Friday, 19 May 2017

OUGD406 module evaluation

In OUGD406 I felt I learnt a lot. The module contained 4 briefs, 3 of which were extensive and one of which was to a shorter timescale. 

Working to a live brief in Studio brief 1 was interesting as it gave me insight into the way briefs are conducted outside of education and the time constraint made the pressure of creating a cover increase. However in the end I think I created an original cover without any obvious imagery and it is one that works to encourage a younger audience to read a novel with rather adult themes. The cover was illustrative and represented childhood innocence as well as racial inequality. I liked my final cover as I felt it was successful, but if I were to redo I would create the cover out of physical fabric and stitching, I think this would have elevated the cover.

For Studio brief 2 I was able to create an outcome based on an event I had actually been to and on a topic I am really interested in. I think my final outcome works well to represent the protest and my research into politics and colour theory helped to create it. Creating a poster using traditional methods was more work intensive than I thought it would be but it was good to expand my knowledge of printing processes and produce a piece of work that wasn't just digital. The placement of the poster into context on a placard works really well and is a good idea for an extra touch. if I were to improve my print I would have printed straight onto the MDF of the placard and also made the print more celebratory. 

Studio Brief 3 was interesting to work with as it was a brief that would be implemented had we given a successful pitch. The group work alongside the format of the brief was like a brief you would work on in a design company. Delegating tasks and managing time alongside others was a good way to produce a large quantity of work for the final outcomes and working with others helped to inform my design decisions, as our separate outcomes had to fit the same theme and have a similar appearance. Constantly being in contact with the group and editing our work to fit others was a good way to keep the design consistent. I enjoyed working in the group and I feel our overall design was really successful and worked together. The pitch was an extra requirement to present to the second years and one element of a brief that we did not have the opportunity to do in another brief. This gave us the opportunity to practice presentation skills and gain valuable feedback from more experienced people we otherwise would not have had contact with.

My initial designs for the inside of the exhibition developed onwards with the help of the group into a feasible, cheap and effective system that categorised the prints well in our chosen theme of postcodes and also made use of the custom typeface created earlier in the project, this provided consistency across the entire brief.
If I was to revisit this project I think I would have spoken in the presentation/pitch in order to improve my public speaking and experience with pitching for future use. I was also ill for some of the lessons where ideas were formulated so I had to catch up on the sessions with the group, so I felt my understanding of the initial ideas was limited and could have been improved had I been present. Other than this, I felt our project went really well, everybody in the group contributed a lot, our designs were consistent and we worked together well as a group in terms of delegating tasks and managing the project.

Studio Brief 4 was a project which I enjoyed doing but did not like the final outcome.
Working in a pair was really fun and helped us to split the work equally, allowing us to delegate tasks and manage our time more effectively. Continuously using another input was great as the concept we came up with together was really interesting and by basing the game in more than one person's experiences, the freshers next year will have more of an idea of what to expect. When it came to producing the work, as we chose to screen print, having 2 people set up a production line, with us both doing tasks to produce our outcomes, it made the process quicker and much more efficient.

The project seemed rushed to me due to the small timescale on top of the other work to complete (for example contributing towards the exhibition). If the timescale for the project was extended I think we would have been able to produce a more successful, professional looking design. If we were to improve this project further I would have spent more time on the design of the board to make it look more professional. I also would have digitally printed the cards on top of screen printed card to make the cards look less messy, and I would have used the same process for the information leaflet as it is digitally printed due to it being a last minute addition from the crit feedback and is a different colour to the paint used in screen printing. This would have given a more consistent look across all outcomes.

Overall I was fairly happy with most of my outcomes from this module, with the exception Studio Brief 4. I felt the set timescale for this brief could've been longer and if this was the case I would've been able to create more of a successful outcome. 
I think during this module I noticed that I put more effort into my work than I had before, and I was able to create a large body of work that I was generally proud of. Using traditional printing processes in more than one brief helped to extend my knowledge beyond just digital printing and I will be using this process in the future as the outcomes were successful.



No comments:

Post a Comment