❣️ Penn Week 6a – Explainer Critique

Welcome to our first full critique!

You’ll notice that each person has been assigned a first responder (1R), second responder (2R), and notetaker (N). The first and second responders (1R and 2R) will kick off our discussion as soon as the presenter has finished sharing their work – they’ll serve as our revolving panel of critics. The notetaker will listen carefully and document the highlights of the critique on our document.

👉Please also submit your project URL on Canvas.

When critiquing, these are the questions we should consider

  1. Is there a clear point of view with this project? What about the content, art direction, writing, or design adds to this impression?
  1. How is this project organized? Does the structure match the designer’s intention?
  1. What is the relationship between the design and the content?
  1. What are the strongest moments of this website?
  1. What parts were weak — what would have helped? 
  1. Any questions left unanswered?
  1. How might the designer continue to evolve this piece?

We’ll have a timer set for ~10 minutes per presentation.


Critique Order

  1. Larry (1R: Will, 2R: Antonia, N: Rachel)
  1. Will (1R: Antonia, 2R: Rachel, N: Jason)
  1. Antonia (1R: Rachel, 2R: Jason, N: Cindy)
  1. Rachel (1R: Jason, 2R: Cindy, N: Sherry)
  1. Jason (1R: Cindy, 2R: Sherry, N: Paris)
<intermission></intermission>
  1. Cindy (1R: Sherry, 2R: Paris, N: Cecily)
  1. Sherry (1R: Paris, 2R: Cecily, N: Ruth)
  1. Paris (1R: Cecily, 2R: Ruth, N: Larry)
  1. Cecily (1R: Ruth, 2R: Larry, N: Will)
  1. Ruth (1R: Larry, 2R: Will, N: Antonia)



Notes

Please paste your URL under your name.

Larry (1R: Will, 2R: Antonia, N: Rachel)

  • was personal to him a designer
  • the design mimic the content (feels like diving in)
  • careful attention to the typography
  • playing with different alignments?
  • maybe no css animation in the beginning
  • maybe in future, fix the contrast with the images
  • maybe a box behind them or a highlight
  • parallax