45 Replies
I'm looking on my phone and I can't really read any of it
im looking on desktop and it's very very cramped
the small text might as well not be there, because it's just a black and white blob of pixels
im not joking
some you can, somewhat, read with EXTREME effort
I'm guessing you made this in figma or penpot and didn't zoom out enough
the graph is pretty much unusable, as it doesn't have a scale on the y axis
you can't tell what any of the bars are relatively, without clicking on every single one of them
looks amazing, doesn't work
you're missing the units and a time frame here, making this useless
it doesn't say if it is for today, yesterday, the entire last week
it doesn't have units as well and has no indication if 540 carbs is good or bad
again: looks amazing, doesn't work
I would argue that those would work at a larger size, honestly. Carbs, Protein, and Fats are always measured in grams.
but at this scale, the text is unreadable
usually, yes, unless you're american
but then again, is 540 good or bad? the graph doesn't show that
as for the graph, I don't think it's meant as a way to fully accurately read the scale. The highest number is labeled somewhat clearly at 70 minutes, the other bars are there for a qualitative comparison
I assume that circle is filled based on how far towards your goal you are
what if you go over the goal? a symbol would be a good idea, but there's none
it is the selected value. the graph still needs a few horizontal lines that denotate 3-4 values in the y scale, to make the graph a lot more usable
by the way, all the times in the graph are in minutes
the problem: this requires doing math in your head, when you could display 53h20m and 1h18m, which makes a lot more sense for humans
the notification dot is super easy to miss
the text here could be a lot bigger
you have inconsistent casing in the text
these titles could probably use more space at the top, less space at the bottom and be bigger
what's this?
so, 540 carbs is bad, but 90 protein is good? and both have the same filled in part?
that looks a lot better, but here's what i would do:
- limit it to 4 values on the left axys
- remove the 0
- add some very very faint horizontal lines behind the graph
in this example, i would put 15m, 30m, 45m and 1h
i will change it
ok , i will do it
just give it a try, and see if you like it
the problem is that there's no way to see what's good or bad, as both look the same, except the color
and color isn't a good indicator if something is good or bad, as there's this thing called "color blindness"
its just case study for my protfolio
Thank you for your time. I’ll try it and show you the result
you're welcome
the problem is that you have the exact same "symbol" (the graph) representing "good" and "bad"
yeah ur right i will change it
you don't need to change a ton, just change the value of the graphs
since you're using a "gauge" graph, you could do like how gauges do, and have an area being represented as the "good" area
for example, you don't need exactly 2000 calories
going a bit over isn't too bad
got it thanks i'll show you the results
what aboat this
how will you represent when you go over?
i can reduce it, and when it goes over, I'll make it red
that's way too much
something like this
here's the excalidraw file, in case you wanna play around with it
thanks man for ur effort
you're welcome
That’s everything.
close, really close
can u be specific
each red arrow is a line
the numbers arent aligned to the lines, and you have an extra line at the top
ok got it
are there any mistakes here? regardless of the lines u mentioned @ἔρως
the screenshot is from the pdf