Evaluation

Brief two - machine to make a typeface

The idea behind the machine had potential, however the production was not so successful. Initially I planned to create a kit including the shoes, type specimen and a box to contain them in. However I ran out of time to make the box. I also think I could have used a better binding technique for the specimen that relates to the machine more, such as using bolts or reflective duck tape. The shoes themselves also don’t relate well to the machine as they are trainers, which are not often worn in road signage, and the look of them, being bright red doesn’t tie in well with the overall look of the kit.

Feedback from peers have said that the rationale is effective as it explains the function, design choices, and idea behind the machine. Some stated that they didn’t understand the choice of paper stock, and therefore probably wasn’t explained well. The typeface isn’t legible enough for its function, however most still approved of its appearance. The design of the specimen could have been more representative of the machine or letterforms, e.g. experimenting with the shape of the paper.
I found myself limited to some of the design aspects of the machine, such as the shoe itself.
The machine would be more versatile if the shapes were strap on, rather than attached to the shoes. The detachable aspect would mean it is usable on all shoes, therefore making the machine more cost effective and easier to reproduce. It would also have been a more complete machine with a box to contain the specimen and shoes, which I initially aimed to create. I also would like to improve the legibility of the letterforms so that the typeface is more readable and therefore fulfilling for its purpose. To do this I would need to experiment with the placement of the shapes, remembering that the shapes can be repeated and layered; an idea that I only thought of towards the end of designing the typeface.
I believe I have exploited my creative potential within the time constraints to a certain extent, however, with better time management I could have improved my machine more; by adapting the shapes into items that can be strapped on, or designing a box for the machine.
During the process of this brief I learnt that I should constantly be questioning my design, such as ‘is this product versatile and easily reproducible?’. This would have made the development a lot quicker, to result in the most effective machine. I also learnt that using modules to create a typeface is an effective way of bringing consistency to the design and will keep this in mind for later typeface designs.
I have found that using rules, such as a grid is vital for designing a typeface as it creates consistency.
One difficulty I had to overcome was the production of the shoe. Initially I aimed to cut into the shoe, leaving the shapes for the sole. This proved to be a skill I don’t acquire, and therefore had to figure out a solution; to cut the shapes from lino material and glue them to the sole of the shoe. This solution works temporarily, however for long term use it wouldn’t be adequate.

Brief one - logotype for a professional

The logotype is a success because it conveys many aspects of her life as well as her as a person.

It was suggested that the logotype should be made animated or used in a digital sense as the rotating aspect could create some interesting interactions.
I found putting the logotype into context limiting as I wanted to exploit the rotating aspect, but not many contexts can be rotated.
To improve the outcome of this brief I would have used more contexts relating to other things they did such as their writing. I could have created a book showcasing her works and could have experimented with the layout rotating.
Feedback from peers have said that the typeface is very representative of Claude Cahun and the outcome exploits many aspects of their life. It could have been better if the context in which I put the logotype in was developed more, such as digitally as a website or as a book on their work.
I believe I have exploited my creative potential to an extent but I could have gone further with the context by making physical items, and I could have experimented with animating more, bringing the design to life digitally or creating physical printed matter other than a poster.
I have learnt to question the form and how it can be seen. In future projects I plan to experiment with printed matter, exploring different ways the content can be seen.

Evaluation of module one

When looking at the work I have produced in module one, I have found strengths and weaknesses in the way I worked. My strengths lie in ideas and connecting research with development. However I have found I am weak in producing the outcome, and putting into context. I have also struggled with time management and keeping a note of how and why I do things, which I intend to work on in future projects.

I found that in this module, designing a typeface require considerations. These include the use of grids, identifying modules in which to form the type and personality to base the design off. These considerations create a consistent typeface with clear intentions.

When it came to taking risks, brief one proved to be more open to experimental ideas, whereas brief two felt limited. I could have taken more risks in brief two by making more physical outcomes, however I feel the ideas for the logotype had politically risky elements. The outcome of brief one had risks as there was uncertainty to whether the machine would work.

I found the development and research stages the easiest, especially for the second brief due to the amount of information on my chosen professional. Researching inspired many ideas, which would lead to further research. From the ideas came development which would also inspire more ideas, becoming a spiral of research and development, creating a varied and diverse workload.

The hardest stages proved to be the finalising and outcomes. Due to the intensity of my researching and developing, I would leave little time to finalise my ideas. This meant that my full potential wasn’t achieved and the final outcome lacked professionality.

I feel I almost fully exploited the studio space and engaging with the feedback from peers. However, although I attended the tutorials, I only practised techniques from Illustrator and Photoshop, neglecting bookbinding and Digital Printing. This is something I intend to work on in future projects.

Feedback I received was taken on board, using suggestions to further my development. Some ideas taken from crits I intended to experiment with, but would develop a different idea and neglect others. In future projects I intend to resolve this by managing my time better, sticking to self-set briefs and staying on track.

In conclusion the module proved to be a challenging endeavor into the way I work and my creative potential. I have pushed myself out of my comfort zone, and explored how I can answer a brief. I have identified ways of working that are best for me that will inform future projects, resulting in more fulfilling outcomes that show my creativity.