FAYEARBOOK_DEVELOPMENT

What direction did I take?

For the visual direction we decided to use the concept of SUM, being parts of a whole, into the visual language of the book. I personally looked at a range of digital and installations that would all have an over arching quality of being made up of many parts. I also looked at strong art brands in order to get some more traditional input on the layout and typographic style.


Why did I take this direction?
The concept that was determined with the committee was a driving factor. I felt that the direction was very suited to the concept, especially if we could incorporate an element into the visual language that paid homage, not just the parts of a whole concept, but to the wider context of the arts sector. I was directed toward solving problems in the design from a variety of sources, and I wanted to take a solid and honest direction that was based mainly around the work and information, and not over designing the object.


What influenced me?

I was influenced by a range of different things. For the main visual I was influenced by sculpture, computer graphics, 3D renderings, and distorted type. I was influenced by the art world in general, looking into contemporary sculpture by artists such as Alice Channer. I looked at successful layouts for artwork, in order to see what design elements I could adopt and employ for the yearbook.


How did I develop the brief?

I developed this brief by first deciding upon the basics. Having decided a typeface, I put together a basic layout in order to get feedback from the committee. Deciding upon a layout for the students work that was minimal and intimated a gallery setting, being based entirely around the work, and having minimal distractions. The rest of the book was put together in a more subjective development stage that was open to crit by the design team and the committee. To gain our SUM imagery we visited a 3D modeller that helped us acheive the visual.


What problems did I have?

There were a few problems orchestrating the team together, and a lot of the brief was done at different points with individuals. This was down to our own management of time and personnel. However, there the work that was produced was very well received and we were very happy with it. We did have some issues implementing the visual concept, however, once we started working with the 3D modeller this became far easier to control.


Was it successful?

The brief was a success. The committee gave us some very promising feedback and the tutors were very happy with all the decisions that we made. It would be nice to move the brief further, and I think that the success of the yearbook has allowed us to complete more design work after we hand in our modules to expand the deliverable set.