am I a complete beginner at graphic design? I thought I had the grasp of basic concepts but I was harshly corrected when posting designs on the internet should I start with more simple things? I am autistic about book covers but every time I try to get a bit creative I get told it just doesn't look that good
here is another one that got negative feedback as well
for some reason this got the most positive attention out of them all not meaning its good but people thought it was a lot better in comparison to the others but I just simply disagree I think it looks really boring? is that how its supposed to be? or am i too new to make appealing creative designs
I am also planning to read the "thinking with type" since I got a lot of people pointing out my dogshit font choice. for some reason I wasted my time reading a book about website design because I found it interesting
and also if you want to bother can you explain something like this book cover? what does it mean it looks like visual vomit to me but it probably has a really good design for it to be sold on amazon
>>461239I get the top part with a pattern at the top the fail and why on opposite sides to balance the design and the nation in the middle I also get the author part the middle part is what I don't get
>>461240>>461239Is just a basic design with a clean layout, it uses rules of thirds, z-pattern eye movement, hierarchy, repetition, consistent spacing and kerning, color theory etc. Those are some of the basic principles you need to study, specially for designing books, is better to just spend a few weeks studying visual communication, design fundamentals and gd history, you will start noticing the difference within days.>>461238Websites are based on printed media, there's a lot of similarities between them and you can learn a lot from each.
>>461235>>461237>I think it looks really boring? is that how its supposed to be? or am i too new to make appealing creative designsEveryone sucks at first they just look more like sketches rather than finished works, look at the vimeo link below his designs sucked at first and a few years later he ended working for Star Wars and other hollywood films. If you're serious just study, practice and try to develop a good eye.There's a designer's kit in the link below try to come up with your own process, is way better if you start by writing down each step of the process, like a roadmap that you can follow (you will become faster and better just by having a system). For example you can write down the brief and goals for the project, the tasks and problems you have to solve, the research and questions you need to ask, your brainstorming and idea generation process, the rules if you want to impose them. Then you can make a moodboard (or a reference sheet) for ideas and visualizing the style or mood you're going for. Then sketch first on paper or tablet using thumbnails and black and white, leave colors and type for later, Then scan or take a pic and use a vector software like Illustrator for creating artboards with different iterations that you can improve. There's also lots of AI tools for speeding up your process.Also If you're working for a client then is really useful to write down the reasoning behind each of the design decisions you took, that way you can persuade and convince people, as well as present your work and offer different options. That's how you start getting good results and become a professional.>Watch:https://vimeo.com/55846250https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzarZJXEDmIhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyjQ3qtvjBw>[The_Designers_Toolkit]https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1MsmW3nuVUJ_IrUhkudErkgkrYW2v1YCs?usp=drive_link
>>461235I guess it is somewhat cute but terribly sloppy. no element has any meaningful (visual) relationship to anything else. also I just feel like I have seen the main idea a thousand times before. if you do what everyone else does, make it at least better then them.>>461236gimmicky without elegance. looks forced and thus self-important - without living up to the claim.>>461237you are correct. it is very boring. but at least it is clear, which is important. just why the fu is the text not aligned and what is the reasoning behind "crime" and the grey background not sharing a color?>>461239it is *not* a good book cover.it just is a book cover.at best.>what is the feedback you received elsewhere?
God does all the graphic design work. This board is going to be so fucking aids.
>>461262are you saying that god himself does graphic design work or did you mean to say "god does all the graphic design work here suck"
>>461260>no element has any meaningful (visual) relationship to anything elseelaboratethe text misalignment and color thing are a mistake I am aware of
>>461267I asked ai since its gonna take ages for you to respond on this board and all of them say the same shit but the eye is watching him the cross is casting the shadow how do they not connect? i am baffled so I really would like you to elaborate on it
>>461267size, thickness, shape language, alignment.things don't snap together in order to build a larger whole. instead it is a bunch of random elements.>what feedback did you get before???
>>461268>ages
>>461269Not very useful stuff like this
>>461270well I didn't realize you lived here, sorry
>>461269well how would you adjust it? I am not saying make it perfect or fix every mistake but give me an example of how to make it "snap" together even if its a quick edit
>>461271helpful would be the right word my bad
>>461271autistic takein that case keep it like that or pay me real dollarz. then Ill guide your baby, clumsy hand with more effort for sure, hun
>>461272I am sure your ability to accept and effectively incorporate criticism will make you a star designer in no time! your designs are already so promising it is crazyyyyy
>>461273ah. I thought you grouped my answer together with this one >>461271as "unhelpful".cannot do that right now. maybe another day. in the meanwhile just give it a try?
>>461277Okay, I was wondering why you suddenly got all aggressive lol
>>461268>the cross is casting the shadowWithin the context of the black and white design, it is doing the exact opposite: the cross is casting a beam/ray of illumination that spreads as it fills the foreground, not casting a shadow in a beam of light from a source behind it- the cross IS the only logical source of light in the image.In any 2D image that uses perspective to create an illusion of depth, accurately representing light sources and direction are key to making the effect be cohesive and comprehensible, *especially* if you intend to take artistic license and add incongruous elements like shadows that don't follow the shapes of the people casting them.The design still has to "work" along the same rules of geometry and physics that would apply were it a full color photograph using real elements....otherwise you are just making it more confusing because they eye/brain seeks out ways to resolve what doesn't look right even where it might exist in complete darkness in the scene. As long as what looks right *could* be there it works, but if what might explain things *cant* be there the confusion is perpetually unresolved.
>>461279Thanks for the detailed reply but what I mean to say was "the cross is making the person cast a shadow"
