Next generation UI for next generation LS

Hello Peter, hello CPF...

now that the new ARC LS is in development, may I suggest a new user-interface?

To be honest, I think the whole "multiple-click" thingie is overly complex.

This was true for the ARC 4, and the HDS series of lights isn´t any better... I mean a flashlight where you´re supposed to have a quick-reference-card at hand?

Maybe a sailor who operates a morse-code radio transmitter can get used to it, but someone who simply needs some light in the darkness won´t.

IMHO a nice approach for combining on/off-functionality and multiple brightness levels is implemented in SF´s U2: Click on/off, turn dial to adjust brightness.

The Gatlight V2 does this even better: Turn dial to go from "off" over "dim" to "full brightness".

Turning a dial or rotating a bezel ( hint hint ) is so much more intuitive for changing brightness settings than clicking like mad on the on/off switch... Just my humble opinion.

Seth

I disagree that the Arc4+ had a complicated user interface. A nice feature of that interface was easy, one-handed operation. An interface such as you suggest that is present in the U2 and the vaporware Proton requires two hand useage. It bad enough in a light the size of the U2, but becomes even more of a nightmare in a smaller sized light.

I'm with TIN on this one: single button interfaces such as in the Arc4 and the HDS are easy to learn and operate (hey, *I* can do it!). Adding a selector ring in the small size of an Arc LS would be very hard to doo (I'm guessing).

:thinking: Did I miss changes in the Proton? The one we played with at SHOT had a (also, very easy to use) single-button interface - this one on the body, not the tailcap.

I can tell you a large percentage of the budget was spent developing/evaluating various interfaces. In the end, I selected a combination of simplicity, reliability and functionality.

Of course, each person will have to see for themselves if the interface is useful to them.

Peter

this_is_nascar said:

I disagree that the Arc4+ had a complicated user interface.

Click to expand...

Different people, different opinions, I guess
Nothing wrong with that, I respect your point of view.

this_is_nascar said:

A nice feature of that interface was easy, one-handed operation. An interface such as you suggest that is present in the U2 and the vaporware Proton requires two hand useage. It bad enough in a light the size of the U2, but becomes even more of a nightmare in a smaller sized light.

Click to expand...

I guess 50% of all CPF members prefer a clickie, 50% prefer a twisty.
On most lights a twisty is a two-handed job. Even the classic ARC LS was originally a twisty-type of flashlight, so I don´t see this will be a "nightmare".

I agree that a clickie can be operated easier one-handed, but some twisties ( think about the ARC AAA ) can be used the same way.

Seth

Seth, how about both?

--

Btw, please know that the new Arc-LS has a microprocessor. Now, depending on the individual reading this, this could be good or bad news.

I think it is a good thing- when used properly. Remember, Arc was the first company to put a microprocessor and a high power LED together. This was a couple of years ago. Unfortunately, my first offering was a bit more complicated to use than neccessary.

One goal with the new LS was to improve the interface. The biggest part of that goal was to improve the switch, second was to improve the firmware.

Of course, the final test of any design decision is how it affects the user.

Btw, for those interested:

Top level goals for the new LS

- output
- size/weight
- interface
- durability
- modifiable/upgradeable
- manufacturability

I would like to avoid hype in presenting this. No design satisfies all people. Product ready to ship is a long long way off. Read my posts at your own risk, etc.

Peter

Bucket full of

I was wishing that the next LS was going to have a pure mechanical 3 stage switch. But thats just coming off a crazy mind here.

Multiple stage mechanical clickies are extremely difficult to implement.

I'm with Tin on this as well but hope that the new LS offers something in between the old Arc 4 and the FFIII. I have both a HDS and the FFIII which uses a twisty interface. The HDS has to many clicks in my view to access the wide range of possible lighting levels but is easy to operate when you get the hang of it. I also feel that the FF III is to limiting in accessing all of the output levels quickly with the standard FLuPIC firmware. I'm not knocking either light and happy to have them both but I hope the new LS will be a good balance of several lighting levels with minimum input. Ideally I would like to be able to access at a minimum 5 light levels with 7 or 8 clicks and holds. Not sure if that is possible but it would be nice. I'm really looking forward to the new LS.

Gransee said:

Seth, how about both?

Click to expand...

Peter,

sounds good to me

In my opinion, a good flashlight is a flashlight where you don´t have to "learn" something to use it.

Getting away from flashlights, a kitchen stove is a good example for a good, easy-to-use UI: I think every single human being on this planet knows or understands it gets hot if you turn the knob in one direction, it gets cooler if you turn the knob the other way round.

Would you buy a kitchen stove where you have to multi-click to adjust temperature? :huh:

In other words:
A good design is a design that even my 70 years old dad can use.

If I hand him something in the line of an ARC 4, he´ll surely manage to click it on/off, but he won´t figure out how to change brightness settings or other fancy things. Chances are good he´ll call me some day on the telephone telling me his flashlight is only doing "SOS", having no clue how to make it work "normal".

On the other hand, if I´d give hime something in the line of an SF U2, he´ll discover within minutes "click is on/off, turning this dial is dim/bright" without any instruction sheet.

To sum it up:
If the next-generation ARC LS has an KISS interface, I firmly believe we have a winner here

Seth

Seth said:

Would you buy a kitchen stove where you have to multi-click to adjust temperature? :huh:

Click to expand...

I have an oven like that and everytime I use it I ask myself "What were the designers of this thing thinking?" .

That being said, I really put my arc4 through it's paces, never had any issues with the switch and my only complaint with the UI was the 10 click/press thing. Other than that I replaced the lens with a UCL. I dropped that light off ladders almost daily and other than a dinged up bezel never had a problem.

Upgradeability is a definite plus, even if it's relatively involved, I don't mind. Spending alot of money for a light and having to practically destroy it to get to the innards is a real bummer.

Peter, remember the Arc4+ clip! It was great!

Seth said:

Getting away from flashlights, a kitchen stove is a good example for a good, easy-to-use UI: I think every single human being on this planet knows or understands it gets hot if you turn the knob in one direction, it gets cooler if you turn the knob the other way round.

Would you buy a kitchen stove where you have to multi-click to adjust temperature? :huh:

Click to expand...

There are potentially other features to a flashlight than simply up or down. And the form factor is quite a bit different than a kitchen stove, it's hard to put a "10 lumen" or "40 lumen" sticker on a knob on a flashlight ;-). I've put a good deal of thought into just what one can do with a one button interface, it's an interesting problem and I look forward to seeing new ideas. Perhaps someday I'll get my own ideas out into the wild...

Another thing to consider, as you put more features into a stove, you require a more complex interface. Say, time limits, alarms, etc. No longer do you have a single knob. I have one such oven at home.

A UI that makes sense to me would use both the twistie head with an on/off clickie. Maybe magnets in the top of the screw on barrel to trip coils in the head of the light signalling change of brightness. The on/off clickie can turn it on and off but also to program brightness levels. On/off/on/off/on quickly to put it in program mode and program outputs with the switch. The barrel (or head) twist will select say 5 levels of light by twisting. The spring in the bottom of the barrel will compress against the battery to prevent crushing of the cell.

I have three lights that have multiple outputs, one FireFly~III with FluPIC, a LuxeonV Mag mod with nFlex and MillerMods L1P with twist on/click for low/high output. The nFlex is a great UI that non-flashaholics understand after playing with it a minute or two. The press and hold for low... hold a little longer for max always impresses with it's simplicity. Once on, press and hold to cycle the output levels. Look ma! No multiple clicks!

The FF-III uses multiple on/off twists of the head to adjust output levels and once you get the sequence, it is very easy to use.

Can't wait to see what Peter has up his sleeve with UI multi outputs, lithium-ion cells and Luxeon K2's that are about to roll out. Don't forget to put a heat sensor in the head if you don't have a copper heatsink.

Peter,

I still have three Arc4 + that are still working well to my satisfaction. Lately I bought a bunch of the new Arc AAA to my satisfaction. I hope to keep the this trend!

Aside the switch issue with the Arc4+, i.e. the sensitivity to the battery length and type, the vulnerability when the light falls on the floor with the pushbutton - what I did't liked of the Arc4+ is the type of drive of the LED. About the UI, I believe I can adapt to any.

I learned, after various reading of physiology, that the PWM technique used for dimming and tint control in the ARC 4+ threatens the side vision of the eye.
The "flickering" of the light is not perceptible with the central part of the retina, while it is with the side vision - especially when the light is in motion.

The side vision doesn't "integrate" the light spikes like the the direct vision does, and this is due to an evolutionary motivation: it has to trigger the sense of danger - to bring the attention of the direct vision on what is moving.

I realize that this is subjective to the each individual, but any light using the PWM for LED control is going to produce, at some moment, an unexplainable sense of disconfort.
I believe that PT abandoned the technology, LRI will not, and MAG may be going mainstream with PWM controlled light... making people think, IMO, that LED lights are "spectre" lights...

I believe that current DC drive of an LED is much better... nowadays the new LEDs have lesser tint shift with the drive current intensity, but there will be some anyway. It also possible, I believe, to keep PWM for very low levels, and DC constant current for higher levels.

Just my tought, I'm waiting your new lights...

Anthony

Interesting post Ray_of_Light. I agree that the peripheal vision is more sensitive to rapid changes, but I believe that most PWM are well outside the range. Do you have any research articles you could post supporting a particular frequency?

Peter

I would like a clicky for on/off and a twisty for light level. The twisty could be integrated into the head much like a gas cap. Once the head is snug on the body, further turning in the same direction would step thru different light levels. A 360 degree turn would step thru all levels.

buba said:

I would like a clicky for on/off and a twisty for light level. The twisty could be integrated into the head much like a gas cap. Once the head is snug on the body, further turning in the same direction would step thru different light levels. A 360 degree turn would step thru all levels.

Click to expand...

ditto

Whatever the final design I hope it will allow turning the light on at any preset level. I would probably use a "low" most of the time and would not like to have to cycle down to it.

Geoff

I never felt the need for anything like 16 levels when I had an Arc4+. Two levels, definitely; three or four, in a high powered light, ok. More than that seems silly. The Spy 005 has six levels and they don't get in the way because of the knob adjustment, but 3 levels would have been fine.