Plant Care App

A study UX/UI project focused on building a calm and accessible mobile interface for plant care — using structure, consistency, and early design system logic to reduce friction and cognitive overload.

Role

UX/UI designer

Role

UX/UI designer

Role

UX/UI designer

Role

UX/UI designer

Duration

1 month (November 2024)

Duration

1 month (November 2024)

Duration

1 month (November 2024)

Duration

1 month (November 2024)

Team

Solo

Team

Solo

Team

Solo

Team

Solo

Project type

Study

Project type

Study

Project type

Study

Project type

Study

UX Design

UX Design

UX Research

UX Research

UI Design

UI Design

Mobile app

Mobile app

#hero —

#nav-trigger-1 —

Why this project?

Why this project?

This was a study project. No client, no KPIs, no branding kit — just a goal: build something structured from scratch and finally understand what “design system” means.

I picked a plant care app because the context felt close — and I guess that’s how most people choose their first real project. Something you already care about, just enough to want it to make sense.

Planty became my testbed for system thinking. I wanted to go through the full flow — from user research to prototype — but more than that, I wanted to stop guessing what makes an interface consistent.

#context —

UX research, with all the trimmings

UX research, with all the trimmings

UX research, with all the trimmings

“We had two personas, a CJM, a competitor matrix and another two or three frameworks — but I knew we were just circling around the real problem.”

“We had two personas, a CJM, a competitor matrix and another two or three frameworks — but I knew we were just circling around the real problem.”

(Hunter S. Thompson didn’t say this, but he might’ve if he worked in Figma.)
(Hunter S. Thompson didn’t say this, but he might’ve if he worked in Figma.)

I did what a proper UX student is supposed to do: two personas, a full journey map, competitor audit, IA, storyboards, frameworks.

The research wasn’t pointless — but I knew from the start that no matrix would help if the interface couldn’t carry the logic on its own.
So I used all this not to validate features, but to draw boundaries.

UX didn’t give me answers — it gave me constraints to work with. That’s where the structure came from.

#research —

Iteration one: where it fell apart

The first version was what you expect from someone who just learned UX terms: cluttered, visually unbalanced, no rhythm, too many things happening.
I tested early lo-fi screens on actual humans via Useberry. It was the first time I tried collecting feedback, and I had no idea what I was really asking.
That’s when I realized how little I actually knew about the flow of understanding in a product. And how much of “UX research” at this stage is just slowly learning where you were wrong.

So I did the only sensible thing:
Deleted everything and started over.

Iteration two: structure starts to speak

This time, I focused on rhythm and limits. Each screen had fewer elements. Actions followed clearer patterns.
I didn’t build components yet — but the idea of structure started forming.
The kind of structure that tells a user what’s important before they even start reading.

#structure —

Design system... or at least the attempt

I had read the definitions. I had seen Fluent 2. But I still didn’t get it. So I used this project to figure it out from the inside.
Not “build a system”, but:
- how do spacing, corner radius, shadows and color combine into trust?- where does consistency come from — and how do I break it without breaking everything?
I started to recognise how much structure hides in the smallest decisions — and how fast UI collapses without them.
I had read the definitions. I had seen Fluent 2. But I still didn’t get it. So I used this project to figure it out from the inside.
Not “build a system”, but:
- how do spacing, corner radius, shadows and color combine into trust?- where does consistency come from — and how do I break it without breaking everything?
I started to recognise how much structure hides in the smallest decisions — and how fast UI collapses without them.

Screens

Screens

A full mobile flow designed to stay simple, readable, and consistent — from home to scheduling to plant details.
Each screen builds on the same structural rules, helping the interface feel calm and connected.
The result: a compact but complete prototype with twelve clear, usable screens.

#system —

#form —

A prototype that holds its own.

A prototype that holds its own.

In the end, I built a clickable mobile prototype in Figma with 12 core screens.
The UI was still a bit fluffy in places. But it held together — structurally, visually, and functionally.

What I actually walked away with

What I actually walked away with

✅ What worked

✅ What worked
  • Using constraints to guide decisions — especially when scoping features.

  • Prioritizing accessibility over visual complexity.

  • Applying component logic early, inspired by Fluent 2.

❌ What didn’t

❌ What didn’t

No more shadows — that was the last time I used them in mobile UI.

  • Too much color in early screens — it clashed with clarity and accessibility goals.

  • Skimming over foundational structure — made prototyping harder than it needed to be.

🔁 What I’d do differently

🔁 What I’d do differently

🔁 What I’d do differently
  • Simplify visuals from the start.

  • Spend less time on templates, more on real research.

  • Build with a clear system of states, layouts, and tokens.

  • Add better onboarding for new users.

#context —

#reflections —

What will we build?

© Ekaterina Pykhova, 2025

#footer —

#contact —

What will we build?

© Ekaterina Pykhova, 2025

#footer —

#contact —

What will we build?

© Ekaterina Pykhova, 2025

#footer —

#contact —

What will we build?

© Ekaterina Pykhova, 2025

#footer —

#contact —