The video was about three corresponding emotional responses that all designers must entice in their customers in order to make their design a success. Making people happy is what design is meant to be used for, in order to provide something aesthetically pleasing and simple to enjoy. But what about the designer who creates the object or design?
Sure making people happy is just one of the core concepts of creating a successful design, but what would happen if we did not get one of those emotional responses that the video named? Would that make the designer who put their heart and soul into the design a failure? Just because one person does not respond to the design in such a way does not mean it is a complete lost cause. It takes time and effort in order to get people to respond the way they are supposed to respond in order for the design to be deemed "successful."
Adapting to peoples demands and emotions is key to becoming a designer who can be depended on to create something that will draw people to the product. I know of that and I have known of that for a long time. But does that mean that the designer must completely give up their experience and style in order to make money? Design should not be all about money and attracting costumers, the designer should set aside time to make themselves happy while balancing the money making so that their job doesnt become dull and boring.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Summary of Project
What did I learn from this project? That design is picky and demanding and that you not only have to go step by step from what they provide you but they expect you to do what they tell you exactly as they tell you and when they tell you. You cannot work on your own schedule it has to be by a deadline that they set for you and that if you need to learn to adapt in order to get it to work.
How does my project demonstrate good design and good color usage? My poster is simple in design, its aim is to showcase the various colors that the nintendo 3DS comes in. I did not rely heavily on the 3DS's features like I originally intended instead I decided to take a much more simple approach. Simplicity is the name of my design and my poster aims to reflect that without distracting the viewer. How it used good color usage is a little bit more difficult to explain. My 3DS and all other 3DSs tend to come in different colors of different shades and values. Not all colors of the system compliment the others and not all shades are the exact same type. Instead I decided to focus on the chromatic aspect, I decided to darken the chroma on the poster in order to get the 3DS rainbow to match in at least in some shape. That way it is easier for the viewer to look at without their eyes trailing all over the page.
What would I do differently? I would go back and use my own hand drawn pictures more rather than relying on the photos that I can find on the internet. Drawing by pencil and paper is my strongest aspect and I wish I could have figured out how to scan earlier that way I could have used my own sketches in the final piece more than I did.
What was the most difficult part? Trying to have the patience to work at the design classes pace rather than my own. I enjoy design most when I can do it for my pleasure and for my aims rather than having to meet the criteria of someone else. But accepting criticism and working around deadlines is part of the experience and I had to learn the hard way to accept that. Also learning to use Indesign on the mac desktops since I dont have my own was a hassle as well.
Did my ideas about design change? Of course they did, not really from a professional standpoint but rather from my own personal one. I had to learn to adapt to their rules and expectations while also following my own interests and principles. I am pretty confident that my poster shows what is required of me while also adding my own personal opinion and style to it.
How does my project demonstrate good design and good color usage? My poster is simple in design, its aim is to showcase the various colors that the nintendo 3DS comes in. I did not rely heavily on the 3DS's features like I originally intended instead I decided to take a much more simple approach. Simplicity is the name of my design and my poster aims to reflect that without distracting the viewer. How it used good color usage is a little bit more difficult to explain. My 3DS and all other 3DSs tend to come in different colors of different shades and values. Not all colors of the system compliment the others and not all shades are the exact same type. Instead I decided to focus on the chromatic aspect, I decided to darken the chroma on the poster in order to get the 3DS rainbow to match in at least in some shape. That way it is easier for the viewer to look at without their eyes trailing all over the page.
What would I do differently? I would go back and use my own hand drawn pictures more rather than relying on the photos that I can find on the internet. Drawing by pencil and paper is my strongest aspect and I wish I could have figured out how to scan earlier that way I could have used my own sketches in the final piece more than I did.
What was the most difficult part? Trying to have the patience to work at the design classes pace rather than my own. I enjoy design most when I can do it for my pleasure and for my aims rather than having to meet the criteria of someone else. But accepting criticism and working around deadlines is part of the experience and I had to learn the hard way to accept that. Also learning to use Indesign on the mac desktops since I dont have my own was a hassle as well.
Did my ideas about design change? Of course they did, not really from a professional standpoint but rather from my own personal one. I had to learn to adapt to their rules and expectations while also following my own interests and principles. I am pretty confident that my poster shows what is required of me while also adding my own personal opinion and style to it.
Written description of project
The first project of the semester is trying to select one object and making a poster that focuses on that object from a marketing standpoint without relying heavily on text. The aim is to get us to balance color theory while also using basic designing principles to create a poster that will attract the audience while also managing to give the aim of the object without distracting them. The poster has to be in color and has to focus on the object of our choice.
Because I have experience in the video game field, I have chosen my nintendo 3DS as my object. There is no set color theory but instead there will be a focus on chroma because the 3DS comes in various colors that do not always match each other. My original aim was to focus on the different features of the 3Ds but now I am focusing on the different colors that the system comes in. A rainbow of sorts with aim towards a comparison of Skittles as well. There will not be any rainbow text or rainbow colors because that is just a cheap tool to rely on plus it will only distract without providing anything that the poster can benefit from.
Because I have experience in the video game field, I have chosen my nintendo 3DS as my object. There is no set color theory but instead there will be a focus on chroma because the 3DS comes in various colors that do not always match each other. My original aim was to focus on the different features of the 3Ds but now I am focusing on the different colors that the system comes in. A rainbow of sorts with aim towards a comparison of Skittles as well. There will not be any rainbow text or rainbow colors because that is just a cheap tool to rely on plus it will only distract without providing anything that the poster can benefit from.
Response to Color Lecture
The first week of school, and the first thing my design class does to make things progress? Introduce a heaping amount of information including Color Theory.
The color theory itself does not bother me, it was actually fascinating seeing exactly how bad coloring can distract a person enough to get them to miss the original aim of the product or photo. I have always been pretty decent with color theory, I have to be since my career training is aimed towards character design. In any sort of design field you have to be mindful of what colors you use and in what extent otherwise you are going to confuse and distract your audience or customers from seeing the purpose of your design. Its all about balance, you have to balance the color its not about principle or about wasting money on photos for class like they are teaching us.
What bothers me about the entire lecture is being expected to understand the extensive amounts of the theory itself. Which means we are expected to understand the theory and concept all at the same time rather than just a little bit at a time. I understand that color is one of those design building blocks that could make or break a design but expecting us to understand everything all at once can get stressful. Thankfully I understand what bad coloring is and I hope I have avoided that in my poster since I decided to go with a limited chroma design.
What bothers me about the entire lecture is being expected to understand the extensive amounts of the theory itself. Which means we are expected to understand the theory and concept all at the same time rather than just a little bit at a time. I understand that color is one of those design building blocks that could make or break a design but expecting us to understand everything all at once can get stressful. Thankfully I understand what bad coloring is and I hope I have avoided that in my poster since I decided to go with a limited chroma design.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Tuesday September 3rd
Nothing really happened in class today, we reviewed the pictures that we took over the weekend for the color theory. Surprisingly the teacher was pretty lenient because some of us took less than was expected or did not bring any pictures at all.
I did not have any time to go collect the foam core that we needed to grid on but I did get some preliminary sketches done of the object of my choosing. Because I am a gamer I chose to do one of my gaming systems the Nintendo 3DS.
I plan to use almost no text on the finished product and my color theory technique that Im going to use is the limited palette. The reason being is that the 3DS I have is blue and black only with no other colors present on the unit itself. I plan to sketch on the foamcore rather than plastering pictures on it like other students are doing sketching comes easier to me.
I did not have any time to go collect the foam core that we needed to grid on but I did get some preliminary sketches done of the object of my choosing. Because I am a gamer I chose to do one of my gaming systems the Nintendo 3DS.
I plan to use almost no text on the finished product and my color theory technique that Im going to use is the limited palette. The reason being is that the 3DS I have is blue and black only with no other colors present on the unit itself. I plan to sketch on the foamcore rather than plastering pictures on it like other students are doing sketching comes easier to me.
Monday, September 2, 2013
Response to 10 principles of good design
I just got done reading Viscoe's ten principles of good design, the ten principles were simple enough to read and to understand but do they really concern all design or just the most intricate parts of design that require a precise understanding to succeed?
Principle one says that all good design is innovative, but the description given in the article is concerned with design that will use technology to advance. Does this just apply to the design that goes into architecture and the like? Or can it be applied into fields such as mine for example? Character design does not rely on technology to be "innovative" it relies on the talent and perception on the creator of the character. So what exactly is innovative about those departments that are not able to invent new technology? It comes to show you that "innovation" is like beauty the two concepts are defined by the person and not by the department as a whole.
The next to concepts bother me slightly. According to this list the design needs to be useful and beautiful. I am aware that a good design is pleasing to the eye and can help attract consumers that are willing to buy a product that appeals to them but does that really mean that beauty is more important than functionality? We do not all create beauty the first time so when we mess up is it really that bad to the point that we need strict perfection and beauty to sell something instead of something that just looks pleasing rather than completely perfect? Perfection is boring.
The next two principles confuse me even more than the last two! Principle four is that good design makes a product understandable about its use. And principle five is that good design is unobtrusive and allows self expression. How can that be when he stated that design needs to be beautiful in order to be successful? I guess principle four can be a little bit more obvious since good products do indeed show their use from association with similar products that way the consumer will know its use and wont have to research about it before buying it. Its really and honestly principle five that contradicts itself. How can you expect a product to be both beautiful and unobtrusive to where the owner can express themselves using it? Self expression is its own beauty so why do we need established beauty to make a product sell??
The other five principles do not confuse the hell out of me like the last listed two did, design is basic when it comes to being long lasting. I mean who would buy a product that was cheap and poorly made? It would be a waste of their money and a waste of space for something that cant last for very long in comparison with something that can. And it is true in recent years that products are environmentally friendly considering our recent concern with global warming. Most of these points come down to just plain common sense that I think even the most basic of designers can understand.
But in reality as stated before beauty isn't something that is established and that each designer will have their own concept of beauty. Why does beauty have to be such a structured thing that its become an integral part of design? It wouldn't be that bad if we weren't expected to provide something that is simple in itself at the same time. Sometimes beauty is simple and sometimes its exaggerated and intricate. It cannot be both at the same time and even if it is its just a combination of certain characteristics of both without meeting both ends of the spectrum in the end.
Principle one says that all good design is innovative, but the description given in the article is concerned with design that will use technology to advance. Does this just apply to the design that goes into architecture and the like? Or can it be applied into fields such as mine for example? Character design does not rely on technology to be "innovative" it relies on the talent and perception on the creator of the character. So what exactly is innovative about those departments that are not able to invent new technology? It comes to show you that "innovation" is like beauty the two concepts are defined by the person and not by the department as a whole.
The next to concepts bother me slightly. According to this list the design needs to be useful and beautiful. I am aware that a good design is pleasing to the eye and can help attract consumers that are willing to buy a product that appeals to them but does that really mean that beauty is more important than functionality? We do not all create beauty the first time so when we mess up is it really that bad to the point that we need strict perfection and beauty to sell something instead of something that just looks pleasing rather than completely perfect? Perfection is boring.
The next two principles confuse me even more than the last two! Principle four is that good design makes a product understandable about its use. And principle five is that good design is unobtrusive and allows self expression. How can that be when he stated that design needs to be beautiful in order to be successful? I guess principle four can be a little bit more obvious since good products do indeed show their use from association with similar products that way the consumer will know its use and wont have to research about it before buying it. Its really and honestly principle five that contradicts itself. How can you expect a product to be both beautiful and unobtrusive to where the owner can express themselves using it? Self expression is its own beauty so why do we need established beauty to make a product sell??
The other five principles do not confuse the hell out of me like the last listed two did, design is basic when it comes to being long lasting. I mean who would buy a product that was cheap and poorly made? It would be a waste of their money and a waste of space for something that cant last for very long in comparison with something that can. And it is true in recent years that products are environmentally friendly considering our recent concern with global warming. Most of these points come down to just plain common sense that I think even the most basic of designers can understand.
But in reality as stated before beauty isn't something that is established and that each designer will have their own concept of beauty. Why does beauty have to be such a structured thing that its become an integral part of design? It wouldn't be that bad if we weren't expected to provide something that is simple in itself at the same time. Sometimes beauty is simple and sometimes its exaggerated and intricate. It cannot be both at the same time and even if it is its just a combination of certain characteristics of both without meeting both ends of the spectrum in the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)