3/10/21—Making big changes
Meeting with Rob was very insightful and means our design will be making a lot of big changes.
Our client, Rob, had tons of great feedback on our first design (included at the bottom of this post). Since there was a lot covered, this blog will be broken up into two parts: what was good and what was bad. (SPOILER ALERT: One part is much longer than the other!)
The Good
Although the good was few and far between, there were some things we did right.
- Rob thought the use of an endangered bumblebee species was very meaningful and aesthetically pleasing.
- He thought the bottom bar with a link and QR code was a clear and accessible call to action.
In our meeting, Rob made it clear that first and foremost, he wants a design that will be efficient to the sign’s purpose: demarking the habitat and getting people to the Beecology Project website. As such, he though the picture of a bumblebee fit the context of the sign and was an attractive, engaging element. He also thought that the call to action was directly on point.
The Bad
A significant portion of our meeting was spent on things that Rob wanted changed. These were caused by both insufficient elements and changes in the project limitations.
- He thought the design’s connection to existing pollinator habitat signs was off base. Rob told us that he believes that typical habitat signs are misleading and focused on the wrong ideas.
- Rob also wanted more emphasis on the Beecology Project itself. He thought the logo should be more readily identifiable.
- He mentioned the icons for the Beecology Project’s three platforms were really not needed. People are expected to naturally discover them through the website.
The core of many of Rob’s grievances were based on the rejection of typical habitat signs. He believes that stereotypical titling of “Pollinator Habitat” and writing about “providing a safe place for pollinators” is unrelated to the habitat’s real goals of understanding the science behind pollinator ecosystems. As such, he recommended the wording “Native Pollination Systems at Work” — wording that is both catchy, engaging, and education-focused.
Additionally, Rob wanted to place a larger emphasis on the connection to the Beecology Project as he thought it was critical in drawing new citizen scientists to the team. Although, he understood the reliance on both a logo, name, and subtitle were very inhibitive to a prominent element that looked good. As such, he relinquished the subtitle requirement and offered that wrapping the name around the logo could make a nicer design.
Finally, Rob said that information like the platform icons really didn’t belong on the sign. Instead, he wanted us to focus on decreasing the overall amount of information in the design, making everything larger and more visible, and creating a nicer style to things.
Coming in to the meeting, we knew our design wasn’t great but didn’t exactly know how to make it better. After the meeting though, we have a lot of new ideas to go on and are looking forward to the next iteration. Find out how that turns out in my next blog!
NEXT BLOG: https://paradoxpyt.medium.com/3-15-21-reaching-perfection-300c19783ce4
LAST BLOG: https://paradoxpyt.medium.com/3-9-21-meeting-the-challenge-c0c623143886