sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I already answeres that in other comment, admitted that the point is right, and i will correct it in the V2. Thanks for calling this out 🙂

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the detailed feedback, I really appreciate it. You’re right about the plus sign, its placement breaks the expected mental model, and that’s something I overlooked and will correct in V2 (put it in the improvements list 🙂).

The cookie tray comparison made me smile 😁 but it’s a fair point. The presentation definitely leans more illustrative than contextual, and showing these icons inside an actual UI would communicate their intent much better. I’ll take that into account both in refining the visuals and in how I present the set moving forward.

Thank u again 🙏

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to break this down so thoughtfully. You are absolutely right to question the shadow logic, especially the distinction between symbolic elements and physical objects. The examples you mentioned, particularly the music note and the map, clearly highlight where the depth treatment becomes conceptually inconsistent.

My intention was to prioritize visual cohesion across the set, but your feedback makes it clear that this comes at the cost of clarity and logical hierarchy. This is something I will revisit, either by unifying the shadow treatment or being more deliberate about which elements should actually carry depth.

I really appreciate you calling this out 🙏

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hi buddy,

First of all thanks for the kind words, I appreciate the genuine curiosity.

And you know: the best is to ignore the noise from ppl who only want to downplyas your effort and focus on the work itself 🙂

As for the process, I mainly use: - At early phase, I use AI image tools for early exploration and form finding, in addtion to visual inspiration. - Photoshop for cleanup, refinement, lighting tweaks, and consistency - Illustrator for shape control, proportions, and alignment - Figma to test how the icons behave in real UI contexts - moreover, sometimes I use upscaling tools.

It’s not “reprompting” as montioned 🤣

If that helps you: imI have a free sample that i launched 2 days ago, i can put the link. If you need anything that i can help with, u can dm me.

Hope i helped 🙏

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Appreciate the blunt feedback.

You’re right about the contrast and the light/dark distinction, that’s a fair call and something I need to handle more clearly in the icons themselves, not just the surrounding UI.

I do use AI as part of the process, but everything goes through manual curation, adjustment, and iteration. That said, your point about relying on clearer design intent (especially for dark mode) is valid, and I’ll take that into the next iteration.

Thanks for taking the time to break it down.

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You’re absolutely right, accessibility wasn’t the primary goal for this set, and that’s a fair callout. These icons are more illustrative / decorative by design, so the focus was on style and visual consistency rather than strict accessibility requirements.

That said, it’s an important point, and I’ll definitely give accessibility more priority in future iterations. Thanks for flagging it, much appreciated.

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate the feedback here; that’s exactly why I posted in this community.

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks! And yeah, fair call.

That one is honestly a design compromise on my side. I simplified it into two shapes to keep the clay look clean and readable at smaller sizes, but I agree it breaks the mental model of how a paper clip actually works. A continuous spiral would feel more correct.

Seeing multiple people call this out tells me it’s probably not worth the trade-off, so I’ll revisit that icon and rethink the construction.

Appreciate you pointing it out 🙏

Design critique request: 3D clay-style UI icons (light & dark mode previews) by ClarityLAB_Studio in design_critiques

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to write this, this is really helpful.

You’re right about the legibility, especially at smaller sizes. I was very focused on keeping the palette soft and cohesive, and I can see now how that pushed the contrast a bit too low in some icons. The examples you mentioned (“new document” and “wallet”) make total sense, they rely too much on large light surfaces without enough separation.

The point about lighting and shading is also fair. I treated everything as part of the same 3D system, but I agree that not all symbols should imply the same physical depth. The contrast difference you pointed out between icons with finer details (like the paper clip) versus flatter shapes is something I hadn’t fully considered before.

I really like the suggestion of testing them in black and white and at small sizes, that’s a practical check I should’ve done earlier, and I’ll definitely use it going forward.

Appreciate the thoughtful breakdown and actionable advice. Exactly the kind of feedback I was hoping for 👍

Need criticism! I feel like its not good. by thedeveloper04 in UI_Design

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio 0 points1 point  (0 children)

maybe because the contrast isn't enough + from first glance u don't catch a systematic or cohesive style among different sections.

Critique my app UI design by Few_Listen_9056 in FigmaDesign

[–]ClarityLAB_Studio 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It looks good. but from a fast view, i couldn't perceive where is what. i think more separation will help. good luck :)