Arts

Check Out This Dime-Sized Van Gogh Replica—It’s Made of DNA

dna-origami-starry-night

 

DNA codes for life as we know it, but in recent years, scientists have discovered more uses for the molecule. Because DNA is foldable and “sticky,” they’ve begun making microscopic shapes called DNA origami. Over the last decade or so, researchers have improved at this DNA art, and now, Caltech scientists say they used DNA to sketch a glowing masterpiece — a replica of Vincent van Gogh’s famous painting “The Starry Night”— on a canvas the size of a dime.

While the mini-van Gogh is neat — if a little fuzzy and monochromatic — the demonstration shows the technique may be approaching more practical uses. One of the difficulties of making technologies ever-smaller is figuring out how to precisely place components. As it turns out, our fingers are just a little too fat to build on scales far thinner than a human hair.

Researchers hope DNA origami can be like surrogate hands on the tiniest scales, and if successful, the technology may be used to build useful devices smaller than any yet in existence.

 

dna-origami-starry-night-1

This reproduction of Vincent van Gogh’s painting “The Starry Night” is the width of a dime and made up of 65,536 DNA-based pixels. Image credit: Paul Rothemund and Ashwin Gopinath/Caltech

 

Making microscopic shapes out of DNA has a decades-long history, but newer techniques developed in the last ten years have further advanced the field. To make a particular shape, researchers first model an exact sequence of DNA base pairs on a computer — this takes about a week — and then synthesize the DNA from the ground up — taking another week.

The base-pair sequence of a long strand of DNA determines how it can fold, while shorter strands of DNA act like staples, attaching different parts of the longer strand to one another. After being placed in a solution, the planned shapes — smiley faces, letters of the alphabet, whatever the researchers design — assemble themselves in a few hours without further human interaction.

Caltech professor, Paul Rothemund, who developed DNA origami in 2006, has more recently been working toward DNA-based devices by sticking DNA origami onto chip-like surfaces.

Using electron-beam lithography, the team etches a surface with “sticky” patches shaped to match a bit of DNA origami—a triangular bit of DNA, for example, will fit into a triangular patch. The DNA shapes can then settle in and stay put.

“Think of it a bit like the pegboards people use to organize tools in their garages, only in this case, the pegboard assembles itself from DNA strands and the tools likewise find their own positions,” says Rothemund. “It all happens in a test tube without human intervention, which is important because all of the parts are too small to manipulate efficiently, and we want to make billions of devices.”

The cool bit is that DNA can also bind to a wide range of molecules. In this case, the DNA was designed to bind fluorescent molecules, and the sticky patches were of a special sort — called photonic crystal cavities (PCCs) — made to magnify the light emitted by the molecules. Just how much the light gets magnified depends on precise placement of the DNA/molecule pair. If placement is only a little off, they won’t emit any light. Each cavity was made to bind anywhere from zero to seven pieces of DNA origami, corresponding to “pixels” of eight levels of brightness.

Other attempts to make similar emitters have failed to yield more than a few successful lamps due to the difficulty of placing them just right, according to the scientists. The DNA-based method is more precise, and therefore, more successful.

“It’s like using DNA origami to screw molecular light bulbs into microscopic lamps,” Rothemund explains. Shining together, these molecular light bulbs make up a dime-sized masterpiece.

The team is next working on improving the lamps which currently “burn out” in about 45 seconds and only shine in a few different red hues. But the long-term goal is to take the techniques they’ve learned and use them to begin building tiny sensors or next-generation computing devices.

“Everybody thinks molecules are eventually going to be the devices of the future,” Rothemund told Gizmodo. “But how do you connect them? How do you wire them up into larger circuits? How do you do anything with them? You need an interface between the molecular and the macroscopic world, and that’s what this is.”

If they can paint like van Gogh on molecular scales, then maybe they can do a lot more.

[SingularityHub]

July 17, 2016 / by / in , , , , , , , , ,
Creativity Is Much More Than 10,000 Hours of Deliberate Practice

Creators are not mere experts. Instead of deliberately practicing down an already existing path, they often create their own path for others to follow.

istock7616AF385C

Image: iStockphoto.

 

In his new book “Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertise“, psychologist Anders Ericsson and journalist Robert Pool distill an impressive body of research on “mastering almost any skill.” Indeed, deliberate practice can help you master new skills. Deliberate practice involves a series of techniques designed to learn efficiently and purposefully. This involves goal setting, breaking down complex tasks into chunks, developing highly complex and sophisticated representations of possible scenarios, getting out of your comfort zone, and receiving constant feedback.

But as they note midway through their book — and I believe this is a really important caveat— the techniques of deliberate practice are most applicable to “highly developed fields” such as chess, sports, and musical performance in which the rules of the domain are well established and passed on from generation to generation. The principles of deliberate practice do not work nearly as well for professions in which there is “little or no direct competition, such as gardening and other hobbies”, and “many of the jobs in today’s workplace– business manager, teacher, electrician, engineer, consultant, and so on.”

And may I also add: almost any creative domain!

Deliberate practice is really important for fields such as chess and instrumental performance because they rely on consistently replicable behaviors that must be repeated over and over again. But not all domains of human achievement rely on consistently replicable behaviors. For most creative domains, the goals and ways of achieving success are constantly changing, and consistently replicable behaviors are in fact detrimental to success. While Kobe Bryant showcasing the same slam dunk and Tiger Woods getting a hole in one will reliably induce public applause, scientists can’t keep publishing the same paper over and over again, and writers can’t keep writing the same critically acclaimed novel over and over again and expect the same acclaim.

Artists are under constant pressure to surpass what they and others have done before, and it is precisely this pressure that drives them toward ever increasing originality. Artistic products can lose their “shock value” quickly. How many times would Lady Gaga have to consistently wear her meat dress without people getting bored? If people applied the techniques of deliberate practice to create a meat dress and wear it for Halloween, would those individuals be lauded for their creative genius? Probably not.

While creativity often draws on a deep knowledge base, creative products, by definition, are much more than expert products. This is because creativity must be original, meaningful, and surprising. Original in the sense that the creator is rewarded for transcending expertise, and going beyond the standard repertoire. Meaningful in the sense that the creator must satisfy some utility function, or provide a new interpretation. This constantly raises the bar of what is considered useful, and puts immense pressure on creators to find new meanings. Finally, creative products must be surprising in that the original and meaningful creative product must be surprising not only to oneself, but to everyone. This is exactly how the United States Patent Office evaluates new applications. Original and meaningful ideas that could have been created by any expert in the field are considered “obvious” and are therefore unpatentable. Creative products– such as the discoveries of Galileo and Leeuwenhoek– are surprising to everyone, novices and experts alike.

Over the past 50 years or so, there have been many systematic studies of the career trajectories of creative people, the traits that predict creativity, and the life experiences of creative people. This wealth of research on creativity contradicts the notion that deliberate practice is the sole– or even the most important– aspect of creativity. Below I will summarize 12 of these findings.

  1. Creativity is often blind. If only creativity was all about deliberate practice. We could all just practice our way to creative acclaim. But in reality, it’s impossible for creators to know completely whether their new idea or product will be well received. Oftentimes, the public isn’t ready for an idea. The creative product has to fit the “spirit of the times”. Although developing a feel for what people will like is certainly a skill that can be honed through experience, there will always be a certain degree of “blindness” or uncertainty to the creative process. As Simonton notes, “Only someone with almost infinite wisdom could figure out that the time is most ripe to conceive an experiment rather than a theory, to write a poem rather than a play, to paint a portrait rather than a landscape, or to compose a symphony rather than an opera.”
  2. Creative people often have messy processes. While expertise is characterized by consistency and reliability, creativity is characterized by many false starts and lots and lots of trial-and-error. There are many examples of a creative genius producing a masterpiece, only to be followed by a hugely unpopular product. For instance, Shakespeare’s most popular plays were created when he was about 38 years old. Around this time, he produced Hamlet, which is surely a treasure. However, soon after Hamlet, he wrote Troilus and Cressida, which is not nearly as popular. If creativity was merely a function of deliberate practice, you would expect that with increasing deliberate practice would come increasing creativity. But that’s not what you find when you look at the career trajectories of creators. Instead, you see a lot of trial-and-error, and peaks around mid-career, not towards the end of their careers when they presumably have acquired the most expertise.
  3. Creators rarely receive helpful feedback. When creators put something novel out into the world, the reactions are typically either acclaim or rejection– not nearly as useful feedback as making a foul shot to audience applause or checking your weight on a scale to see if you’re making progress toward your weight goals. Deliberate practice is really helpful when it comes to well-structured domains, but for most creative domains, you are working, often in solitude, for a very long time writing that novel or coming up with that mathematical proof, with very little immediate feedback. To muddy the waters even more, critics often disagree amongst each other, making it difficult for the creator to known which feedback is really helpful and which stems from other factors, such as obtuseness, jealousy, or bitterness. As Kuhn noted, the standards for artistic and scientific products are constantly changing. What may be considered a “revolutionary” best-selling book at one moment in time, may be considered utter drivel by future generations. This surely makes it hard to deliberately practice your way to a revolution!
  4. The “10-Year Rule” is not a rule. The idea that it takes 10 years to become a world-class expert in any domain is not a rule. While Ericsson didn’t present the variability statistics in his original paper on deliberate practice amongst musicians*, other psychologists have done such an analysis. For example, Simonton conducted an analysis of 120 classical composers and found that while on average, nearly a decade of compositional practice was important before the first major works appeared, the standard deviation was almost as large, with the range exceeding three decades! Many composers took less than 10 years and even more took longer than 10 years. Creativity doesn’t have an expiration date. Creativity seems to happen when it’s ready to happen.
  5. Talent is relevant to creative accomplishment. If we define talent as simply the rate at which a person acquires expertise, then talent undeniably matters for creativity. Some people clearly get more bang for the buck out of a given training regimen. When Simonton looked at his sample of 120 classical composers, he found that the most lauded creators were those who took the least time than the average to acquire the necessary expertise. This may be an inconvenient truth, but it does counter the idea that creativity is only about deliberate practice. Expertise acquisition appears to be the least interesting aspect of creativity as creators tend to be in a hurry to learn what exists so that they can go beyond what exists.
  6. Personality is relevant. Not only does the speed of expertise acquisition matter, but so do a whole host of other traits. People differ from one another in a multitude of ways. This includes general and specific cognitive abilities (IQ, spatial ability, verbal reasoning, etc.), personality dispositions, interests, and values. At the very least, research has shown that creative people do tend to have a greater inclination toward nonconformity, unconventionality, independence, openness to experience, ego strength, risk taking, and even mild forms of psychopathology. These effects are not trivial (for instance, openness to experience is robustly predictive of creativity), and can’t just be explained away by deliberate practice. Of course, each creative domain will feature its own “X-Factor” of abilities and traits that are most essential for creativity in that domain. Physics may require a higher IQ than the visual arts, for instance. Nevertheless, there do appear to be some traits that are conductive to creativity across domains.
  7. Genes are relevant. Ericsson often pits deliberate practice against “innate talent”. But here’s the thing: modern behavioral genetics has discovered that virtually every single psychological trait– including the inclination and willingness to practice— is influenced by innate genetic endowment. This doesn’t mean that genes determine our behavior. It just means that genes are relevant influences on our behavior, including our creative behaviors. Assuming that all of the individual differences that contribute to creativity have some genetic influence, Simonton estimated that somewhere between a quarter and a third of the differences in performance can be attributed to genetic factors. But it’s also important to emphasize that this doesn’t mean that environmental factors are unimportant.
  8. Environmental experiences also matter. Darwin’s cousin Sir Francis Galton, who is mainly known for his work on the hereditary basis of genius, actually  showed that highly eminent scientists were more likely to be first-born sons. So he certainly didn’t neglect environmental influences on genius. Since Galton, researchers have found that many other environmental experiences substantially affect creativity– including socioeconomic origins, and the sociocultural, political, and economic context in which one is raised. These environmental factors are most likely larger compared to genetic factors. Another hugely important environmental factor for creativity is the availability of role models in one’s childhood and adolescent years.
  9. Creative people have broad interests. While the deliberate practice approach tends to focus on highly specialized training and purposeful techniques designed for improvement within a specific field, creative experts tend to have broader interests and greater versatility compared to their less creative expert colleagues. Simonton investigated all 911 operas composed by all 59 composers who contributed to the standard classical repertoire. If creativity were solely the result of deliberate practice, you would expect that the best approach for an opera composer would be to specialize within a particular genre of opera. But Simonton found the exact opposite. The compositions of the most successful operatic composers tended to represent a mix of genres. His data suggests that composers were able to avoid the inflexibility of too much expertise (overtraining) by cross-training. The importance of cross-training for creativity has also been found in the sciences. In fact, highly creative scientists tend to have a lot of artistic hobbies and interests. For instance, Simonton’s extensive analysis of Galileo reveals Galileo’s intense fascination with art, literature, and music. As the psychologist Howard Gruber has shown, rather than a dogged single pursuit of a single research question, the most creative scientists throughout history engaged in “networks of enterprise”, where they pursued a large number of loosely related projects.
  10. Too much expertise can be detrimental to creative greatness. The deliberate practice approach assumes that performance is a linear function of practice. While this may be true for many well-defined domains of human achievement, this doesn’t appear to be the case for creativity. The relationship between knowledge and creativity is best characterized by an “inverted U-shaped” curve: Some knowledge is good, but too much knowledge can impair flexibility. In fact, in some fields such as creative writing, there is an optimal amount of formal schooling, after which further schooling decreases the likelihood of writing highly creative fiction.
  11. Outsiders often have a creative advantage. If creativity were all about deliberate practice, then outsiders who lack the requisite expertise shouldn’t be very creative. But many highly innovative individuals were outsiders to the field in which they contributed. As David Henry Feldman notes, temporary exile from the mainstream may set up an “asynchrony between mind and domain such that the mind encounters significant dissatisfaction with what the domain currently offers”. Many marginalized people throughout history– including immigrants– came up with highly creative ideas not in spite of their experiences as an outsider, but because of their experiences as an outsider. Examples include composer Irving Berlin, filmmaker Ang Lee and the first female Secretary of State, Madeline Albright. These individual didn’t deliberately practice down an already existing path; they created their own. Which leads us to the last key point here..
  12. Sometimes the creator needs to create a new path for others to deliberately practice. The deliberate practice approach is focused on using deliberate problem solving to learn an existing set of rules within a domain. Creative people are not just good at solving problems, however. They are also good at finding problems. A great example is Galileo’s discoveries, which have received extensive analysis. After much trial-and-error to create a new instrument for observing the night sky, Galileo was able to revolutionize astronomy. It is very clear from an analysis of his process that he didn’t simply deliberate practice his way to this discovery! In fact, his discoveries had absolutely no basis in any existing scientific body of expertise. Almost everything he observed conflicted with Ptolemaic astronomy and Aristotelian cosmology. Most experts of the day rejected his ideas. The most useful expertise for him was actually his training in the visual arts! His Chiaroscuro drawings allowed him to correctly interpret what others had missed. There’s no way anyone in his time could have predicted that his artistic experience would have influenced one of the most important discoveries of modern humanity, and surely if he only deliberately practiced down the already existing path of his time, he would never have made his important discoveries.

 

I hope I have convinced you that creators are not mere experts. Creativity does draw on a deep knowledge base, and delibrate practice can certainly contribute to many aspects of creativity, but ultimately creativity involves much more than just deliberate practice. Creators are not necessarily the most efficient, but their messy minds and messy processes often allow them to see things others have never seen, and to create new paths that future generations will deliberately practice. I have immense respect for Ericsson’s body of work on deliberate practice, and do believe that deliberate practice can help you get better in virtually any skill. However, I also believe that an accurate understanding of creativity is important for how we recognize, nurture, value, and ultimately, reward it, across all sectors of society.

 

[Scientific American]

May 30, 2016 / by / in , , , , , , , , , , ,
No helicopter needed: How drones are opening the sky for filmmakers

Tim-Cash-0001

 

Long gone are the days of indie filmmakers blowing half their budget on a helicopter for that all-important aerial shot. Quadcopters are where it’s at, their flying and camera capabilities now good enough for capturing incredible footage that can wow audiences – subject to the director’s artistic vision and flying skills, naturally. Tim Cash, a filmmaker from Bend, Oregon, has been using the technology for around a year now and although music videos are his specialty, he recently had the chance to include some carefully crafted drone shots in his debut feature film, which lands this summer.

DT got in touch with Tim to find out more about how drones have helped take his work to a whole new level, and about his experiences with the technology along the way.

How long have you been using drones in your work?

“They’ve brought production values way up.”

It’s been exactly one year since I got the chopper. I use DJI’s Inspire 1 along with my iPad Air as the monitor and controls. I wasn’t impressed with drones until I saw what the Inspire 1 could do. The main things for me were: controlling the camera settings in the air (i.e., shutter, aperture, and ISO), as well as being able to control the gimbal and do tilts in flight, all from one controller. It also used a camera that wasn’t fisheye and shot native 4K at 24 frames. Bonus, as all my work is in 4K at 24 fps.What impact have they had?

They’ve brought production values way up.  Always going for the bigger-than-life look.

What are the biggest challenges for you when it comes to filming with a drone?

Well, I would have to say the attention it brings. When shooting with my camera crane I get looks and interest but once they see this thing hovering, then flying over the ground at 60 mph, people get interested real quick. Mostly because they’ve never seen anything like it. I personally like to stay below the radar but drones just bring you more attention. And then there are the legalities. That’s all still happening, so we’ll see where things go in the next couple of years.

 

How much training did you need to get proficient at flying the drone?

Not much at all. I’ve been flying for a year and have about 200 hours in the sky. I have experience operating a crane with a camera on the end, which involves similar controls. That said, I’m still learning and the camera moves only keep getting better and more intricate.

What kind of mistakes did you make early on when using drones in your work?

Well, I’ll start by saying, “These things can be dangerous!” I started flying with a huge fear of hurting someone or damaging the craft itself. In all it costs around $4,000 for everything, so sending it to the ground is not an option. I’m a very conservative flier and safety is always the top priority. When I first started piloting, I experienced a few near-fly-aways at 200 feet; I had to fight with the controls to rectify the problem and it was scary at the time.

Before drones, how would you get aerial or elevated shots?

“Advice: Don’t crash it into people and ruin it for the rest of us!”

On one particular shoot a few years back, I used a helicopter. The pilot and the chopper, plus the cameraman, camera, and gimbal, cost over $3,000 for less than an hour in the sky. And you can’t get a helicopter nearly as close. I also have a 20-foot camera crane which has set me apart from most of my competition. So I’ve been doing flying shots for a while … just not without strings.

Drones produce such stunning footage that it must be hard to not use them during an outdoor shoot?

I’ve always been a variety guy. There’s a lot you can do with a drone but the trick is definitely not to overuse them. In the right situation they can set up a scene or add some serious action to another. We just released a trailer (below) for The Astronot movie, which has quite a few drone shots in it but we’re trying to get butts in seats so we really wanted to wow them with some cinematography right out of the gate!

 

Could you tell us something about that gorgeous sweeping drone shot at the start of The Astronot trailer?

Ha! Yeah, when it comes to flying the drone, I’m a send-the-bike-down-the-road-and-get-as-many-shots-as-I-can-while-the-bird-is-in-the-air kinda guy. I didn’t really know what I was getting until I saw it in the monitor, then it was all about the dance with the bike – keeping it smooth and keeping the bike framed artistically, all the while flying a multi-rotor aircraft. The second part tends to leave your mind especially when you have a wide-open area to fly in with no obstacles. When I have to fly around or through things, that’s when my heart palpitates.

Below: One of Tim’s music videos using drones, and drone shots, as part of the story:

 

What improvements would you like to see made to the currently available remotely controlled copters?

It’s already happening – better camera! They just released a new camera for the Inspire 1 with a great big sensor and it shoots RAW. I’ll probably upgrade to it sooner than later.

And finally, what advice would you give to filmmakers looking to include drone photography in their work?

Don’t crash it into people and ruin it for the rest of us!

[Digital Trends]

May 19, 2016 / by / in , , , , , , , , , ,
The surprising habits of original thinkers

 

How do creative people come up with great ideas? Organizational psychologist Adam Grant studies “originals”: thinkers who dream up new ideas and take action to put them into the world. In this talk, learn three unexpected habits of originals — including embracing failure. “The greatest originals are the ones who fail the most, because they’re the ones who try the most,” Grant says. “You need a lot of bad ideas in order to get a few good ones.”

After years of studying the dynamics of success and productivity in the workplace, Adam Grant discovered a powerful and often overlooked motivator: helping others.In his groundbreaking book Give and Take, top-rated Wharton professor Adam Grant upended decades of conventional motivational thinking with the thesis that giving unselfishly to colleagues or clients can lead to one’s own long-term success. Grant’s research has led hundreds of advice seekers (and HR departments) to his doorstep, and it’s changing the way leaders view their workforces.

Grant’s new book Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World examines how unconventional thinkers overturn the status quo and champion game-changing ideas.

May 7, 2016 / by / in , , , , , , , , , , ,
50 Flat Mobile UI Design with Remarkable User Experience
50 Flat Mobile UI Design with Remarkable User Experience

 

Flat design means designing without the usual gradients, pixel perfect shadows, and skeuomorphism that’s been rampant in recent years (more on this later) to achieve what appears to be a “flat” interface.

The most beautiful, modern and amazing Flat Mobile UI Design is right here. Today we’re picked up 50 Flat Mobile UI Design with Remarkable User Experience from behance and dribbble for inspiration. All the Mobile App UI/UX designs are created by professional graphic designers who can join web’s biggest platforms from all over the web. Its a big list of fresh Mobile App UI designs available on the web.

The actual fact of User Interface (UI) and User Experience (UX) is that both UI/UX are the two sides of the same coin. Both are keeping up the relationship between the users and their products.  The User Interface (UI) describes the dealing with the as well as and the products, while another, the user experience (UX) is dealing with the user’s experience and the observation of the products. Moreover, simply saying, the User Interface (UI) deals with technical as well as formal features of a site and the user experience (UX) is dealing with the understanding and response to the user.

If you need Flat UI Kits, Flat Elements or Flat Design Concepts for your website or mobile app then you can get in touch with us. We are posting free flat web design elements that make your website or app simple and yet effective.

You may be interested in the following modern trends related articles as well.

Beautiful Flat Mobile UI Design with UX (User Experience)

UX (User Experience) is all those elements and factors related to the user’s interaction with a particular environment or device which generate a positive or negative perception of the product, brand or device. UX is subjective and focused on use.

The standard definition of UX is “a person’s perceptions and responses that result from the use or anticipated use of a product, system or service”.

Here is the big list of Remarkable examples of Interaction Flat Mobile UI/UX Designs. Enjoy!

1. Squirrel Settings

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-1

Source

2. Mobile Menu UI Flat Design

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-2

Source

3. UI Design Mobile Flat Hidden Menu

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-3

Source

4. Concept of a Radio App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-4

Source

5. Healthy – Mobile interface design UI UX

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-5

Source

6. Stats

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-6

Source

7. My Drink

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-7

Source

8. Minimalist and Flat Design Trend Example

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-8

Source

9. Room App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-9
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-9

Source

10. Login form

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-10

Source

11. Mobile Splashpage, Dashboard Flat Design

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-11

Source

12. Interactive Table – Flat Mobile UI Design

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-12

Source

13. Lucid Dreaming APP

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-13
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-13

Source

14. TriplAgent Branding and Design

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-14

Source

15. Analytics App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-15

Source

16. Facebook flat concept

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-16
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-16
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-16

Source

17. Tenki Weather 2.0 Project

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-17
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-17
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-17
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-17

Source

18. iOS App Liga Moche

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-18

Source

19. BookTranslate

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-19
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-19

Source

20. First Notice

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-20

Source

21. Graph screen

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-21

Source

22. Rx Reminder

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-22

Source

23. Capital One 360 Mobile App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-23
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-23
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-23

Source

24. ChatAppUI

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-24

Source

25. LiveProfile Redesign For iOS

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-25
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-25

Source

26. American Chamber of Commerce in Latvia | Mobile App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-26
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-26

Source

27. eBay App Flat Design

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-27
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-27
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-27

Source

28. Simple – App Concept

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-28
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-28
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-28

Source

29. Facebook – App ReDesign

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-29
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-29
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-29
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-29

Source

30. Mobile App for OWLET

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-30
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-30

Source

31. Settings Screen

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-31

Source

32. Statistics Screen

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-32

Source

33. App Mídia – iOS

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-33
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-33
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-33

Source

34. My Diaries

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-34

Source

35. Manage your boat

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-35

Source

36. Flat Design App: facelift App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-36

Source

37. Infomatic iPhone App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-37

Source

38. ZAP UI/UX design Concept

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-38
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-38

Source

39. iPhone chat UI [real pixels]

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-39

Source

40. Lose It-My Daily

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-40

Source

41. 6nCASE redesign

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-41

Source

42. Android Feed

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-42

Source

43. Road Mark

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-43

Source

44. Transporter App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-44

Source

45. GO TRAVEL – Travel app concept

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-45
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-45
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-45

Source

46. HTWK Leipzig – iPhone App UI

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-46

Source

47. Instagram flat(ter) redesign

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-47

Source

48. Weather iOS App

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-48
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-48
Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-48

Source

49. Time Zone App Concept

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-49

Source

50. Samsung Smart Home App Concept

Flat Mobile UI Design and UX-50

 

By GraphicDesignJunction.com.

May 23, 2015 / by / in , , , , , , , , ,
Show Buttons
Hide Buttons

IMPORTANT MESSAGE: Scooblrinc.com is a website owned and operated by Scooblr, Inc. By accessing this website and any pages thereof, you agree to be bound by the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, as amended from time to time. Scooblr, Inc. does not verify or assure that information provided by any company offering services is accurate or complete or that the valuation is appropriate. Neither Scooblr nor any of its directors, officers, employees, representatives, affiliates or agents shall have any liability whatsoever arising, for any error or incompleteness of fact or opinion in, or lack of care in the preparation or publication, of the materials posted on this website. Scooblr does not give advice, provide analysis or recommendations regarding any offering, service posted on the website. The information on this website does not constitute an offer of, or the solicitation of an offer to buy or subscribe for, any services to any person in any jurisdiction to whom or in which such offer or solicitation is unlawful.