Mray, I spent some time going through all your mock ups on GitHub. I see what you mean about "referencing the landing page." There are a few very simple motifs that run through the whole set of mockups: the stylized trees and sun both show up on other pages, and the focus is very much on Mimi and Eunice and on the function of each page.
I also see what you mean about this fitting on different screen sizes. The older graphic would be too much on a smart phone. I really like what you're doing with those motifs. Is there a middle ground, where you can add some of the elements of the older design without going over the top, and then incorporate those elements in the other pages just like you've done? To me, five of these elements are: 1)The obvious snowdrift and the entirely cleared road. When you draw a fight in a comic, you show the aftermath of the punch, rather than the moment the fist is striking their face. It's just more dramatic that way. 2)The expressions on Mimi and Eunice's faces. "We Did It!" as opposed to..."I'm not so sure about this" and "I might be crazy." 3)The trees/house being just a bit closer to Mimi and Eunice, but remaining stylized; not as extravagant as the old mock up. I love the suggestion of the trees suggesting the "two pines" co-op, but it seems like to push that reference too hard would clutter it up too much. 4) The "rays" around the sun. It's a friendly sun! Not a desert sun. 5)The jet plane. This scene is happening in my time. -Jon On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Jonathan Roberts <[email protected] > wrote: > Just to be clear, I do think the more barren one is still really > fun...again, I'm being nit-picky: weighing the pros and cons between > options that are all really wonderful. > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Jonathan Roberts < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Those are really good points... >> >> What do you think about my point, that the average person isn't going to >> see all that symbolism, but is just going to have a much more visceral "is >> this fun or not?" reaction? I tell ya...people these days...to much >> content, not enough attention span... >> >> What if the graphic doesn't "work" at the symbolic levels you point out, >> but does give people a feeling that "this place is safe and fun and I want >> to stay here and listen to what these folks have to say?" >> >> -Jon >> >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:12 AM, mray <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 01.10.2015 17:29, Aaron Wolf wrote: >>> > I agree that "works" as an entry is higher priority than vividness or >>> > aesthetics, but these issues don't necessarily conflict. >>> >>> My point is that they do conflict in my eyes. >>> You want more wood which isn't a topical thing but "completes" a picture >>> in your head. To me the whole "snow" theme has a point, while "forest >>> and trees" does not. It is about stylistic consistency and focus on the >>> message. The "emptiness" you notice is the same you will experience on >>> the other mainly white pages, I want to anticipate that and be able to >>> reference the landing page in style and in feeling later on when pages >>> are more boring. >>> >>> > >>> > I think the barren wasteland feeling is actually negative. I might >>> > dabble with updating things myself ever. I really insist that my two >>> > other concerns be addressed: more buildings / destination in the >>> > distance; more trees and landscape that makes this feel like familiar >>> > and desireable place, not the tundra. >>> >>> When covered in snow everything is a "barren wasteland", and >>> things that stick out *despite* the snow-cover steal focus instantly. >>> Having more of everything makes it easier to have nice illustration but >>> harder to get along a point (and harder to fit on different screen >>> sizes, too). >>> Let's not forget this isn't even about the snow - it is about *clearing >>> the path*, destination and trees don't play a role. >>> Having a more tangible destination makes things even harder, you don't >>> know what others regard desirable. We also can't promise that the way we >>> clear leads to a golden future for everybody. >>> >>> My conclusion is that what you ask for tries to do too much and achieve >>> too little. I prefer boiling it down to what matters and have *that* >>> work. >>> >>> >> >>> >> I addressed your desire to add more snow to the road though: >>> >> http://ur1.ca/nw6cf >>> >> >>> > >>> > I'm not sure that particular touch-up is good, it doesn't get the "pile >>> > of snow" feeling as well as either the earlier mockups or the >>> > https://snowdrift.coop/static/img/intro/snowdrift.png illustration. >>> It's >>> > hard to pin down why, but that illustration I made (which was based on >>> a >>> > photograph incidentally) achieves a stronger sense of substantial >>> > obstacle, although I also like the sense that the Mimi & Eunice >>> > illustrations have that there's snow to clear for a good long ways down >>> > the road, not just this singular snowdrift to clear. >>> > >>> > Anyway, the new update doesn't quite have the clarity about the >>> > snowdrift that would be ideal. >>> >>> but is it better than the version before? >>> >>> > >>> > I also think Jon and Stephen have some good points, although I don't >>> > agree with Stephen that we need a "professional" font, I think the new >>> > font choice is fine. I also think we should go ahead with mocking >>> things >>> > up with the new "Free the Commons" slogan candidate. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Design mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design >>> >>> >> >
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
