Evaluation

The way in which I think our poster meets the needs of the brief is that it shows clearly the basic meanings of semiotics. It has an easy layout of understanding the order in which semiotics is layed out. The layout is simple and we have kept the colours to a minimum so there isn't a wild amount of colour going on to scare viewers. We have all the correct amount of information about semiotics. I don't think we have failed to meet the brief with the poster, I think that we have met everything in the criteria. The strengths that I think we have with the poster is what I have said previously about the colour and simplicity of the piece. The weakness that I think we have within this poster is just maybe colour, I think the colours work really well together, but there might be certain aspects which some viewers might think there is too much purple going on. The way in which I think that this piece could be mis-read or mis-understood by the audience is the whole meaning of the piece. I think that Semiotics as a whole is a tricky and complicated subject which personally I had trouble trying to understand. So I think the audience for this poster would be an older person with interest within semiotics, or a student studying within the area. In a practical way I think that the piece could maybe be a bit more experimental with colour. The purple looks good in my opinion, but to others purple might not be as appealing. 

My timekeeping within this task I think I dealt with well, we had a limited time to do research and design so we, as a group, set up a plan of action which we all followed well. We wanted to leave enough time for deigning, tweaking and printing, as we have printed outside of Uni, at a shop. My research for this project was just one part, this was part of our plan, we all allocated sections of the research in order to keep to keep it fair and also so that we could have a discussion and have more knowledge in certain areas within the project. I drew conclusions from my research with the info graphics that the Independent had as a newspaper. I picked out ones that I thought would relate to us and we could work with, this helped us generate ideas. As a group we did experiment, we had around 4 different ideas which had pros and cons to each. After getting feedback on each poster we tweaked and improved each time. The part of the project that  I have enjoyed the most was working within the group. We had a trustworthy group and I think we worked really well together and ideas were generated with general chat about the project. We set enough time for this so this was an easy and enjoyable part of the task. The part of the project that I didn't enjoy as much was trying to understand semiotics. In the end I think I grasped the idea of it, but I think that doing two project at the same time confused me. The times in which I worked best was the designing part of the task, again this was due to working within the group, bouncing ideas off of each other was a good way of coming up with ideas and being able to combine them. 

Working in the group:  We worked really well together and I think we were able to rely on each other to be in every day and come up with the work, seeing other groups struggle with this kind of commitment made us more keen to work closely as a team and I do think that we did that really well. We didn't have any disagreements, but we just talked things over if we thought there was a better way of doing things. I think that everyone in my group contributed a good amount of work.