Hello all,
Please respond to the following prompt via the comment section by Sunday at 8pm. These count towards your studio grade and are meant to help you develop a polemic for the second half of the semester!
BLOG EXERCISE 4
In response to the LID-IR reading, what should we change about our graphic template? What works well and should be maintained? What makes LID so successful as a manual/booklet?
I think in our booklet having references at the bottom may be helpful as it may lead to the readers the opportunity to discover more information that was not presented in the pages. I think there should be a different comparison factors for each of the systems since some of the criteria used to define “green surface” may not apply to “water collection”. Right now, I think for reviewers it is hard to understand if we didn’t show any images at all. In our template, we should include at least a generic photo of the project to help the reader to visualize so that they can better understand the rest of the systems that we introduce in the two-page sheet. In LID, The combination of detailed drawing and photo collage is also helpful for visualization.
ReplyDeleteI think idea of having this graphic template is wonderful, it represents important information from which one can see caparison from one project to another. We could organize all of our projects by the total percentage, starting from largest to smallest.
ReplyDeleteWhat is not working for me is color and size of green circles. For color I think we can grey green out about 60%, so we can still see small hint of green, or maybe we can just use single green color for all circles. In terms of size, if circles would be little smaller they would not act as focal point on the page.
Another approach for colors could possible be: using green color filled circles only there, where it applies on the project, and grey out the rest of them. If there would be 2 or 3 applied to one project, size can vary due to percentage rate.
We could also illuminate description for each circles on every page, and just to have it on the index cover as a legend. But then we will have to find a method to differentiate them. Maybe by different filling pattern of circle objects.
Part of the effectiveness of the LID format lies in two key elements. First, the graphic format is grounded in something familiar, the periodic table of the elements. This organizational strategy establishes the relationships between the systems. I'm not certain our information can be organized in this manner, but perhaps there is a similar and familiar graphic strategy that can communicate the relationships between systems or the relationships between studied projects or both at the same time.
ReplyDeleteSecond, this layout benefits from focus. By that, I mean that each set of facing pages has a highly focused message. The only thing each set of pages is trying to communicate is the fundamentals of how the system or family of systems work. With the exception of the flow control devices pages, each set of facing pages has only one or two intuitive diagrams.
Part of the struggle I'm experiencing with our format is a lack of focus, or more accurately stated, attempts to communicate too much on a single set of pages. If our intent is to communicate as much about a precedent as possible, perhaps we should consider giving each project three or four spreads with each spread dedicated to a single system.