Poster Design. Opinions Please. [Archive]

druma

12-10-2006, 06:50 PM

Hi everyone.

I wondered if I could have some opinions on a poster design. It's the seventieth anniversary of the opening of the Golden Gate Bridge next year and I've given myself the task of designing a poster to celebrate the event. This is the final version (I think) of a concept that has been through many changes. Previous versions were very Deco and 1930s, but I resorted to this simpler, cleaner version in the end. One thing that concerns me is the colour of the bridge. I used some reference photographs that were shot in a clear blue sky with the sun beating down; giving the bridge quite an orange appearance. Another thing that bothers me is the simplification of the architecture. I found it quite difficult to strike a balance between stylization and recognition. Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

druma.

http://img475.imageshack.us/img475/7870/goldengatebr3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

MPI

12-10-2006, 07:14 PM

I think that's the best looking thing I've seen in a long time - excellent work! Love the angle; love the swoops; really nice.

My only negative comment is on the photo-style clouds up against the poster-style bridge graphic. I would find it more pleasing if you did a similar simplified treatment of the clouds.

Seapony

12-10-2006, 07:21 PM

I agree, fabulous perspective and excellent work. Because of the GGB's distinctive color, it is very easy to identify...or more to the point, it's the first guess folks will likely make when they see a bridge in that color.

I agree with the clouds, another good alternative is to increase their transparency, blending (fading) them into the blue sky so as to hint their presence, particularly the ones behind the bridge. Besides, in real life your eye will either naturally focus on the detail of the bridge or clouds, not both.

I'd also move the type away from the edge of the live area a bit more, almost centering it within that little space.

:)

Edit: Whoop, I've caught something. The top cable is a little unstable and wobbly (as in earthquake) near the left corner where it meets the support. I'd smooth it more.

12-10-2006, 07:25 PM

Seapony

12-10-2006, 07:28 PM

it would be nice to see some info or something inbetween along with the other type. Perhaps somemore information wabout the bridge or something. Off course this typography should be in something like 10 or 12 pt font though.

Good point. I second. ;)

I noticed that the last couple of posters seem to be omitting info like that—I wonder if it's a trend or something that I'm missing.

:)

mylkhead

12-10-2006, 07:41 PM

Yeah i really like the angle. And I second the comment about the clouds. It'd be cool if they were a more simplified and suggested version

budafist

12-10-2006, 07:54 PM

Agree with others - Love the angle of the bridge. So dynamic and interesting. I think the colour is fine.

Clouds - perhaps try vectorising it to give it a flatter look? It's too realistic at the moment so detracts from the the bridge.

Type is too close to the right hand side. I would move it over a smidgen.

Some more info for this poster would definately be nice. Anniversary pieces generally have dates. 1936 - 2006?

1ooScreamingTrees

12-10-2006, 08:32 PM

you nailed it.

love it.

maybe look at some detailed kerning issues such as between the "E" and "R" in anniversary. While you're at it, I might try reducing the th in 70th...just see if it works better.

frankster

12-10-2006, 09:35 PM

Ooooh, lovely! I see so many images of the GGB living in the Bay area, but this one really stands out! I had a similar design that I wanted to make a lino print from, just for the walls of our home, but other projects got in the way. You've made me think about getting back to that now.

Jriddim

12-10-2006, 09:40 PM

really really nice.. ditto to what MPI said about the clouds

druma

12-10-2006, 10:23 PM

Thanks very much!

All very good points. It's nice to have such specific comments. I'll work on everything that's been mentioned!

I like this forum.

Thanks again

druma.

Trick54

12-10-2006, 10:42 PM

That looks great!
The only thing I might try is: the top cable, behind the pole structure, maybe open up the angle a little bit so it fans out more.

Skyler

12-11-2006, 05:03 AM

- 'th' in '70th' should probably be in small caps and superscript. I feel that '70' and 'Anniversary' to be the draw of that line without anything to distract your viewers.

- The clouds look great, IMO, however there are 'clouds' and then there are spots of light blue that look like you spilled vectorized coffee on your print. Specifically the area of light blue color spill right behind the bridge doesn't seem right to me.

- I'm not sure about the cable being so dramatically twisted. I understand the perspective, and it really is a good effect, but after looking at it for a while it started to bug me. I think both cables should follow each other in a way that makes sense.

Ms.O

12-11-2006, 06:36 AM

Beautiful!

However, I have two comments:

- I'm not sure about the cable being so dramatically twisted. I understand the perspective, and it really is a good effect, but after looking at it for a while it started to bug me. I think both cables should follow each other in a way that makes sense.

I sort of agree with this. I sometimes turn my work upside down or reversed to see if I can get a new perspective on things. I actually like the way this looks upside down better in a way, except that the dramatic twist seems (in both versions) to be a bit too much.

Also, there is something funky happening with the cable behind the post...it's not following the curve currectly...there's a bend/kink in it that doesn't look quite right.

Just some thoughts...

http://www.onieward.com/ggb.jpg

EDIT: Edited to say that the cable curve doesn't have to be perfect, or follow perfectly the lines of the actual bridge cables. What you've made is more than suggestive and descriptive of the GGB that some leaway in the curve of the cables actually adds a stylistic approach to a real object...which looks cool.

frankster

12-11-2006, 06:49 AM

Is the bend in the cables something that you have made up entirely for interest in the piece, or is it a result of shooting a photo of the bridge to work from with a fisheye or other unusual lens?

12-11-2006, 06:50 AM

I reaqlly think the inital upward design is the most sussecfull. It adds a contrast to what it normal every day. Alot of posters I see are just an image or something in regular view. That fine at time but, I think what has been done here in the perspective is ingenious and would highly recommend keeping it the inital way- besides for adding a tad bit more typography of course.

The origional perspective draws me in more so then when its turned upside down becasue I can't really tell what is in representation before I take a closer look at the poster. When you put it upside down you lose the mystery that would otherwise help to create interest for passer-byers. At least in my opinion.

I just think its really interesting how you have taken a normal known object and turned it into a abstract or even non-representational design that also communicates something representational also. cause at first when I look at it its the beautifull dynamics of piece that drew me in. I didn't know what it was or what you were trying to say and at that point didn't care. Then I become so interested in it that I looked to the golen gate bridge text and made that connection. I would prombably go as far to read a paragraph of two on poster if included. Thats how sucessfull and engaging I think it is.

With that said, I beleive that a posters main goal is to enage. If you do this but, your aesthetically off a tad or something doesn't look right then that can be promblem. However, I don't think anyone here will disagree with me that your graphic is communicating a bridge. So if your communication is sucessfull and your engaging the viewer I don't think fiddling around with such little little technically incorrect things matters much(in my opinion).

again… great work,lol.

Samakimoto Graphics

12-11-2006, 10:33 AM

Awesome work!!!!

I agree. As a viewing your work from this side of the world, I would love to see a brief history of the bridge seeing as it's an anniversary.

druma

12-11-2006, 12:09 PM

OK. Several people have commented on the arrangement of cables behind the tower. All valid points. The peculiar “kink” in the left hand cable was a problem. If you can imagine a real suspension bridge, the cables have a smooth curve, swooping down to the platform. I think my confusion between making it recognizable and creating an abstract form has caused this problem. I think I agree that this cable should follow the curvature of the cable that extends from the front side of the tower, rather than follow the line created by a real cable on a real bridge. Thanks for picking that up.

There were no reference photos taken with a fish eye lens (or similar). The idea started with me drawing the long swooping lines of the cables on paper. One of the photographs I studied was taken very close to the tower – with very strong perspective – which appealed to me. The reason for the gross exaggeration of perspective and abstraction was simply to grab people’s attention. When the bridge was built it was a great feat of engineering and a stunning piece of architecture (still is!), so I wanted to try and present the bridge in a refreshing way – to make people look again.

Some previous versions were a lot more complicated, but in the end I realised there was no point in having anything compete with the bridge itself.

The first ten versions of this poster had the bridge shown the right way up – ie. as if stood at the base of the tower. I wanted to exaggerate the enormity of the structure even more, so I turned it upside down – as if you’re laying on your back with your head facing the tower, gazing up at this monumental bridge.

I’m glad that some of you agree that it would catch people’s attention. I’m definitely gonna add some info about the bridge.

Personally, I prefer the bridge in my original post – upside down. I think it really adds to the vertiginous sensation.

There are plenty of good comments for me to think about. I’ll look very closely at the type, and the quality of the clouds (vector coffee stains).

Haven’t got time to write anymore- my lunch break is up.

Thanks again

druma

Virgo Nightingale

12-11-2006, 02:05 PM

I do like the original poster... made me a little dizzy though! :D

reuber1

12-11-2006, 02:25 PM

I can only post quick right now, but excellent poster. I like it.

(gra-ph!c-D'sig-nah)

12-11-2006, 02:31 PM

The original poster was best....if you go with the second one...I think the cables should be less curvy!

panzer

12-11-2006, 02:41 PM

nooooo leave the first one alone :(

i really thought everything about it was EXCELLENT
as people have said the type should move to the left abit, if only to give the printer some leeway

CamarotaDesign

12-11-2006, 03:57 PM

I like Ms. O's version much better. Simply because the other bridge is upside down. I do think the cables would need to be massaged out a bit, but unfortunately that upside down bridge is not working for me.

As someone that has driven over the golden gate bridge hundreds of times, I do not for a second picture it upside down the way it is in the original version. Ms. O's version feels much more familiar to me.

Thats not to say that the first isn't a great composition and very dynamic, but it just doesnt look right to me. 2nd version is very dynamic as well, and has the "correct" view. Also, the headline at the top works better for me. Just my two cent opinion though.

Ms.O

12-11-2006, 04:20 PM

I do like the original poster... made me a little dizzy though! :D
Well, me too. Seriously. But then again, I was staring at it intensely. I'm not sure someone looking at the poster would do that quite the same way. And having never driven across it, maybe that's the way you DO feel...HA!

I was just throwing out the other version as a way to look at it differently...not necessarily suggesting you do it that way. And as tz said, leaving it the original way "...adds a contrast to what it normal every day." That's very true.

If you didn't change a darn thing (except add a little more info), it would be an awesome poster, imho. Very striking.

captain spanky

12-11-2006, 04:42 PM

reeeeeeeeeally good. I love it. leave it as in the first tho.. i much prefer when it makes me feel a little dizzy so it feels like i'm looking right up onto the sky like that... :)

CamarotaDesign

12-11-2006, 04:50 PM

I really do like the first version, but It just doesnt look that way when looking at it from below. Also, in order to see it at that angle (if possible because it doesnt seem the way it looked when I've looked up at it) I think you would have to be standing off of the bridge and in mid air. The golden gate bridge has become a part of my life because of all the times going over it and this just doesnt feel familiar, it's almost uncomfortable for me to look at it at that angle. Like I said that, its a great composition either way.

Silence04

12-11-2006, 04:56 PM

stunning, absolutely stunning. incredible job!

i do agree about moving the text to the left slightly...

Broacher

12-11-2006, 04:59 PM

To abstract the perspective realism at one end was a design decision. A good one? Depends. Does this selective distortion really engage the reader (the stated objective)? It engages anyone who knows better-- artists, draftsmen, etc..... but as a drawing error-- or, the unfinished possibility of something unanticipated? The bridge collapsing in some strange way?

I keep asking myself, what, if any, is the conceptual message introduced by this distortion, and does it serve to convey anything about the event or bridge itself? Or is just to accommodate a more dramatic layout? In short, is the distortion justified from a communications standpoint? Does better layout justify unexplained distortion?

Or am I missing something editorial? Given the historical significance and national importance of this symbolic structure, frankly.... I expected something 'extra' beyond a pretty picture. Pretty as it is.

ecsyle

12-11-2006, 07:02 PM

That is FRIGGIN AWESOME

Love it.

druma

12-11-2006, 08:07 PM

In short, is the distortion justified from a communications standpoint? Does better layout justify unexplained distortion?

That is FRIGGIN AWESOME

I love the diversity of comments in this forum. ;)

To be completely honest with you, Broacher, my intentions were very, very simple; to condense the awe inspiring beauty of the Golden Gate Bridge into a two dimensional image. Nothing more. Obviously I can't claim to have achieved my goal, but I had a lot of fun trying. This was essentially an exercise - to see if I could.

It's interesting to hear the opinions of people who are very familiar with the bridge. I never intended for this to be an accurate, physical representation; but I certainly appreciate your comments. I've never been to America, let alone San Francisco!

Hopefully I'll get some time tomorrow to work on this image.

Cheers

druma :)

ecsyle

12-11-2006, 08:13 PM

It reminds of of driving under the bridge as a kid. Laying in the back, looking up at it. Too cool.

Silence04

12-11-2006, 08:52 PM

It reminds of of driving under the bridge as a kid. Laying in the back, looking up at it. Too cool.

that's what it reminds me of too... looking up at a giant bridge for the first time and being overwhelmed with a Larger-Than-Life feeling...
you've really captured that Larger-than-life feeling and put it in to a single image, fabulous! :D

Ms.O

12-11-2006, 09:07 PM

I've never been to America, let alone San Francisco!

HA! That's hilarious! Wow, even more reason to say "right on" as far as the poster goes.

Originally Posted by ecsyle
It reminds of of driving under the bridge as a kid. Laying in the back, looking up at it. Too cool.

that's what it reminds me of too... looking up at a giant bridge for the first time and being overwhelmed with a Larger-Than-Life feeling...
you've really captured that Larger-than-life feeling and put it in to a single image, fabulous! :D

That's it exactly!!

daSnarf

12-12-2006, 03:31 PM

I have to say....that is OUTSTANDING.

Well done.

druma

12-12-2006, 04:08 PM

OK. Some alterations........

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/2977/goldengatepost2rh7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I've changed the path of the left hand cable - it's a little less dramatic now (only a little). I've applied a little blur to the clouds. I did go part way to creating some stylized clouds, but i think it would require greater attention and more time (I was thinking of curved bands of colour, sweeping across the image; almost wave like).
I've tried to sort out the type. I've added the date, but I do intend to add some copy (at some point), although I was having difficulty deciding what to write. I found out some very interesting facts about the bridge (how long it took to build, how many rivets there are!)

Almost forgot- I've gone some way to resolving the issues with the cables behind the tower. Let me know what you think.

All comments welcome.

Thanks

druma.

Broacher

12-12-2006, 04:23 PM

More than anything this work reminds me of Guy Billout.

http://www.guybillout.com/

(And maybe that's why I'm looking so hard to find that extra 'thing'!)

I wonder what Druma's poster would look like -- without the type in the image? It has that, as someone said, childlike 'daydream' quality, and it's very strong. This is an image that benefits from any scale that you can give it. That open, free cloud space. Maybe it would work just as well, or better, if the type was moved below? Or not at all? The bridge's unique colour might be all you need-- maybe with a stylized 50 somewhere to let the viewer make the connection. It's evocative nature makes the 'less is more' approach a premium direction.

Seapony

12-12-2006, 05:08 PM

I still see a kink in the top cable where it meets the support and overall the curve is still off. It really should be in keeping with the whole stylized direction and be sweepingly smooth throughout to imply that the exaggeration, though "unrealistic" is intentional to push the feelings of drama, scale, etc.

:)

Jackimalyn

12-12-2006, 05:17 PM

i dont have time to elaborate, but i love it. looks amazing, great work

druma

12-12-2006, 05:34 PM

WOW! I've never heard of Guy Billout before.

Gorgeous. Thanks for posting that.

Funny you should mention dropping the type and just having a number (you said 50, but I assume you meant 70). That was part of a previous version.

There was a painting I had in mind whilst working on this. I can't remember the name of it, or the name of the artist, but it was a very stylized number 5 - in a cubist/ futurist style. Painted in the early 20th century. If anyone knows what I'm talking about, please let me know what it was.

thanks

druma.

dyers78

12-12-2006, 06:26 PM

that's coooooooooooool!

RWakefield

12-12-2006, 06:35 PM

Wow.

Really impressive. Fantastic work. Colours look great - the design is unique and eye-catching and just... well... wow. I'm sure it's going to be a big hit when it starts popping up all over the city!

R.

cj2a

12-12-2006, 06:46 PM

Love this poster...the angle is so fresh and unexpected...nice job!

cornfed

12-12-2006, 06:56 PM

Are these going to be printed? You haven't mentioned where they'll be used or anything. Is it just for fun?

I love it!

Ms.O

12-12-2006, 06:56 PM

It's looking really good, druma. Should be a big hit!

druma

12-13-2006, 05:57 AM

I'm sure it's going to be a big hit when it starts popping up all over the city!

Are these going to be printed? You haven't mentioned where they'll be used or anything. Is it just for fun?

er.......well it was supposed to be for fun, but now I've got this far I suppose I should look into selling it/ having it printed. I'd like to get in touch with someone who deals with this sort of thing - maybe someone from the local council? - dunno. If anybody's got any ideas about who I should contact, then I'd be very interested. I do intend to print it, but only a few copies - one of which will hang on my living room wall.

druma

druma

12-13-2006, 07:28 PM

1ooScreamingTrees

12-13-2006, 07:32 PM

I'm tired right now - do anniversary dates contain two dates? It sort of makes it look like the bridge died :o

I guess bicentenials and the like list both dates - bleh.

I need coffee or sleep.

druma

12-13-2006, 08:26 PM

I'm tired right now - do anniversary dates contain two dates? It sort of makes it look like the bridge died

The thought did cross my mind; but if someone were to look at the poster in five years time, they might ask when it was it's 70th anniversary. I thought about writing "opened in 1937" or "completed in 1937" - try and make it sound less dead?. Not sure, though.

OR... do I simply write 2007? I can't believe that just occurred to me, sorry. I'm tired too.