Two people in the class evaluated my work and this is what they had to say about it...
1. The fact that a referee booked a player with 3 yellow cards before booking him with a red.
2. That an English referee has paid the price for making a mistake: giving a player 3 yellow cards
Is this being communicated in a clear and focused way? Yes No Unsure
What could be developed further?
1. YES. The image only could be made more fluent in its communication, people may look at it and just think 3 yellows and not think of the error that is being visualised.
2. YES. More information... or perhaps laying out the information in a more eye-catching way.
Have the posters been kept "simple and to the point?" Yes No Unsure
Is a statement, fact or question being posed?
1. A fact is being posed, more so in the type and type/image posters due to the phrase 'the English referee has paid the price'
2. Fact- this is clear due to the information including, names and numbers. There is no question mark, nor quotation marks.
Has the restriction of two colours plus stock been met? Yes No
Are the two colours plus stock appropriate to the solution? Yes No Unsure
Why are the two colours plus stock appropriate/inappropriate?
1. The two colours are required to make the design work without red and yellow, it wouldn't make sense. They are are 3 colours and stock so the black stock should be used.
2. The colours illustrate the concept well, (i.e. yellow and red cards). I especially like the way that , in the image/ type poster, 'yellow car' is in red, making a subtle joke about the mistake.
Do the posters work as a set or series? Yes No Unsure
Why do they work/don't work as part of a set or series and could this be developed further?
1. They work as a set because they use the same colour in two and the same phrase in two so easily relate maybe the 'type only' could be developed so that red is incorporated.
2. The consistency in the colours, the layout of the imagery (e.g yellow, yellow, yellow, red) and the fact that the same message has been used throughout.
Is it clearly evident which poster is TYPE, IMAGE and TYPE & IMAGE?
1. Yes, it's very clear which poster is which.
2. It is clear, however in the image/type poster, I think the type is to small, making it hard to read (if read from a distance)
Are the posters "memorable, immediate high impact and clear"?
1. The posters are memorable because they use simple colours and images nothing to eccentric which may have spoiled the idea. The image only poster stands out the most with immediate high impact as the simple images work well with the yellow and red (compliment each other). The posters are clear to a certain point, but what was the price paid? The image only poster may not make sense to people not familiar with the rules of football.
2. The posters are certainly high impact the bright, strong colours are extremely eye-catching, especially against the black background. The imagery is clear and memorable, but I think the wording could be more concise. I think however it would be difficult to get the message across in less words. Perhaps find a way of emphasising the main points other than the 'yellow card'.
Do you feel the brief has been fulfilled to it's full potential? Yes No Unsure
Further feedback....
1. The 'type only' could be pushed more creatively in a visual perspective and more exciting not just simple text and colour. The image is good and captures the eye but could be more understandable.
2. I think the brief has been fulfilled really well. My only comment would be with regards to the colours, there are in fact 4 colours used, but i don't know whether the intended stock is black...?
No comments:
Post a Comment