3D renders of your favorite VST plugin interface!

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

ghettosynth wrote:You brought up tits in a conversation about user interfaces and are overly defensive because you're shallow and think that everyone else is. Just own it, and move on.
Sweetie, what you're doing is called "projection" (since you talked about psychology you might know what it is).

Your intense wish to "win" a debate let's you spit out false accusations in a row just to make a point. You propagate thoughts, conclusions or aims the "opponent" allegedly carries with him without any proof just to make a point. You've been told several times that you are wrong with your accusations - what you eventually had to confirm - but you keep on playing those false cards. You judge the effort to refuse these accusations (which were often unneccessarily insulting, too) as overly defensive but the only problem here is that you're overly aggressive. :phones:

That is not ok, even though you're that kind of person. In fact, it has nothing to do with discussing or debating. It's a sick behaviour (in a pathological meaning).

Furthermore you seem to have a problem with women but that's another topic. :hihi:

Post

Jace-BeOS wrote:I must say it's ...odd... how men on tech forums bring up women so often when talking about tech. I just saw some appalling examples on a thread from 2008 on GearSlutz. Can we just not compare tech gadgets with women, please and thank you? :-)
Jeez, it was only an example of an 'every day's situation' most people know (ok, probably not all people).

Post

elassi wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:You brought up tits in a conversation about user interfaces and are overly defensive because you're shallow and think that everyone else is. Just own it, and move on.
Your intense wish to "win" a debate let's you spit out false accusations
It's no wish, my point holds, and it was not a false accusation that brought up your shallow perspective on the kinds of women that you like to kiss and who's breasts that you appreciate the most.

You were called out on being shallow, again, get over it. You aren't going to be able to save face. Confusing you with another poster was an honest mistake and one that I copped to as soon as I realized it.
Furthermore you seem to have a problem with women but that's another topic. :hihi:
LOL! You owe me an irony meter.

Post

elassi wrote:
Jace-BeOS wrote:I must say it's ...odd... how men on tech forums bring up women so often when talking about tech. I just saw some appalling examples on a thread from 2008 on GearSlutz. Can we just not compare tech gadgets with women, please and thank you? :-)
Jeez, it was only an example of an 'every day's situation' most people know (ok, probably not all people).

No, it was far more than that. Let's not misquote you, here it is...
elassi wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:I'm saying that these things serve a purpose
Yeah, and fake eyelashes or push-ups are fake, too.

Will you kiss her anyway? :wink:
With even a wink, lovely. I'm talking about misrepresentations of software and you are equivocating that with how a woman looks and how this manifests in someone else's sexual desire. The implication being, since you are trying to win the argument, that you would exercise such a desire, and more than that, that it's all ok because everyone does it and it's ok to make the "bride look pretty."

To top if off you think that it's ok to refer to other people with the diminutive, and sexualized, terms "honey" and "sweetie." Why don't you try stepping into the 21st century with the rest of us, ok?

Like I said, let it go. If you want to talk about user interfaces and 3d projections, cool, but your point about titties and kissing is offensive, off color, and off topic and your desperate attempt to color it otherwise borders on pathetic. If you can't figure out I'll see if I can have a moderator help you.

Post

ghettosynth wrote:You can think of it that way, but, that's not why it's done and the fact that you think that it's "just fun" suggests that it has some effect on you. That is, you see it as positive. It's designed to make products appear more tangible which has an impact on your risk perception and, consequently, your purchase decisions.
Making software products feel more tangible is for sure in general the biggest reason for doing this with commercial products (same as virtual box shots).

However, it's not the *only* reason, and it *is* often/sometimes done as a fun, extra thing, usually not "ordered" by the company, but done by the graphics guy as a nice visual, and the company likes it and puts it out - some of the u-he renders were done like this, just stuff they thought looked nice, and not some underhanded marketing technique.

As someone who is working on something and is also contemplating doing a 3D render of the interface, here are the reasons I'm thinking of doing it:

1) - The interface looks nice, and a 3D version might also look cool as an alternative view
2) - It's a fun exercise in improving my skillset in the 3D tools
3) - It generates more visual material that I can use in the website/blurb/artwork (same for virtual box shots, although this has really been overused these days so it feels a bit cheap imo)
4) - The interface is based on real hardware, so it might also be able to generate some nice visuals of the real thing, and my improvements on it, better than photography alone.

For me, the "making tangible" or "marketing manipulation" isn't even a factor in the decision to try this (unless you really want to equate "a nice presentation" with "marketing manipulation", which is altogether a longer and more nuanced conversation ;) ) And if I did it, I wouldn't be presenting it in a way that suggested this, anyway.

If I was already skilled in the area of 3D, rather than having just done a bit over the years, it's almost a no-brainer because for not much effort you can generate some nice extra visual material that's useful.

So for me, it's reason 2 and 1, then 3 and 4, that are the factors in the decision to pursue this. I can't speak for everybody, but if someone had just blanket ascribed a "cynical marketing" factor to me, then they would be incorrect in their assumptions.

FWIW I've mostly always taken 3d renders as a fun, nice way to present your product, and am in no way "fooled" into thinking a software product is real - they don't influence my purchasing decisions one bit - but I do understand that others are very sensitive, or perhaps even over sensitive - to feeling manipulated, and I think it does a dev some good to at least consider this in the way they present their stuff.

Post

Thank you for validating that.
U N I S O N : shoegaze/electronic wall of sound with heavenly voice
https://soundcloud.com/weareunison / https://www.facebook.com/unison666 / https://weareunison.com/

Post

I am surprised how some of the guys are getting so intense and defensive about the idea of some 3D mock ups of a VST plugin.

Sad :roll:

Post

beely wrote:
ghettosynth wrote:You can think of it that way, but, that's not why it's done and the fact that you think that it's "just fun" suggests that it has some effect on you. That is, you see it as positive. It's designed to make products appear more tangible which has an impact on your risk perception and, consequently, your purchase decisions.
Making software products feel more tangible is for sure in general the biggest reason for doing this with commercial products (same as virtual box shots).

However, it's not the *only* reason, and it *is* often/sometimes done as a fun, extra thing, usually not "ordered" by the company, but done by the graphics guy as a nice visual, and the company likes it and puts it out - some of the u-he renders were done like this, just stuff they thought looked nice, and not some underhanded marketing technique.
I think that you're reading too much into what I'm saying. The reason you do it for fun is because it's perceived as tangible. You like it and think that it looks cool because it makes a non thing look like a thing. That's the psychology of the thing. You actually like that it misrepresents what the product is because, as humans, we connect to things. There's nothing wrong with a graphics guy doing it for fun because, as a graphics guy, you aren't misrepresenting a product to someone else.

However, as I said earlier, all marketing, and when a company puts that out, regardless of who did it and for how much, you aren't really in control of why, is meant to generate interest in the product and renders primarilty do it by creating tangibility through misrepresentation.

I said in my first post on the topic that there is variance in the degree to which these are used. With respect to Urs efforts, even I like the repro screen background. However, I view that as slightly different than other vendors, whom I won't name, who use the tangibility in the same what that rendered boxes are used. As I said, boxes and 3d renders are cut from the same cloth. They are like "9s" in pricing, everyone uses them, yes, it's a little shady and manipulative, and some people use them more than others.

I also pointed out that, even if you don't intend for it to be manipulative, you don't get to control how the customer perceives it. Since it is, by definition, a misrepresentation, then some segment of the population will look askew at it, and moreover, the more you do it, especially if it's seen as compensation for quality, then the larger that segment is going to be.

Post

Yes, that was expressed rather better than the previous over-generalisations, and for the most part I agree with your points. :tu:

Note: I'm more inclined to use 3d renders more as large subtle background material, than trying to present a 3D shot as the product - not so much because of misrepresentation, but more because everyone else does it that way, and I don't just like to do the obvious things, anyway... At the end of day, any GUI that is a recreation of the interface/design of existing hardware is in some way channelling the "real thing", and comes under the "marketing" category anyway... :neutral:

I especially dislike the "9s" thing, and the other crappy marketing trend of omitting the currency from prices, so you'll see on adverts/voiceovers things like "Get this for Only 399!" as if it sounds less like spending *actual* money than saying "£399" or "399 pounds!"....

And don't get me started on the "hide the product price until you force customers to the online shop and start the checkout process..." thing. Those are the things I tend to react more negatively too than presentation, unless it's really overtly bad...

Post

I was checking out Kirk Hunter's Virtuoso Ensembles the other day and saw some 3D renders of a virtual studio that made me stare and stare to try to figure out why it was done in the first place, but couldn't...

Image

Image

So weird for some reason... Not that I disapprove of weirdness.

Well, with DeepMind's Augmented Reality and so on, maybe we should prepare for Virtual Reality Studios, so then 3D renders of plugins will come to good use. :wink:

Post

elassi wrote:
Jace-BeOS wrote:I must say it's ...odd... how men on tech forums bring up women so often when talking about tech. I just saw some appalling examples on a thread from 2008 on GearSlutz. Can we just not compare tech gadgets with women, please and thank you? :-)
Jeez, it was only an example of an 'every day's situation' most people know (ok, probably not all people).
I have distaste for using women as an analogy for objects and marketing. They're people. The makeup and fake body parts stuff is not part of my "every day" life experiences, either, because I don't have women in my life who fall prey to the cultural pressure to change themselves with makeup and fake body parts. The ones who do are generally being coerced by culture, which is bad. It's all around bad stuff and so that's why I've resistance to this kind of analogy.
- dysamoria.com
my music @ SoundCloud

Post

That's all nice and stuff, but i thought we talked about 3D render of plugin interfaces. :)

Post

chk071 wrote:That's all nice and stuff, but i thought we talked about 3D render of plugin interfaces. :)
Subthread. This is how conversation works ;-)
- dysamoria.com
my music @ SoundCloud

Post

Well, user's world view are better off in HPC, i guess.

Post

ghettosynth wrote:If you can't figure out I'll see if I can have a moderator help you.
See, cutie, in one of your first replies to my posts you (as an example) assumed I'm hoping for support by other people in order to somewhat help my "shallow points" become stronger. There was no hint or reason to come to this conclusion. One can only speculate about your motive to write this as it neither underlined, nor did it strengthen your on-topic POV. Actually, this and other following posts were just plain ad hominem tactics. Funny enough that you accused me of attacking you at the same time.

Therefore you can't expect that the tone you've set with it won't be adressed in one or another way. Even more as you kept on working with this 'tool' and enhanced your unpleasant debating style by other badly reputated strategies like "strawman"-arguments and simply wrong, read: utterly false, accusations made of pure fiction. You have been proven twice in that regard (could have been more if I have wanted to), but your urgent need to achieve your goal overrid any doubt you may have gathered from that. Furthermore you didn't check earlier posts in this thread. That's a pity because you would have seen then that you were also wrong with further assumptions about your opponent's mindset. Instead, you made yourself a ranting 'not-too-smart-person'. Ira (that's Latin) is a bad consultant. q.e.d.

You also didn't get the point of widening the topic of the paper by other aspects that also fit to the question of the (non-)sense of 3D-renderings. And you didn't understand that this does not mean that the paper has been considered wrong, inadequate or of minor importance. Instead you felt offended, or, let's put it like this: misunderstood and devalued, and from that moment you were looking for ways, suitable or not, to take revenge and somehow 'win' an useless fight. You even (and embarrissingly) confirmed that you're longing for an actually meaningless victory. The repetitive mentioning of the term "defense" or its derivates also indicated your view on discussions as a kind of 'war'.

You noticed that I had fun by using repetitive phrases in return and also adressing you with terms of endearment? Good, because that was my 'answer' to your methods of discussing and your ongoing insults. I was pretty sure that sooner or later you'll hop on this train. Or, let's again put it in other words: become upset once you grasp the function of it. Psychology, you know?

Conclusio: Do not expect a boomerang to simply disappear after you've thrown it. Keep it in your bag when joining a discussion. That's much more fruitful and enjoyable for all participants. If you can't resist, which can happen from time to time (know it from myself), be prepared for the resulting conflict and don't run to moderators searching for help once you're facing appropriate reactions. This looks weak and childish.

P.S. You'll probably reply to this post. I'll read it. But essentially I have nothing more to say about this, "our", specific sub-topic so you're given the possibility to put and have the last words on it. I can feel how much you need this. :tu:

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”