Critical Analysis - Session 1

In this session, we all had two designs we like and two designs we dislike, and go to a different table to organise what we think should go in like and what should go in dislike. This allows you to see that a lot of the tables share the same opinion of design, so we should trust our peers with their opinions.

Two I like;

http://www.dutchuncle.co.uk/illustrators/noma-bar/portfolios/negative-space

I love this piece of design and the designer, especially his book called Negative Space. I love how simple to design is but has hidden messages through it using the negative space, as it shows other images, I think its really cleaver and admire it very much.

http://kimparslow.wordpress.com/2010/03/21/lovely-packaging/

This packaging design is very simple, subtle, and has really nice colours which work well together. I love nice packaging, for me the packaging is why I buy a product. As they say don’t judge a book by its cover, I always judge the product by its packaging. Its also quite clever and funny, taking the mick out of larger companies and things by stating the obvious using type.

Two I dislike;

http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/london-2012-olympic-logo-is-a-disgrace/

 This is a piece of design which I don't like for many reasons, I think the typography inside it is childlike and patronising the ‘london’ type. Also its not clear when you first see it that it says 2012, so its not communicating very well. I also don’t like the colours, overall I just think it's a bad design.

https://mail.google.com/mail/?account_id=dc103021@students.leeds-art.ac.uk&shva=1#inbox/13a4b1239d0b3cde

The reason why I hate the design of google mail is specifically because of the reply button. When first using this I couldn’t find that reply button, then realized it was that icon. This is really badly designed and drives me crazy because it faces the wrong way! Generally I just don’t think that Gmail is as well designed as other email sources such as hotmail.

Judgements on whether the design should be put into like or dislike were based on...

• Layout
• Colour
• Context
• Content (visual)
• Function
• Concept
• Composition
• Legibilty
• Communication
• Visual quality/Skill level
• Content (non-visual)

D - Describe (what can you see?)
I - Interpret (what's it about?)
E - Evaluate (how good is it?)
T - Theorise (how could it be improved?)

D - colour, image/type, typeface, layout, composition, format, media, form, process
(Some evidence - prove it - objective)

I - skill level, legibility, function, meanings, concept, communication, tone of voice
(Subjective response - judgement)

E - effectiveness, communication, aesthetic, fulfilled it's purpose, legibility
(Relationship between objective and subjective aspects)

T - judgements from the above


DIET evaluating one of my chosen designs;
Writing the D and the I ourselves, and doing the E and T together with my partner.

http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/london-2012-olympic-logo-is-a-disgrace/

D - Its the 2012 London Olympics logo. I don't like the word 'london' as it doesn't have a capital 'L' also it looks like a very childlike font - looks to be patronising. Colours don't work very well. Before people see the 2012, they see crude images of Lisa Simpson and two men boxing.
I - Its trying to show the 2012 Olympics, but not doing a very good job. The '2's are different shapes - why? It has bad layout and bad type as its not clear that it says 2012. Doesn't explain what the Olympics stands for, and doesn't show a very good message of what to expect from the 2012 Olympics. Also why is there a random '-' dash in between the 1 and 2.
E - Not a good design - recognizable image - but if it wasn't, no-one would no what it says. The word London is a bad typeface - the 'o's are perfectly round and the 'd' isn't rounded at all - sharp corner, as does the 'n', also the 'l' isn't a capital.
T - Change completely - the colour scheme is really bad, they clash too much. Change the typeface of London and make it a capital letter, as at the moment it looks like its aimed towards children. Make the '2's the same and minus the dash.

DIET evaluating one of my partners designs;

Kirsty Shaw (my partners blog)

D - I see a magazine/Journal cover, using only type and geometric shapes. Using two colours which keeps it simple and makes it work really well. The white is the negative space around the green which the type is made up of (display type)
I - The piece of design is introducing you to the magazine/Journal, it is in a different language but because of the layout and structure and geometric shapes surrounded the type, I think its about architecture. It shows you all the necessary information and nothing else, very simple.
E - Well put together and thought out - use of negative space for the pattern, good colour scheme. Works well because you can see its about architecture even though I cant speak the language. Its visually pleasing - well chosen typeface (neutral). Also like that all the text is justified to the left.
T - If it was made universal as it is in a different language. Some people understood what it was, but I needed more understandable (English) information.

Why critical analysis is useful;

• It can help you see what your peers think, and see whether it works or not.
• Helps to find the in perfections which you haven't seen yet.
• Could help you to move on, or in a different direction or idea.
• Give you more confidence in what your doing works and looks good.
• To help ensure your doing the right thing/Correcting it if its not the right concept.

Why crits are useful;

• It gives you a deadline to meet, something to aim for.
• It allows you to find out what your peers think of your development.
• It can help you make a decision if you have options, find out what works best.
• You can see and get inspiration from peers.
• It can give you more confidence in your ideas.

Criteria;
From the 11 citeria, Layout, Colour, Context, Content (visual), Function, Concept, Composition, Legibilty, Communication, Visual quality/Skill level and Content (non-visual). I have chosen 5 which I first look at when looking at design.

Colour - What I look for in the colour is; not a lot of colour, I like quite natural and neutral colours. I also really like pastel colours which all compliment each other. What I dislike in colour is bright and in your face. I prefer subtle, I think it comes across better and more professional. Obviously the context in which the colour is used needs to be appropriate, but bright colours and lots of them, I don't think works very well.

Visual Quality/Skill level - What I like about visual quality is simplicity, I think it works really well, the simpler the design is the easier I think it is to communicate the message. What I really dislike is a really busy design, where you cant see whats going on, or that there is so much going on that the point of the design isn't very clear.

Concept - The concept is an important part of design, whether it is portraying the right message and meaning. With concept I also like simplicity, I really like bluntness in design, saying it how it is, but I also hidden meaning, as long as it is cleaver. I don't like when its really busy and cluttered and unable to see whats going on so that you cant tell what the concept of that design is.

Legibility - With legibility I really like when it is simple and readable, very plain rather than busy. Some things can work really well busy, messy and less legible but I don't really like that, I prefer sleek and straight rather than messy and all over the place.

Layout - Layout is really important, and I prefer everything perpendicular, and would so much prefer left text align than centered, also justified rather than centered, as I think centered may sometimes look childlike. What I dislike most in terms of layout is if one little thing is out of place or slightly off.