Thread replies: 8
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
File: OVERLAY.png (109KB, 1916x1078px) Image search:
[Google]
109KB, 1916x1078px
Hi so, I've been a massive rut recently. Hating anything I try to make. I recently did this for a couple of small streamers for Magic the gathering. I HATE it but they loved it. So, is it just me or am I not a tard and this is awful. (It's been a hobby for about 5 years, I've won awards and shit.)
>>
I mean, it caters directly to their tastes and their needs, fits the aesthetic, so you've met the brief well mate!
It does look rough, and you are clearly missing out on some fundamentals of design, but that's fine man. Meeting the brief can be more important than having something that looks good on its own.
I'd say pirate some kind of Lynda 'fundamentals of design' torrents and learn some of the rules now that you know you can fuck with them.
>>
File: hort-fb.png (35KB, 1200x630px) Image search:
[Google]
35KB, 1200x630px
>>310303
Also I think you would really hate (but then eventually love)
http://hort.org.uk/
>>
>>310303
>Meeting the brief can be more important than having something that looks good on its own.
And this, kids, is why nobody value graphic design.
>>
>>310304
Not OP but that's dope, you should check out vier5 if you don't know them.
>>
>>310314
yeah it's evident nobody in my company gives a shit about principles and elements of design, which is fine. I do my best to make sure clients aren't signing off on shitty designs but if they are headstrong about maintaining what they are asking for and it happens to be shit I don't push them. Or sometimes I'll just do what they ask and then do a separate version of what I think may work better and then them seeing the visual makes them realize why the original idea was shit.
>>
>>
File: Screen Shot 2017-06-04 at 12.11.59 PM.png (9KB, 164x123px) Image search:
[Google]
9KB, 164x123px
>>310347
he's not wrong though lol.
in regards to the OP, its okay I guess? I don't know what flat out saying "awful" means. awful in comparison to what? is there a standard of what this type of work should meet? I mean based on the layout it seems effective enough and not something that necessarily has to be breath taking in design.
the line work in pic related seems kind of choppy/inconsistent. the font face for "deck name" seems like a poor choice because the e looks like a G. Not really a fan of the bevel and emboss type look on the trim because to me personally its just associated with being used for the sake of being used.
idk, just my 2 cents. you don't have to read into it if you don't want to.
Thread posts: 8
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3