Hmm... I'm trying to get back in to this, but there are so many restrictions on what we're allowed to do, it's hard to be creative. By the way, here are the guidelines for this part of the task:
Incorporate your logo into a personal business card that includes your contact details. You may use one of the following typefaces Minion, Myriad, Gill Sans, Frutiger or Helvetica or similar. Keep all details within a single text block. You may experiment with the possibilities of line spacing (leading) to group related information together. Carefully consider the relationship between the logo and the textblock (alignment). You should also consider the relationship of each of these elements to the business card format. Use one colour (black) only. You may wish to experiment with paper stock.
Also, as I said before, we're not permitted to use any other graphical elements apart from the logo and the text.
Well, I'm clearly too late but the ligature work was definitely the strongest idea for your logo, although it would have required you to absolutely nail the spacing and letterform. The other two ideas are very college.
Your lecturer should be immolated for imposing those typefaces on you for the business card brief, you can tell them I said that. Although 'or similar' can I guess be translated to mean 'just about any humanist sans serif or serif typeface' considering the options stated. It looks like you're maybe mixing typefaces in some of those rather than just using different weights of the same kind, I wouldn't do that especially with sans-serif humanist faces - mix complimentary serif and sans or a display with a body sure, but not two faces from teh same category. As it is, it looks like Myriad is working best with the logo you've selected; Helvetica isn't doing it any favours.
Whilst there's nothing wrong with a traditional arrangement, if you're looking to earn points on creativity, taking into consideration the limitations you have on colour and content you should experiment with unconventional layups. The angled one is a start, although don't mix that with an oblique. Maybe also experiment with oversizing the logo so it is too large for the card; positioning one half on the front, one half on the back; reversing out the colours from front to back; suggesting a blind emboss or blind spot varnish for the logo instead of printing the graphic - that sort of thing. Also remember that being restricted to black means that you can also use percentages of black...
Well, I'm clearly too late but the ligature work was definitely the strongest idea for your logo, although it would have required you to absolutely nail the spacing and letterform. The other two ideas are very college.
I suppose was really going with what other people said they liked. To be honest, if I had had more time/had managed my time better I wouldn't have chosen any of those logos; I probably would've kept going until I found something special. Unfortunately, it is too late to change my choice now.
Although 'or similar' can I guess be translated to mean 'just about any humanist sans serif or serif typeface' considering the options stated.
Hmm... I still want to play it on the safe side though. Tutor says we shouldn't use another font without consulting them first, and considering this has to be done by tomorrow...
I'll definitely be more careful with combining typefaces in the future though.
As it is, it looks like Myriad is working best with the logo you've selected; Helvetica isn't doing it any favours.
Hmm... That might be a problem. I did have a look at Myriad, but my tutor specifically said she hates it when people use Myriad Pro, since that's the default illustrator font. Whether or not that includes regular Myriad I'm not sure. I can probably explain that it was a conscious choice though, and not out of laziness.
... positioning one half on the front, one half on the back; reversing out the colours from front to back; suggesting a blind emboss or blind spot varnish for the logo instead of printing the graphic - that sort of thing.
As cool as these would be, I reasonably certain I can't do any of them. They directly stated they want the basics of the basics, and the focus is on the layout, not the production.
Wanted to stick with the very basics for the first three designs (and their negatives). But since boring designs are... boring, I then tried to do something more interesting. The idea could work, but the execution isn't great.
Why not stick with that last idea, move the logo to the left and the text to the right? That way everything will be easily legible, yet attention-getting.
Why not stick with that last idea, move the logo to the left and the text to the right? That way everything will be easily legible, yet attention-getting.
Yeah, I'll admit I just randomly threw the logo and text on the card without much forethought. :P Not concentrating well tonight. I'll start focusing again.
Do you mean that I should completely seperate the text from the logo, or just have them overlapping less? I think the overlap is really the only thing that makes the design slightly distinctive.
well, try both approaches. i was thinking completely separating the text from the logo, on the theory that if you have an illegible contact information sectiom it's useless, but if you're set on the overlap, it could still work
... if you have an illegible contact information sectiom it's useless...
Yeah, you're right. This is stuff I should be picking up on, my mind is somewhere else tonight.
Was this what you were thinking of?
EDIT: I don't think a horizontal format is going to work; the logo's too elongated to be included effectively at larger sizes. I'ma gonna try a vertical format.
DOUBLE EDIT: Unfortunately this idea isn't going to work with a vertical frame unless I make the text unreadably small. Back to the drawing board.
also, is there some incredible reason why you are only using black and white, other than to be exactly like thousands of other graphic designers who think it's clever?
also, is there some incredible reason why you are only using black and white, other than to be exactly like thousands of other graphic designers who think it's clever?
Nope. Maybe colour is too complex for us first year designers?
... if you have an illegible contact information sectiom it's useless...
Yeah, you're right. This is stuff I should be picking up on, my mind is somewhere else tonight.
Was this what you were thinking of?
EDIT: I don't think a horizontal format is going to work; the logo's too elongated to be included effectively at larger sizes. I'ma gonna try a vertical format.
DOUBLE EDIT: Unfortunately this idea isn't going to work with a vertical frame unless I make the text unreadably small. Back to the drawing board.
I love this first pic here. I think it's a winner.
also, is there some incredible reason why you are only using black and white, other than to be exactly like thousands of other graphic designers who think it's clever?
Nope. Maybe colour is too complex for us first year designers?
Well, that's sort of the point. I am not trying to be harsh, but minimalism out of college students says "I don't know how to do this stuff yet". I've both participated in and scouted design portfolio reviews of college students, and the snazzy cards and resumes really are what gets your attention.
You might be too forgone now, but that's something to consider and your next go-around.
If you stick with the black and white, consider getting it done on some nice paper, rounded corners, or even gloss black, to give it some flare.
If you stick with the black and white, consider getting it done on some nice paper, rounded corners, or even gloss black, to give it some flare.
That is possible... If I can figure out how.
Another crappy attempt.
The black looks alright but I don't see any reason to have the logo bleed off the top on the white version. Maybe that's just a trick of the eye.
As for gloss, etc... just use a printer service. There are lots of overnight printing services for business cards that offer those options. Then you just call them up and explain what you want glossed.
It will cost money, basically.
If you go with that black one above then you wouldn't gloss the black, you'd gloss the white on black paper.
The black looks alright but I don't see any reason to have the logo bleed off the top on the white version. Maybe that's just a trick of the eye.
I think I'm going to forget about cropping the logo. It might work if it was a well-recognised symbol, but by removing elements am I just detracting from its identity?
As for gloss, etc... just use a printer service. There are lots of overnight printing services for business cards that offer those options. Then you just call them up and explain what you want glossed.
It will cost money, basically.
If you go with that black one above then you wouldn't gloss the black, you'd gloss the white on black paper.
Ah... Hm... I really wish I'd thought about that sooner.
... general design. It's not particularly interesting, but it achieves its purpose fairly well. The logo and text are both clear, but neither is dominant. And the right-alignment is just enough to give it a sense of individuality.
Of course, I may just be talking out of my ass. What do you guys think?
EDIT: Bugger the restrictions, it looks much better at a lesser % of black.
As it is, it looks like Myriad is working best with the logo you've selected; Helvetica isn't doing it any favours.
Hmm... That might be a problem. I did have a look at Myriad, but my tutor specifically said she hates it when people use Myriad Pro, since that's the default illustrator font. Whether or not that includes regular Myriad I'm not sure. I can probably explain that it was a conscious choice though, and not out of laziness.
Kick her in the ovaries. She specified Myriad as a font choice. Additionally, professional design has bollocks all to do with what an individual 'likes', it's about what works and what is most appropriate solution.
also, is there some incredible reason why you are only using black and white, other than to be exactly like thousands of other graphic designers who think it's clever?
Nope. Maybe colour is too complex for us first year designers?
Well, that's sort of the point. I am not trying to be harsh, but minimalism out of college students says "I don't know how to do this stuff yet". I've both participated in and scouted design portfolio reviews of college students, and the snazzy cards and resumes really are what gets your attention.
From what I understand of the brief, it's to get them to focus on layout. I think that's a reasonable educational progress. This isn't his final year project. For example, when you are teaching new students the principles of typography, you stick to black on white to begin with because colour is mostly irrelevant at that stage.
The idea here is to create a poster which is a visual representation of a certain word, using an object of our choice as the focus. The poster also has to contain a statement, which acts as a subtitle. The word I've chosen is 'percpetion', the subtitle is 'keep out of reach of children'.
These are not even close to the finals, these are just mockups of my basic idea.
I'll post a better explanation later, but I'm in a hurry at the moment.
EDIT: Shit, it's supposed to say 'PERCEPTION' instead of 'WARNING' in the second image. Made a mistake in my haste.
Here's another quick version of the same image, in landscape format.
Oh yeah, and here's the description of the task from the outline.
The aim of this project is to develop your ability to visualise ideas to communicate
a concept. The brief will be defined by a pair of words that can be
interpreted in a variety of ways. You will be asked to develop your observational
skills generating ideas through photography and by collecting objects
and ephemera from the environment. The outcome of the project will be a
poster that presents a compelling interpretation of one of the words that you
have investigated.
The pairs of words available to work with are: perception/reality, local/global, action/persuasion.
I've obviously gone with perception/reality, and have chosen perception as my final word.
(C'mon guys, this is the part where you berate me with harsh critiques. I thought you were good at this.)
I dont really have much to say in terms of crits. You're following the design rules. I dont like your 'text overlapping studies'. I think this one works best. The 'text overlapping' studies dont work. But i think you know that.
man, i wish my visual communications course was like yours. In first year we werent allowed to use a computer at all. We had to cut out each individual piece of typography, gluing them down to form words and sentences. If the letter and word spacing was incorrect, we had to re-do it. Then we would scale it with a photocopier. It was supposed to teach us the important fundamentals of graphic design much better as apparently computers make us forget those fundamentals. Thats why i moved into illustration focus. Your course looks good though.
man, i wish my visual communications course was like yours. In first year we werent allowed to use a computer at all. We had to cut out each individual piece of typography, gluing them down to form words and sentences. If the letter and word spacing was incorrect, we had to re-do it. Then we would scale it with a photocopier. It was supposed to teach us the important fundamentals of graphic design much better as apparently computers make us forget those fundamentals. Thats why i moved into illustration focus. Your course looks good though.
I'm pretty sure the course I'm doing used to be just like that. I'm not really basing that on much though; apart from my typography lecturer's aversion to computers in the first year, and their obsession with kerning etc...
EDIT: Actually, it's pretty selfish for me to expect critiques and never really give them out myself.
I'm not sure if you've interpreted the brief completely correctly*, but I like the concept none the less. I think the option with other kids toys scattered around is a stronger image (although the layup needs work).
*By this, I mean I'm not sure if your idea actually 'presents a compelling interpretation of one of the words that you have investigated'. It's 'interpretation' that I'm sticking on. The image is an example of how something can be perceived and the consequences thereof, but is it an interpretation of the actual word? I'm not really sure that this matters, not being present at the lecture or workshop where the task was assigned, I don't know how the lecturer understands and explained the brief so I'm cautious as to how they expect you to have interpreted it.
I like the imagery but in all honesty, I don't understand the brief.
"communicate a concept" - that's fine, all design should communicate something to the viewer.
"a compelling interpretation" - is it the designer or viewer who is doing the interpreting? And surely leaving something open to interpretation means it no longer communicates a clear concept?
I'm all for open-ended briefs which allow you to stretch your creative legs but this has no focus, no clear target-audience, and no limitations (things which real world design briefs all have)... at least to me! I may well be missing something here. o_O
Yeah, the brief itself isn't very clear, and I've complained about these tasks being a bit too non-specific. The explanations we've recieved in tutorials have been much more comprehensible. I've run this idea through the tutor already, but to be sure I'll check again to make sure I'm not misinterpreting the brief.
I like the imagery but in all honesty, I don't understand the brief.
"communicate a concept" - that's fine, all design should communicate something to the viewer.
"a compelling interpretation" - is it the designer or viewer who is doing the interpreting? And surely leaving something open to interpretation means it no longer communicates a clear concept?
I'm all for open-ended briefs which allow you to stretch your creative legs but this has no focus, no clear target-audience, and no limitations (things which real world design briefs all have)... at least to me! I may well be missing something here. o_O
I think it's the designer's interpretation. But yeah, I'm struggling to completely understand the brief myself. I think really the brief is 'pick a word and tie it to some interesting imagery'. The target audience isn't necessarily relevant, the point here seems to be to creatively explore juxtaposition and relation between text and imagery.
Enjoy it while it lasts, when you start doing it professionally you'll be struggling to find a client who doesn't think hiring a designer consists of telling someone who 'knows how to use photoshop' exactly how and what to design.
As well as the joys of being given tiny source imagery and when asking for something with a higher res, getting the reply:
"You're the designer. Can't you just photoshop it?"
EDIT: See, if I were a lecturer, my briefs would be seamless reproductions of dealing with real life clients, -- right down to me changing the brief/requirements at the last minute. My students would endure endless such hardships, and only the best of the best would be ready to walk out those doors and call themselves graphic designers!
I'm pretty sure the course I'm doing used to be just like that.
The University of South Australia is really backwards, just like the rest of the state When you get further into your course, you should really incoorporate your drawing skills into your graphic designs. Create some illustrations which work with your design. Tutors really love that. Because everything in the piece is your own creative work. Theres nothing better than a graphic designer who can also illustrate. It's like a 3d modeller who can also do concept art. Be great for when you start piecing together your portfolio.
Okay, I'm getting to the final stages of this project. I've done another photo shoot, and these are what I think are the best of the lot. Not a great deal has changed from last time, but anyways.
I need to choose 1 portrait and 1 landscape from these. I still have the setup assembled, so I can reshoot anything. I do have my own preferences (not saying what they are yet though), but I'd like to see if others agree. Personally, I like the ones with the pill bottle more.
pill bottle is unnecessary and ruins the concept. especially if your going to have text at the bottom. You want people to look at it and first assume its candy, then do a double take. Any one who doesnt get it is well.. a dumb shit.
pill bottle is unnecessary and ruins the concept. especially if your going to have text at the bottom. You want people to look at it and first assume its candy, then do a double take. Any one who doesnt get it is well.. a dumb shit.
Yeah, that's where I was headed with the prototype images. I got a lot of feedback during tutorials (from other students) that I should add something like a pill bottle or lolly wrappers to reinforce the idea, but I'm not sure where my tutor stands on the issue. I'd like to just go with my own preference, but gotta go for the marks.
Okay, here's basically what I think the final will look like. I'm not sure if I should tone the saturation down or not - it looks odd, but that's kind of the point. Also, I'm not sure if the desaturation around the edges works.
I'm gonna keep messing with it. Any comments in the meantime?
EDIT: Finally finished all the other work, now I can focus on finishing up the posters. Here's a quick landscape version...
(I think in this case it looks better with the pills).
Posts
Also, as I said before, we're not permitted to use any other graphical elements apart from the logo and the text.
Your lecturer should be immolated for imposing those typefaces on you for the business card brief, you can tell them I said that. Although 'or similar' can I guess be translated to mean 'just about any humanist sans serif or serif typeface' considering the options stated. It looks like you're maybe mixing typefaces in some of those rather than just using different weights of the same kind, I wouldn't do that especially with sans-serif humanist faces - mix complimentary serif and sans or a display with a body sure, but not two faces from teh same category. As it is, it looks like Myriad is working best with the logo you've selected; Helvetica isn't doing it any favours.
Whilst there's nothing wrong with a traditional arrangement, if you're looking to earn points on creativity, taking into consideration the limitations you have on colour and content you should experiment with unconventional layups. The angled one is a start, although don't mix that with an oblique. Maybe also experiment with oversizing the logo so it is too large for the card; positioning one half on the front, one half on the back; reversing out the colours from front to back; suggesting a blind emboss or blind spot varnish for the logo instead of printing the graphic - that sort of thing. Also remember that being restricted to black means that you can also use percentages of black...
I suppose was really going with what other people said they liked. To be honest, if I had had more time/had managed my time better I wouldn't have chosen any of those logos; I probably would've kept going until I found something special. Unfortunately, it is too late to change my choice now.
Hmm... I still want to play it on the safe side though. Tutor says we shouldn't use another font without consulting them first, and considering this has to be done by tomorrow...
I'll definitely be more careful with combining typefaces in the future though.
Hmm... That might be a problem. I did have a look at Myriad, but my tutor specifically said she hates it when people use Myriad Pro, since that's the default illustrator font. Whether or not that includes regular Myriad I'm not sure. I can probably explain that it was a conscious choice though, and not out of laziness.
As cool as these would be, I reasonably certain I can't do any of them. They directly stated they want the basics of the basics, and the focus is on the layout, not the production.
I wish I could, but that's another restriction that's been placed on us. Pure, 100% black or white, and that's all.
Wanted to stick with the very basics for the first three designs (and their negatives). But since boring designs are... boring, I then tried to do something more interesting. The idea could work, but the execution isn't great.
Yeah, I'll admit I just randomly threw the logo and text on the card without much forethought. :P Not concentrating well tonight. I'll start focusing again.
Do you mean that I should completely seperate the text from the logo, or just have them overlapping less? I think the overlap is really the only thing that makes the design slightly distinctive.
BTW, @People-who-are-having-trouble-viewing-the-images: what browser are you using?
EDIT: Like this, Ori?
Not the exact layout, just the general idea.
Yeah, you're right. This is stuff I should be picking up on, my mind is somewhere else tonight.
Was this what you were thinking of?
EDIT: I don't think a horizontal format is going to work; the logo's too elongated to be included effectively at larger sizes. I'ma gonna try a vertical format.
DOUBLE EDIT: Unfortunately this idea isn't going to work with a vertical frame unless I make the text unreadably small. Back to the drawing board.
If you had a website, one trick I see done is you layout the e-mail and site URL as such:
[email protected]
somewebsite.com
so the website stands on its own, and they can connect the dots on the email address.
Prevents you from writing out
[email protected] on one long line.
also, is there some incredible reason why you are only using black and white, other than to be exactly like thousands of other graphic designers who think it's clever?
Nope. Maybe colour is too complex for us first year designers?
I love this first pic here. I think it's a winner.
Well, that's sort of the point. I am not trying to be harsh, but minimalism out of college students says "I don't know how to do this stuff yet". I've both participated in and scouted design portfolio reviews of college students, and the snazzy cards and resumes really are what gets your attention.
You might be too forgone now, but that's something to consider and your next go-around.
If you stick with the black and white, consider getting it done on some nice paper, rounded corners, or even gloss black, to give it some flare.
That is possible... If I can figure out how.
Another crappy attempt.
EDIT: And another (similar to first collection, bottom row middle/right).
The black looks alright but I don't see any reason to have the logo bleed off the top on the white version. Maybe that's just a trick of the eye.
As for gloss, etc... just use a printer service. There are lots of overnight printing services for business cards that offer those options. Then you just call them up and explain what you want glossed.
It will cost money, basically.
If you go with that black one above then you wouldn't gloss the black, you'd gloss the white on black paper.
I think I'm going to forget about cropping the logo. It might work if it was a well-recognised symbol, but by removing elements am I just detracting from its identity?
Ah... Hm... I really wish I'd thought about that sooner.
... general design. It's not particularly interesting, but it achieves its purpose fairly well. The logo and text are both clear, but neither is dominant. And the right-alignment is just enough to give it a sense of individuality.
Of course, I may just be talking out of my ass. What do you guys think?
EDIT: Bugger the restrictions, it looks much better at a lesser % of black.
Kick her in the ovaries. She specified Myriad as a font choice. Additionally, professional design has bollocks all to do with what an individual 'likes', it's about what works and what is most appropriate solution.
From what I understand of the brief, it's to get them to focus on layout. I think that's a reasonable educational progress. This isn't his final year project. For example, when you are teaching new students the principles of typography, you stick to black on white to begin with because colour is mostly irrelevant at that stage.
The idea here is to create a poster which is a visual representation of a certain word, using an object of our choice as the focus. The poster also has to contain a statement, which acts as a subtitle. The word I've chosen is 'percpetion', the subtitle is 'keep out of reach of children'.
These are not even close to the finals, these are just mockups of my basic idea.
I'll post a better explanation later, but I'm in a hurry at the moment.
EDIT: Shit, it's supposed to say 'PERCEPTION' instead of 'WARNING' in the second image. Made a mistake in my haste.
Oh yeah, and here's the description of the task from the outline.
I've obviously gone with perception/reality, and have chosen perception as my final word.
(C'mon guys, this is the part where you berate me with harsh critiques. I thought you were good at this.)
man, i wish my visual communications course was like yours. In first year we werent allowed to use a computer at all. We had to cut out each individual piece of typography, gluing them down to form words and sentences. If the letter and word spacing was incorrect, we had to re-do it. Then we would scale it with a photocopier. It was supposed to teach us the important fundamentals of graphic design much better as apparently computers make us forget those fundamentals. Thats why i moved into illustration focus. Your course looks good though.
I'm pretty sure the course I'm doing used to be just like that. I'm not really basing that on much though; apart from my typography lecturer's aversion to computers in the first year, and their obsession with kerning etc...
EDIT: Actually, it's pretty selfish for me to expect critiques and never really give them out myself.
Resolution time!
*By this, I mean I'm not sure if your idea actually 'presents a compelling interpretation of one of the words that you have investigated'. It's 'interpretation' that I'm sticking on. The image is an example of how something can be perceived and the consequences thereof, but is it an interpretation of the actual word? I'm not really sure that this matters, not being present at the lecture or workshop where the task was assigned, I don't know how the lecturer understands and explained the brief so I'm cautious as to how they expect you to have interpreted it.
"communicate a concept" - that's fine, all design should communicate something to the viewer.
"a compelling interpretation" - is it the designer or viewer who is doing the interpreting? And surely leaving something open to interpretation means it no longer communicates a clear concept?
I'm all for open-ended briefs which allow you to stretch your creative legs but this has no focus, no clear target-audience, and no limitations (things which real world design briefs all have)... at least to me! I may well be missing something here. o_O
I think it's the designer's interpretation. But yeah, I'm struggling to completely understand the brief myself. I think really the brief is 'pick a word and tie it to some interesting imagery'. The target audience isn't necessarily relevant, the point here seems to be to creatively explore juxtaposition and relation between text and imagery.
Welcome to design school.
Enjoy it while it lasts, when you start doing it professionally you'll be struggling to find a client who doesn't think hiring a designer consists of telling someone who 'knows how to use photoshop' exactly how and what to design.
"You're the designer. Can't you just photoshop it?"
EDIT: See, if I were a lecturer, my briefs would be seamless reproductions of dealing with real life clients, -- right down to me changing the brief/requirements at the last minute. My students would endure endless such hardships, and only the best of the best would be ready to walk out those doors and call themselves graphic designers!
The University of South Australia is really backwards, just like the rest of the state
I need to choose 1 portrait and 1 landscape from these. I still have the setup assembled, so I can reshoot anything. I do have my own preferences (not saying what they are yet though), but I'd like to see if others agree. Personally, I like the ones with the pill bottle more.
So, choose your poison!
that one
pill bottle is unnecessary and ruins the concept. especially if your going to have text at the bottom. You want people to look at it and first assume its candy, then do a double take. Any one who doesnt get it is well.. a dumb shit.
Yeah, that's where I was headed with the prototype images. I got a lot of feedback during tutorials (from other students) that I should add something like a pill bottle or lolly wrappers to reinforce the idea, but I'm not sure where my tutor stands on the issue. I'd like to just go with my own preference, but gotta go for the marks.
Okay, here's basically what I think the final will look like. I'm not sure if I should tone the saturation down or not - it looks odd, but that's kind of the point. Also, I'm not sure if the desaturation around the edges works.
I'm gonna keep messing with it. Any comments in the meantime?
EDIT: Finally finished all the other work, now I can focus on finishing up the posters. Here's a quick landscape version...
(I think in this case it looks better with the pills).
I think the scattered pills confuses the message somewhat.