what I'd ever use this for, but definitely
       | putting it in my proverbial back pocket.
        
       | greenavocado wrote:
       | Bring back skeuomorphism. I hate flat and material design. Those
       | two excessively eliminate subconscious visual cues from the
       | natural world.
        
         | bmitc wrote:
         | Skeuomorphism goes in the other extreme direction though. One
         | doesn't need flat design or skeuomorphism. There's a nice
         | balance of UI elements that sit in the middle. I think Windows
         | 7 was probably a good example of just straight up boring
         | buttons and controls.
        
           | skydhash wrote:
           | OS X Maverics and iOS 6 were also nice examples of
           | skeuomophism done right.
        
             | bmitc wrote:
             | I personally dislike Apple's skeuomorphic designs and find
             | them very distracting. I in general do not like
             | skeuomorphism in nearly any application.
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | I hate it too. I understand what people had against it though
         | because Apple (led by Scott Forstall) took it wayyyy too far at
         | one point. The notepad, the game center, it was a joke. It
         | became its own objective.
         | 
         | I think the current bland flatness is a kneejerk reaction to
         | that (kicked off by Jony Ive who was probably angered by
         | Forstall's design).
        
       | seanmcdirmid wrote:
       | This brings back memories of Swing/JFC, back when it was thought
       | to be a good thing to have pluggable look and feels.
        
         | TeaVMFan wrote:
         | NapkinLAF provided a hand-drawn look for Swing:
         | 
         | https://napkinlaf.sourceforge.net/#Snapshots
        
       | SoftTalker wrote:
       | Well we used to use "sketchy" looking mockups so that users would
       | understand that this wasn't a finished, working interface. I
       | guess that's out the window now.
        
         | pech0rin wrote:
         | thats the entire point of this. to generate mockup software
        
           | samuria wrote:
           | Wouldn't it be easier to just decide on a UI library to be
           | used for the project and use that instead?
        
             | worksonmine wrote:
             | Design can distract from the UX and there's a use for very
             | minimal mocks.
        
             | epidemian wrote:
             | But that would not convey to the user the idea of the
             | interface being a work-in-progress.
        
               | mirekrusin wrote:
               | You can stick "under construction" animated gif.
        
       | Dalewyn wrote:
       | I find the deliberate choice of a left-handed font for this
       | example intriguing.
        
         | hammock wrote:
         | Was it deliberate?
        
           | Dalewyn wrote:
           | From the source code:
           | 
           | ><link rel="preload" href="fonts/font.woff2" as="font">
           | 
           | >@font-face { font-family: 'Gloria Hallelujah'; ... src:
           | local('Gloria Hallelujah'), local('GloriaHallelujah'),
           | url(fonts/font.woff2) format('woff2'); ... }
           | 
           | >body { ... font-family: 'Gloria Hallelujah', sans-serif; ...
           | }
           | 
           | So yes, the choice of font looks to be quite deliberate.
        
             | hammock wrote:
             | Do we know they know it's left handed, that was more my
             | (our?) question
        
       | bdcravens wrote:
       | Reminds me of Balsamiq, which was the rage about 10 years ago.
        
         | TheBlight wrote:
         | Wasn't there an X window manager that you could skin in the
         | same way?
        
           | jzemeocala wrote:
           | Compiz?
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | I still find Balsamiq super useful.
        
         | fuzztester wrote:
         | Yes, was about to say the same, then saw your comment.
         | 
         | IIRC, Peldi, Balsamiq founder, had blogged about it at the
         | time. I like it too. Also reminds me vaguely of the Comic Sans
         | font, which was the rage even earlier.
        
           | majikandy wrote:
           | Perhaps more like Tekton, which was like a classier crisper
           | comic sans
        
         | neeleshs wrote:
         | It's still my go-to tool for mockups. I find it to be the most
         | powerful tool to convey product behavior to stakeholders
        
         | kissgyorgy wrote:
         | I use it almost every day.
        
       | the_gipsy wrote:
       | Completely broken on mobile.
        
         | HPsquared wrote:
         | Works for me on Chrome Android
        
         | throwaway_ab wrote:
         | Works for me on iPhone.
        
       | nonesuchluck wrote:
       | Maybe someone here can help me remember. I had a PalmOS app that
       | I loved, back in the day, and I can't remember what it was
       | called. It was a shareware clock app, with hand-drawn time that
       | animated from one numeral to the next. I used to use it as an
       | alarm clock, in my Sony Clie dock, by my bed. Would love to see
       | it again.
        
         | r1chard007 wrote:
         | ChatGPT thinks it was called 'TimeDraw' :)
        
       | xyzzy_plugh wrote:
       | Every time I go to reach for rough.js I get a bit uncomfortable
       | when I read this:
       | 
       | > Some of the core algorithms were adapted from handy processing
       | lib.
       | 
       | handy is LGPLv3, but rough.js is MIT. This line makes me think
       | parts of rough.js are actually LGPLv3, as those parts are
       | derivative works.
       | 
       | In practice this is unlikely to negatively impact me but I'm not
       | super pleased by the uncertainty.
        
         | jacobolus wrote:
         | Algorithms can't be copyrighted (though code can be), so this
         | really depends on what level of copying is implied by the word
         | "adapted".
        
           | xyzzy_plugh wrote:
           | "I read this code and then reimplemented it from scratch in a
           | different language" does not release you from licensing
           | obligations. If that were the case then brb while I go
           | reimplement unreal engine in rust.
        
             | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
             | You absolutely can do that.
             | 
             | And yes, it does release you from licensing obligations
             | (unless the license included specific clauses).
        
               | xyzzy_plugh wrote:
               | You should consult a lawyer. It's one thing if it's a
               | clean-room implementation but every IP attorney I have
               | ever interacted with would disagree with you.
               | 
               | It doesn't take much for a court to consider something a
               | derivative work.
        
       | justinclift wrote:
       | Firefox's "Enhanced Tracking Protection" seems to break their
       | React demo.
       | 
       | Turning that off though and things seem to load ok, even with
       | UBlock Origin and Privacy Badger running.
        
         | jan_Sate wrote:
         | Strange. It works here with "Enhanced Tracking Protection".
         | Maybe I'm using a different version of Firefox?
        
           | justinclift wrote:
           | I'm using FF 126.0.1 on Debian Linux x86_64, if that helps.
           | :)
        
       | hgs3 wrote:
       | This looks nice and oddly nostalgic. One bit of feedback: each
       | time I toggled the checkbox I expected the checkmark to look
       | slightly different, as if it were being redrawn by hand each
       | time. Adding some "noise" might be a neat feature for a version
       | 2.0.
        
         | duegreg wrote:
         | Adding a noise would result differenet look on every render, I
         | am not sure that's good
        
           | SpaceNoodled wrote:
           | It already does that, though.
        
       | bryanrasmussen wrote:
       | I personally like the look of this kind of thing enough I would
       | want to use it for a real product, or maybe for the beta version
       | of the product and then switch it up when official release.
       | 
       | Probably too much extra work though.
        
         | shagie wrote:
         | There's good reason to use it for a beta build (or an alpha) -
         | it changes the type of feedback you get.
         | 
         | While my google-fu is failing me as I write this, there was a
         | blog post I read long ago about a making things look not done
         | (I want to say it was in the context of an AWT look and feel).
         | Related: xkcd-style Plots
         | https://mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/11350/xkcd-s...
         | ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4597977 ) and
         | https://www.chrisstucchio.com/blog/2014/why_xkcd_style_graph...
         | 
         | If the product looks _done_ then the feedback you will get
         | assumes that it _is_ done.
         | 
         | I made the mistake of using a nice looking header (it looked
         | better than the existing ones that were used which were
         | stretched gifs and I had a CSS gradient) while working on the
         | innards of some JavaScript. While I was trying to get feedback
         | on the "is this workflow the right sequence of pages? Are these
         | the UI elements that need to be on the page for this
         | functionality? For that matter, am I missing some
         | functionality?" .... and I got feedback about the color blue
         | and if it should go from dark to light or light to dark in the
         | gradient.
         | 
         | ...
         | 
         | And with some digging I remembered the look and feel -
         | https://napkinlaf.sourceforge.net
         | 
         | Which has the links to the blog post:
         | 
         | Don't make the Demo look Done -
         | https://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/...
        
           | diegof79 wrote:
           | Check out Bill Buxton's work, he wrote a lot about this:
           | https://www.billbuxton.com/
        
         | mortenjorck wrote:
         | Early in my design career, I ran a user test of a lo-fi
         | prototype with some members of a customer success team, the
         | visual presentation intended to convey the mutability of what
         | we were presenting. I got a comment that "the sketch look was
         | really nice" and since then have never relied on that as a
         | signifier of where a concept was in the design process.
        
       | Lorin wrote:
       | Doesn't seem super accessible tho', tab focus leaves me wanting.
        
       | cl3misch wrote:
       | I love the sketchy UI elements. I hate the sketchy text font. Do
       | normal sans-serif fonts and sketchy UI not fit together
       | stylistically?
        
         | lloeki wrote:
         | I liked the font myself, but as with every such "handwriting"
         | font it sits in an uncanny valley of "sketchy but regular": a
         | given glyph, however sketchy in isolation, always looks exactly
         | the same!
        
         | zogomoox wrote:
         | The cursive font should at least lean to the right.
        
           | PhasmaFelis wrote:
           | I think that might be how left-handed people write if they're
           | taught how to write properly left-handed. (I was not.)
        
         | tyingq wrote:
         | A lot (not all) of the things in their showcase are using a
         | normal font, so you can have a look:
         | https://wiredjs.com/showcase
        
       | hodanli wrote:
       | Last commit is three years ago
        
         | amsterdorn wrote:
         | HN is like Reddit, people will repost old things that aren't
         | theirs until the end of time.
        
       | kissgyorgy wrote:
       | My favorite tool for this is Balsamiq Wireframes:
       | https://balsamiq.com/wireframes/
       | 
       | Having to write code loses the point of quick and dirty.
        
         | McDyver wrote:
         | I really like https://wireframesketcher.com/
         | 
         | No cloud dependencies, and a lifetime license for $99. These
         | are becoming rarer and rarer
        
           | mthoms wrote:
           | Sadly, the "lifetime license" only includes one year of
           | updates.
        
         | riffraff wrote:
         | I think something like this can be useful to show your
         | customers that something is a functional prototype and not a
         | finished product.
         | 
         | This works if you can switch out The design as in the old
         | "napkin look&feel" for Swing.[0]
         | 
         | Sadly I think "change design by switching out a theme" has long
         | died as an idea in the web space.
         | 
         | [0] https://napkinlaf.sourceforge.net/
        
           | krsdcbl wrote:
           | I'm asking myself if this might be a good application for a
           | WebGL shader?
           | 
           | The issue with "theming to look sketched" is the same as with
           | "hand drawn looking components" - it has to be integrated for
           | your specific DOM or App, totally defying the purpose of
           | "making someone understand this is a quick sketch". Because
           | by now, it's far beyond being a sketch.
        
             | riffraff wrote:
             | but that's the point, it's not a sketch, it's a prototype.
             | 
             | Consider building a calendar app. You build part of the
             | thing, but you have not handled error conditions and edge
             | cases, the back-end supports only a single user and you
             | don't have authentication working.
             | 
             | It's enough to validate some of the flows and how UX
             | actually works, but if you show it to a customer with the
             | actual proper designs they will subconsciously asume that
             | the work is finished.
             | 
             | If the look and feel is "this is not real" it sets their
             | mind in a different configuration.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | Exactly, I have been in too many meetings when they get shown
           | a click dummy in the technology stack, we get the reaction, a
           | couple of days more and it is done.
        
         | juliushuijnk wrote:
         | For wireframing on your phone, with hand drawn style:
         | https://www.tinyux.app
         | 
         | It has a non-standard ux, since I didn't want drag-drop on a
         | small touch screen.
        
           | xixixao wrote:
           | Wow! Awesome!
        
           | grodriguez100 wrote:
           | Looks great! No iOS version?
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | Great, thanks for sharing.
        
         | Angostura wrote:
         | Love Balsamiq. The style of wireframe is so useful for
         | conveying to people that this is just a sketch and to avoid the
         | 'I'm not sure about the font' questions
        
         | jnsie wrote:
         | Absolutely love Balsamiq. So quick and easy. IIRC there used to
         | be a post-processing tool by a 3rd party that would turn
         | Balsamiq Mockups into code - wonder if it's still kicking
         | around.
         | 
         | Edit: it was called napkee. looks like it was open sourced but
         | hasn't been touched in almost a decade
        
       | Terr_ wrote:
       | I wish more designers used these, precisely because it blocks
       | them from prematurely adding too much detail.
       | 
       | When they start doing things like exact-padding and font-size and
       | whatnot, it either (A) front-loads implementation into the
       | development process when the UX hasn't really been tested or at
       | least (B) making developers spend time guessing how precisely the
       | beta needs to look like the design.
        
       | chr15m wrote:
       | You might also like DoodleCSS!
       | https://chr15m.github.io/DoodleCSS/
        
       | vanviegen wrote:
       | I've drawn my inspiration from this project while creating
       | WireText, a VSCode plugin for quickly creating mockups with a
       | hand-drawn style,
       | 
       | https://gitlab.com/saxion.nl/42/wiretext-code/-/blob/main/RE...
        
         | bobwaycott wrote:
         | Wow, this is _really_ cool and clever. Well done!
        
       | bkazez wrote:
       | Pencil and paper also has a hand-drawn, sketchy look, and you
       | don't have to write code!
        
       | lproven wrote:
       | Reminds me of the Paper theme for MacOS 8.x-9.x.
       | 
       | There's a screenshot in the carousel here:
       | 
       | https://www.macintoshrepository.org/2549-appearance-manager-...
       | 
       | Implemented using Appearance Manager, not via Kaleidoscope or one
       | of the other add-ons.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appearance_Manager
        
       | tunnuz wrote:
       | I use Excalidraw for sketching with a similar outcome.
        
       | pg5 wrote:
       | Glad to have found this! I've been looking for something like
       | this because I'm working on a fun, quick side project and don't
       | want to use something boring like bootstrap for it.
        
       | brimstedt wrote:
       | Nice work
       | 
       | It would be neat if there was an option to make input and
       | textarea use the script font as well and an image component that
       | made a sketch of the image provided.
       | 
       | And maybe charts, and...
        
       | beryilma wrote:
       | This is UI theory gone wrong. The idea that users will give
       | feedback more freely when something looks unfinished is at best a
       | non-validated theory.
       | 
       | This used to work with actual paper prototypes. But going the
       | extra length to make UI designs look hand-drawn, when the users
       | know full well they are computer generated is just busy work.
       | 
       | Showing the users what the actual design might look like works
       | better and it actually captures important design choices such as
       | shapes, colors, proximity, etc. that users care about.
       | 
       | I have been to many UX tests. Regardless of sketchy design look
       | or not, the user will either have no problem providing feedback
       | or they won't give useful feedback. It mostly depends on the
       | person, not on what you show them.
        
         | Oarch wrote:
         | Thank you for this. I couldn't agree more about this being busy
         | work. Which there seems to be a lot of in the PM world.
         | 
         | Personally I've found basic shapes and text boxes, or felt
         | markers, infinitely more helpful at getting direct feedback
         | from users.
        
         | shalmanese wrote:
         | I've found the opposite. When users feel like a lot of work has
         | gone into something, they'll restrict their critiques to minor
         | elements that seem easy to change because they are worried
         | about causing you too much rework. Putting it in a sketch
         | format makes it seem like it was easy to generate and gives
         | them much more freedom to make more radical suggestions.
         | 
         | The key though is you also have to present them at least 2 - 3
         | very radically different versions of the same thing.
         | 
         | Each tool has a different purpose at different parts of the
         | design stage. When I'm in blue sky ideation phase, I don't want
         | users to be thinking about colors and proximity (although I do,
         | even at that stage, care deeply about information hierarchy and
         | hate sketch tools that make information heirarchy hard to
         | design for). It's when I'm more in the narrowing down stage
         | that I'll move to more higher fidelity tools.
        
         | samatman wrote:
         | You're imputing a huge amount of intention found nowhere in the
         | link.
         | 
         | > _A set of common UI elements with a hand-drawn, sketchy look.
         | These can be used for wireframes, mockups, or just the fun
         | hand-drawn look._
         | 
         | You made up all the stuff about users and feedback. It isn't on
         | the page and it isn't in the README.
        
         | SteveDR wrote:
         | Who is claiming that this style improves user feedback? From
         | the OP, "these can be used for wireframes, mockups, or just the
         | fun hand-drawn look."
         | 
         | I like the style for its aesthetics alone
        
         | wouldbecouldbe wrote:
         | It's great for showing work to clients, not users.
         | 
         | I've always gotten so much complaints when wireframes look too
         | much as design, they will start making all kinds of comments
         | about how it looks instead of focusing on structure.
         | 
         | I used balsamiq wireframes tool a lot for that reason.
        
         | DontchaKnowit wrote:
         | Counterpoint, it looks good.
        
         | ghnws wrote:
         | Where are you reading this?
        
         | swiftcoder wrote:
         | Nah, the magic here is that if you hand this to your CEO, he's
         | not going to go "looks great, ship it!" and demand your hacked-
         | up demo be in production next week.
        
         | Izkata wrote:
         | Sketch-style UI isn't supposed to make people comment more
         | freely, it's supposed to help stop them from focusing on the
         | polish and instead look at the functionality. The last thing
         | you want is "X and Y aren't aligned" or "Would color Z be
         | better?" when the questions are still more like "Does this
         | work?" and "Are these numbers correct?"
        
       | danielovichdk wrote:
       | I would like to have something like this for "text on stripped
       | paper". Anyone know if there is a library for that ?
        
       | elevatedastalt wrote:
       | I like it for the aesthetics. It's cute. I don't care whether
       | it's more useful for getting feedback or whatever.
        
         | literallycancer wrote:
         | If you just want the visuals and don't need the JS parts, you
         | can use PaperCSS.
        
           | elevatedastalt wrote:
           | Thanks for the tip, just checked it out. I prefer the
           | aesthetics of the current one better. Paper CSS looks like a
           | kid drew those elements. This one has the hand-drawn look of
           | a more professional hand.
        
       | flemhans wrote:
       | The progress bars should really be filled out like if a person
       | was doing it, rather than re-rendering the whole contents
        
       | WillAdams wrote:
       | There was a charming theme for Mac OS which looked something
       | along these lines (and there was another which collapsed elements
       | down to the bare minimum of space necessary which was a big help,
       | and wish had been preserved, or re-created on some other platform
       | --- in particular, being able to arrange a line of window-shaded
       | folders and to double-click on any one to make it visible was a
       | god-send on small displays) --- it would be nice if theming were
       | simpler to do/implement.
        
       | endofreach wrote:
       | Finally. I have occasionally been looking for something similar &
       | it was not important enough to do it myself. Now i have a good
       | basis to start from. Thank you!
        
       | sandGorgon wrote:
       | can i use this in htmx ?
        
       | aryeshalev wrote:
       | https://jdittrich.github.io/quickMockup/ this is another GEM from
       | the past, super easy and you can load/save as HTML file. i like
       | the simple design for mockup
        
       | lpellis wrote:
       | I'm using this for the AI annotations at https://pagewatch.ai/
       | Its strange how much different it makes the whole page feel from
       | regular boxes, much more of a tangible/informal feeling. Felt
       | perfect to go with the type of feedback LLM's give.
        
       | PhasmaFelis wrote:
       | I want to sneak this onto the test environments for my company's
       | webapp next April Fool's.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-06-01 23:02 UTC)