A6 Unit Evaluation

In my feedback for the A4 assignment I knew that the typography unit would be essential for my design skills development. As some of the typographical elements of my A4 banner designs were not particularly strong due to a courier font being used. This type of font is usually the default font on a printer when no other font can be found, so it might be conceived as being an error in the printing process. In retrospect I should have used another typewriter font instead of courier.

At the start of the unit it was given Neville Brody as the typographer who I would have to do a presentation on. I initially searched the internet to find out the basic facts, before buying the Neville Brody design book to aid me in the construction of the presentation. I found that this book provided me with a wealth of information, and actually found it very difficult to cut down the information for only 5 minutes of presentation time. I decided to segment the presentation into a cross section of the work Brody had produced.

Firstly I decided to look at what influenced Neville Brody, before moving onto his early work. I discovered that key elements such as economy of design were apparent in the first pieces of work he produced. This was a theme I could keep referring to through out the presentation. I also looked at designs he did for products, as this would allow me to show how Brody used typography in different contexts. I think that this range of media gave the presentation more depth, and I should repeat this process when I do another presentation.

When the first task came I felt anxious about what we would be given. I found that I coped fairly well with the tasks, and doing a small amount of time planning for each one really helped me to set mini deadlines for the completion of each section. This ensured that I had plenty of time to evaluate my own work and make changes to areas which I felt uncomfortable with. As this method proved effective, I continued to use it through the other timed assignments. As everyone else was doing the same task, I found it awkward to ask for feedback, as I felt that I could not disturb them from their own work. I believe this was just a quirk of the format, but at least there were several points during both design and construction where I realised I would need feedback if this was a real life task. There were some feedback comments which I added to my roughs, but they did not match the depth I would want if the task had been real.

With the paint tube task I felt that the lack of knowledge about printing techniques limited how I could design the label. As I did not know the problems from being used with techniques such as using a reverse, my design was initially highly flawed. After these errors had been made clear, I was able to quickly redesign the label into something which worked. I was very impressed with the final design I made, as I used a mixture of sans-serif fonts for the technical data, and a display font for the name of the product. The font I chose (Isabella) gave the oriental flair which the design required, while being set at a size which could be read. I also chose a centre alignment, as the cylindrical shape of the tube would mean that the label would be obscured if the viewing angle was slightly offset to the viewer. I feel that this is one of the places which centre alignment is acceptable, as it easier to read and matches the alignment of the brand logo which we were initially given.

The next task was to create a Vodafone advert for a newspaper. Again, not knowing the limitation of printing on newsprint, I found it a challenge to make a design which would be acceptable. I decided to keep the design basic, which I feel is often the best option when designing under pressure. Once again I implemented some basic time planning, which allowed me to explore possible solutions, produce a document, then evaluate, redesign and reproduce an improved product.

One part of my design was to use symbols to provide a visual feature to the design. After gaining feedback from peers, many people thought that they were not correct. I strongly disagreed with his, as I felt that they added a more eye catching alternative to simply using bullets. My argument was that as it was for a creative job, the advert itself had to show more than just traditional elements, ie bullets, and that I should use symbols instead. I think I was right to stick with them, as at the very least it allowed me to explore the use of them. I believe that I should use them again in the future, but I will remain contextually sensitive and only use them where appropriate.
The last task was to create a grid for a newsletter, and then place some content into it. I designed my grid and header with a 3 column design. I thought that this gave enough flexibility, while giving coherence. I think that if we could have implemented more of a style guide, I could have used a 6 column layout, and then imposed rules such as only allowing text to go across 2 columns. This would have added flexibility, while providing structured guidelines to the project. I also reused the “skyscraper” design from the A4 assignment. I could do this because we were allowed to use stroke lines, which gave the same effect as using vector graphics like I did in the banner adverts. This shows that I took the interpretation of the brief and used it to get the most out of the design.

Again, I was impressed with the deployment of typographical elements. I used a drop cap, pull quote, and Brody influenced stroke lines to bring my design to life. If I was to change any part of the design, it would be the title, as I think it looked too playful for a document of this type. Changing to font to something like Franklin Gothic would have been better, as it would look more formal. I would also change the stroke lines on the folio into a thick/thin arrangement, as 3 separate lines looks to excessive.

On the day of our presentations I felt confident that I would be able to reproduce my presentation to a similar standard as in my practice. However, after my presentation I felt disappointed with myself that I had only done 4:10s, as before my presentation lasted 5:32s. I think that under the pressure I rushed parts of the presentation. Next time I think that I should learn some relaxing techniques so that the same does not happen again. My disappointment was compounded when I was asked a series of typographical questions at the end of my presentation. I knew many of them, but the tone and amount of time it took me to answer them did not make it convincing that I knew the answers. This was all my own fault as I had planned to revise them after my presentation, when I had several hours free before the final exam. I think that with the next units I will continually look at any theoretical terms we use through out the unit, not just when they are required at the end.

I was impressed with the look of the presentation, and I felt that the ideas generation was well done before my presentation. I did rough designs of the layout of the presentation slides, then did many roughs of the custom made titles, side bars and bullets that I would place on the page. This made production quick, as I could put the parts together in Photoshop then place them into the design.

For the final exam I felt a little better prepared, as I had taken time to learn some of the typographical elements. Again, better preparation in the weeks before would have aided me greatly in this, which I will ensure I do for the next unit. I thought that the brief and the time we were given was very challenging, but as outside projects using InDesign had taught me how to quickly put documents together paid dividends in this task. Again, I kept a simple design so that I could focus on the typographical knowledge.

I managed to get 3 pages done, each one filled with typographical terms. I found that using the layout itself to explain terms, with the aid of captions, quickly name checked many of the terms. I feel that the outside projects using InDesign were most valuable for this, and I pity those who had to do this complex task with any less InDesign experience as myself. I found it extremely difficult, and I was an early adopter of the InDesign program. I will certainly continue outside project to make me more proficient in using the programs on the course

In conclusion, I have thoroughly enjoyed this unit, even if the last day of it was slightly disappointing. I now feel very confident of creating professional desk top published documents. I found that collecting many examples and annotating them in my sketchpad helped me to visualise the real world use of all the theories we learnt, and I will endeavour to improve on this further for the next unit. Improvements for the future will include designing a document where I can record how much time it takes to do tasks, as well as recording when to do them. I will also continue to add more research to my blog and write about it in my sketchpad, as well as offer more feedback when people put their designs on their blog (as I did on Craig Burgess’s post including his newsletter design). For the last unit I want to bring together all the improvements in time planning and sketchpad work to really push for a good result in the final unit. I will be improving my work output so that I am able to do this over the remaining weeks of this year.
Wordcount: 1726