First version posted:

soup fork

Elizabeth’s tutorial edit:

Take two for me, 10/16, trying out a different font and using a gradient:

soup fork3More tweaks…

soup fork4


10 responses to “sensemakeage

  • Elizabeth

    I really like both this and the beaker image! Both are funny and I think will help a lot to explain what quoiromantic actually means. I hope you don’t mind me ranting about design a bit.

    On spatial distribution: you want to consider the design principles of alignment and proximity. A strong alignment throughout the entire image looks a lot better than trying to just wing it, so I would recommend using a ruler to align all parts of the text together. If you break the alignment, you want to break it REALLY OBVIOUSLY and keep everything else in the same alignment, so it doesn’t look like a mistake. And you want to strongly group the parts that go together

    The other two basic principles of design are contrast and repetition. (CRAP is a mnemonic you can use to remember these.) You’re good with repetition, but I think it’d look way better to go bolder with the contrast. The cyan and the green colors are too similar to one another, so right next to one another like that they clash, and sorta look like a mistake. I also think the weight of the fonts are too similar, so they sort of clash as well. I’d pair it with a much lighter sans serif font. The most important words are the ones you want to put contrast on, and you can play with the size of the text to emphasize words, too.

    I made a quick version of this so that you can see what I’m talking about. I made the cyan a little darker (maybe a bit too dark?) because I didn’t want those to be the brightest parts of the image, since quoiromantic is the most important word, so it should stand out the most. And I put a gradient overlay of the cyan > green to include both colors in a way that doesn’t clash.

  • Silvermoon

    Maybe also keeping the same font for all the stuff on the black background- if you want the quoiromantic bit to stand out, maybe bold it?

  • epochryphal

    hm hm hmmmm — for quoisexual, would you say it’s sexual orientation, or sexual attraction, that doesn’t make sense? (or both?) and does that parallel quoiro exactly, or mostly, or a little?

    (i guess i use it to mean both? but have focused more on attraction as the weird, and its subsequently making orientation weird. thinky thoughts)

WP account not required to comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: