Prior to the workshop we were asked to bring in examples of packaging. The workshop set out to make us define the qualities we look for in packaging design and production, and got us categorising our pieces into 3 different groups - high quality, low quality and medium quality.
Our group had a lengthy talk about which pieces we felt deserved to go into which categories. Some things stuck out more obviously. The bad pieces of design were the easiest to sort, as they all generally employed the same design conventions (poor use of imagery or photography, such as the supermarket own brands, a poor use of colour, and a sense of overcrowding the space with too much text or too many typefaces.)
The medium to high quality picks were more difficult to define because they were a lot of overlaps or conflicting decisions. It's difficult to think of a few factors that justify what is usually a gut feeling. A lot of the things we chose to place in the high quality category were there because they were more creatively packaged, and stood out against the conventional packaging. The medium picks to me, were there because despite having good designs, they were designed for a broader commercial audience, and they mainly struck a good balance between design and production costs.
As a group, these were the factors we decided on.
Medium
High
After a discussion between the groups on what we felt were the markers of good or bad quality packaging design, we then summarised and categorised them as a year group, although there were some conflicting suggestions between what our group decided on, and what the year as a whole felt.
The Year Group Decisions
High Quality
- Nice feeling stock
- Sustainability
- Looks expensive
- Durability
- Net Complexity
Medium Quality
- Disposability
- Good durability but design doesn't match with that
- Mundane design or stock
- Familiairity
Low Quality
- Overcrowding
- Mass produced looking
- Poor quality images
- Attempting mimicry
- Uncecessary packaging
No comments:
Post a Comment