As part of our submission we were to create a product narrative, a storyboard or even some other way to tell the story of our product. This is to show it in potential use cases and to see how it really works in the home.
Early in the project, during the desk-based research phase, the plan for this deliverable was ambitious. The idea was to shoot real footage, a person moving through a home, room to room, with a Figma prototype overlaid on top, composited into the video to show Pane OS living in an actual space. It was the right instinct. A product that is fundamentally about physical presence and movement through a home deserves to be shown in that context, not just on a screen.
The reality of executing that vision became clear quickly. Figma's prototyping capabilities have a ceiling and that ceiling sits well below what the concept required. The interactions in Pane OS, the summon animation, the spring expansion, the split mechanic, the swipe gesture, none of these are reproducible in Figma without significant compromise. Beyond the tool limitations, the time and resource constraints of a live shoot were not realistic within the scope of the project. The idea was shelved.
The next approach was a static storyboard. This was explored both on paper and digitally, going through several iterations to find a format that felt worthy of the concept. The paper sketches established the narrative, a day in the life of a family member moving through the home, each panel a moment in that story. Digitally, a version was produced using ChatGPT's image generation with a detailed prompt referencing the Japandi aesthetic, the glass language and the specific interaction moments. The output was visually interesting but ultimately felt removed from the actual prototype. It showed a version of Pane OS that did not quite match what had been built, and the disconnect between the two was difficult to ignore. A storyboard communicates an idea in isolation. It does not show the thing itself.
The video is structured around the idea that Pane OS belongs to everyone in the home, not a single type of user. Rather than leading with features, it leads with people.
It opens with the parents. The home controls and the energy screen establish Pane OS as a system that looks after the home practically. Temperature, lighting, live energy usage. These are the functional moments that anchor the concept in something recognisable and domestic, showing that the wall is genuinely useful rather than just novel.
From there it moves to a social context. The messages screen and the photo album show Pane OS as a way to stay connected and to hold onto memories. The wall becomes somewhere that relationships live, not just appliances.
The next section belongs to the children. Minecraft and the draw screen show that Pane OS understands that not every member of the family wants the same thing from it. One screen for play, one for creativity. The wall becomes a canvas and a games console in equal measure.
The final section brings in the grandparent. The email screen closes the video on something quieter and more considered. A message from someone who cares. It is a deliberate choice to end here rather than on a flashier interaction. It makes the point that Pane OS is not a product for a specific demographic or a specific kind of household. It is for a family in the fullest sense of the word.