Evaluation - The End of Year Show Branding - Collaborative Brief

Overall the designs are bright, bold and welcoming. They are heavily researched with a lot of experimentation and development behind them. They use an interesting, contemporary use of typography and have a simple and clear concept - we are a community and coming  'together' to create the end of year show.  This was especially important as last year's winner did not have a clear concept and consequently were criticised for it. It also means it has high impact and the general public are likely to understand it, it is not overtly 'arty' or intimidating.

That being said, I find that perhaps the design is too palatable. The colours are very soft and remind me of design for children. I think colour wise, vibrant, contrasting colours may have worked better, conveying more our status as a serious and contemporary arts university. I also think the figures that have been added should have been developed further or not used at all. They vary in size and some of the angles don't seem to quite work. If we had more time this would have been something we would have refined. They all appear to be holding the type together so perhaps there could have been more focus on the process of actually getting the shapes together, with some in the process of being pulled into place. There is also some issue with the fact the figures don't show much diversity. They are very basic to convey just general people, but could be mistaken as only men, which would not be very representative. I was also unsure about the size and colour of the logo and the drop shadow applied to the shapes. These did make the shapes appear 3D to an extent, but I thought it also made them appear quite digital and over-edited. Although without the shadows perhaps the design would appear too flat.

In terms of the collaboration, these seemed to go well. We worked well in sharing research and conducted regular meetings to assess the progress of the project. There was some issues with conflicting ideas of how the project should look, however these were resolved with several compromises. One issue was that we seemed to deviate from our assigned roles and each one of us seemed to be creating designs going down a different trajectory. Eventually we came together and honed our focus, but in future collaborations I hope to have a clearer idea of what each of us is doing and ensure there are regular checks to make sure everyone is happy with the designs being developed. I found that because I was working with friends I struggled to voice the elements I disliked, and when I did sometimes I felt like I was causing unnecessary problems. In future, I hope to be better skilled at suggesting compromises and be more confident about changes I would like to make. This concept was my original idea and design and although it has developed in a way I am not quite happy with, I need to accept that and appreciate the outcome since it is a product of compromise and collaboration.

Why the winning design 'We Don't Quack Like Other Ducks' was successful

The winning design of the competition was very controversial, people thought it lacked merit as a piece of design and did not reflect our university well. However, I believe there are several reasons why it was successful and perhaps answered the brief better than our entry.

• The design was photography based, which was something that was mentioned in the briefing as something the judges have often gone for in the past.
• The design had a clear concept, the public will immediately understand it.
• 'We don't quack like other ducks' references the university's point of uniqueness and specialty as artists.
• The 'duck' line references Yorkshire slang, and again links to pride in being situated in the North.
• The mottled water imagery is interesting and experimental, showing creativity but with a very obvious tagline to keep it relevant. 
• It potentially takes a more humorous edge which hasn't been explored before.