In this critique group we analysed our symbols we created for the our chosen Olympics sport. The chosen sport that I redesigned the symbol for was Trampolining. Here we had to consider the following of what the my design symbol portrayed: Audience, Scale, Contrast, Impact and Clarity.
Overall, my critique group thought my designs were appropriate for the sport (Trampolining). However the design of the figure with the split legs apart, the motion of the bounce looks like spikes than a motion.
But the spinning action on the other designs looked much better, especially with the spinning motion of the flip.
The trampoline in the bottom of the figure looks better in the sketch form as its more square, than the digital rectangle shape and circle shape.
The symbol might not be clear, as a few people could not recognise the sport without me telling them.
Feedback from Nanami (Fellow peer)
1. Is the design treatment still effective at different scale?
As the shapes are simple and bold, the symbol as a whole would not lose clarity on any scale. However, on a large scale the boldness of the block of the colour black maybe slightly overpowering.
2. Is the use of colour appropriate?
The colour choice of the black and white is effective as it adds simplicity to the design. Which incorporates lost of the shape. Also, it allows fro development and easy application.
3. How would the design be produced and applied? (Use/Production)
The design may not be compact enough to be easily applied to certain platforms. However, because of the simple/bold shapes it would be easily to applicable to certain platforms such as posters/flags etc. on a larger scale.
Evaluation
In conclusion, I believe my symbol design was appropriate for this study task. I got a lot of good feedback and advice on how to make my design more effective and recognisable. If I developed my symbol design further by editing the size if the figure, like make it less bolder and make it more thinner. By this it could work on a variety of scales.
Comments
Post a Comment