Week 6 - 2D Design

The week we designed logos before completing a group exercise in changing perspectives.

Task 1: Design perspectives

In this task we were required to design two logos for our own business. The first logo needs to appeal to a design industry client. The second design needs to appeal to a non-profit arts organisation. The logos need a tag line and once we have scotched them we add redraw them in illustrator.

Design Industry Logo:

I wanted to work with the idea of an egg, a symbol of future growth and birth. I kept the name "Cracker" from my InDesign student days, after this exercise I really want to drop this.
I started with 2D representations of the design, I couldn't get he colours, shape or size right .. it seemed to be all wrong but I still liked the idea. My final result shows the simplicity that was needed for a more corporate look, less hand drawn, a bit of shine ....

Logo for Design Industry

I am very unhappy with this design, I can't get it to work, the size is wrong, the colours are wrong .. try again ...

.... and it still looks bad

I'm happier with with.

Non-profit Arts Organisation:

Since it is a non-profit arts organisation I wanted the logo to look a bit more artsy, textured, a bit of fun. I achieved the by using a variety of bright colours to represent the fun of childs play. This theme is also conveyed in the shapes, i.e. blocks often used in childs play.

Logo for Arts Organisation

Task 2: Changing Perspectives

Here we rated each persons design on a scale of 1-10 based on the following criteria:

1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief
   
2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal
   
3. 3.  Cross generational appeal
   
4. 4.  Suitability for print
   
5. 5.  Suitability for web
   
6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability
   
7. 7.  Simplicity 
   
   Self rating
   
   
   1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief - logo 1 - 2 not very corporate / logo 2 - 6
   2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal -logo 1 -3  /logo 2 - 6
   3. 3.  Cross generational appeal - logo 1 - 3 boring and strange name/ logo 2 - 7
   4. 4.  Suitability for print - logo 1 & 2 - 8 both in illustrator so can be adjusted for print, red an be more difficult to see
   5. 5.  Suitability for web - Logo 1 & 2 - 7 good for web, maybe problems for app
   6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability - Looks good in grayscale
   7. 7.  Simplicity -logo 1 & 2 - 5
   
   
   Paul:
   
   
   1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief -8
   2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal - logo 1- 10 / logo 2- 5, colours a bit bright against a dull background, size needs adjusting
   3. 3.  Cross generational appeal - logo 1- 10/ logo 2 - 8
   4. 4.  Suitability for print - logo 1- 10/ logo 2 - 5, colours a little difficult to read
   5. 5.  Suitability for web - logo 1 -10/ logo 2 - 5 letters might get lost to background
   6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability logo 1 - 10/ logo 2 - hard to read as background blends with words
   7. 7.  Simplicity logo 1 - 10/ logo 2 - 7 maybe the font could be more simple and less texture in the art board
      
      
   
   Tag line suggestion Colour your community
   
   Andre: - one logo presented
   
   
   1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief - 5 only one great logo presented
   2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal - 8
   3. 3.  Cross generational appeal - 6 tattoos particular to generations
   4. 4.  Suitability for print - 8
   5. 5.  Suitability for web - 7 if reduced in size might be difficult to read
   6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability - 9
   7. 7.  Simplicity - 5 not simple, but that is what is good about it
      
      
   
   Katelyn: - one logo presented
   
   
   1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief - 6 just one great logo, needed two
   2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal -8
   3. 3.  Cross generational appeal - 7 young and fun
   4. 4.  Suitability for print - 8
   5. 5.  Suitability for web - 8 
   6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability - 9
   7. 7.  Simplicity - 9
      
      
   
   June:
   
   
   1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief - 9
   2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal - 9
   3. 3.  Cross generational appeal - 9
   4. 4.  Suitability for print - logo 1- 8 may be difficult to read the text/ logo 2 -8
   5. 5.  Suitability for web - 7, concerned with clarity of text
   6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability 9 very clear
   7. 7.  Simplicity 9
      
      
   
   Queenie:
   
   
   1. 1.  Accuracy in addressing the brief -5 still developing concepts
   2. 2.  Immediate visual appeal - 6 like the Q, work in progress for the crown
   3. 3.  Cross generational appeal - 8 great ideas
   4. 4.  Suitability for print - 8
   5. 5.  Suitability for web - 7 not sure if the crown will be lost when reduced, design still developing
   6. 6.  Monochromatic suitability - 7
   7. 7.  Simplicity - 6
      
      
      
      
      It's always a good idea to self evaluate or seek someones opinion. Here are some examples where the benefits of a second opinion on a logo design would have been a good idea ...
      
      
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSWdD-tZPSw

Research

In addition to the 2D Design of the web page for the helmet cover (our 3D Design), I would like to continue to develop the concept of featuring peoples favourite things. The idea originated from our first collaboration session, it began as a shadow box with favourite things placed inside, something I am interested in. After spending 8 years as a stay at home mum I've had a lot of time to ponder the things around me, but have not taken the time to think about who I am. So, do the things around me tell a story of who I am?
I wanted to move away from this internal focus, I wanted to think outside the house, outside the box.
Peter (lecturer) then asked the question,"How do I relate to the digital world, what is the relationship  between the digital world and the home?" My first thought was a big off button, in the home I like to turn off the computers to really relax and cut the outside world out.

From these initial thoughts I had a number of questions:

• What is the relationship between how we show ourselves on Facebook, in digital form, to how we look through the eyes of someone visiting our home.
• Do the things around us define us more than we share with the outside world?
• If someone saw our collection at home would they recognise us from a group?
• If we all turned off the computers what would we do, what would we look at?

After completing a Collaboration class about respecting differences I wondered how our favourite things might be the same and/ or different. I find it interesting how different people can be the same, can this be seen in a collection of favourite things? 

Another question, could you group people by age, gender, ethnic origins or socio-economic standing by seeing their favourite things?

So many questions, I'm not sure where this will take the 2D Design, to begin with lets give it a name:

• reflection of collection
• Collection reflection
• You in a box
• In a box

It's about defining people by the things that they have and treasure.

Maybe the design will define itself overtime, I'll do some examples as see where it takes me.

My sons collection

The start of my collection.