Today’s class consisted of each other giving group presentations of our healthcare product so far which included the brand guidelines, sketches and a few screens from the app. I extremely enjoy these type of sessions as it gives us the opportunity to not only reflect on our work and make refinements but also see how the class is progressing as a whole. Essitiantly it’s like writing a book or essay, you can work on it for hours and see no errors until you get someone else to read it.
However, before we conducted this critique I spent the night before going through all aspects of my product acknowledging some of the errors to see if it aligns up with others in my class.
I noted a few things
- Some visibility from colours e.g. bright gold happy face on the mood tree can be hard to see similar with the green face.
- Written content on the app could be seen as too small (type scale has not been used)
- Inconsistency in colours – error by my part
- Few elements are misaligned? – or me being ocd.
- Powerful colour scheme
- Strong typography
- Satisfying and fitting illustrations
- Clean & Minimalistic
- Symbolism in the design (e.g. colour, etc)
- Overall eye-catching
- Similarities in illustrative design
Paul’s critique was mainly positive however he did mention the logo was slightly misaligned and perhaps my target age range could be lower (11-14-year-olds).
Overall, the feedback was extremely positive with the overall consensus mentioning the visual strength of the brand. While the positive feedback is amazing, I want a more critical take on my work. However, I did notice one person who submitted a post-it note to my page mentioning the similarities between mine and a Scientific animation channel on Youtube which I gained inspiration from both narratively and visually.
Below is a piece of my work and the other is from Kergasart. Acknowledging that they do contain many similarities (hard not to when you are working with 2D shapes) I decided to try and create my own unique illustrative design.
After spending hours exploring different ways to design my characters, I decided to scrap all previous ideas and return to my starting point. I wanted my illustrative design to match the principles of my app – minimalistic, fun and easy on the eyes.
Using this formula I decided to build up my characters only this time including more detailed and whacky shapes while removing many of the features that create ties between my work and In A Nutshell.
I feel extremely happy with the outcome of these new character designs, as it has also allowed me to stay true to my initial values that make my app feel consistent, professional and modern. It also allows me to put a new twist on it differentiating my work from others.
After the critique one thing seem to bother me; the logo – acknowledging Paul’s misaligned comments only brought more attention to it for me. I was never really happy with how the logo turned out as while it was minimalistic and perhaps meaningful it felt too bulky/weighty and could also be interpreted differently.
I decided to play around with it again and used one of my previously sketched ideas by combing relative words – bird + breeze.
While retaining many similar features to the previous logo, I feel like one is far more consistent, meaningful and visually pleasing. I am extremely happy with the result and the minimalistic features.
What does it mean?
The logo incorporates the minimalistic and playful (rounded corners) design that is reflected in my healthcare app, while also showing a ‘breeze’ particle that could also be seen as a bird.
I really enjoyed week 6’s critique session as it has allowed me to see many of the visual flaws that were present in my work while also seeing where I am really strong. It has also allowed me to create new and in my opinion, better looking illustrative designs that I feel like fit my work even better than before. I will now continue to work on my app.