Hi,
Just a few suggestions on the three questions:
1. What is the problem today?
There is already a good community around artwork, but there are poor efforts to
coordinate human resources and a shortage of useful documentation. Some people
in the forums have already pointed out the process isn't really a secret, but
it seems so to others because there isn't enough publicity and clear docs that
explain how the planning, design and selection process works. The community is
frustrated in part because they don't understand why certain a design is chosen
(especially if the design in question does not chime with their candidates).
Some designers are frustrated because there is not enough documentation in
place that spells out what is being asked of them. The result is a lot of
wasted effort in the "wrong" direction and not very good feelings about the
designers' roles in the
overall process.
2-3. How can we solve it? And execution?
- More cover material for the community that explains the entire design
process. Once a design is finalised, a statement that presents the design to
the rest of the community, answering the most oft-asked questions. E.g.: What
were the starting aims of the process, and what does the design say about
Ubuntu?
- Better guidelines and/or kits for designers that includes some very
elementary but essential items, e.g. a palette (not just a sampling of
previously accepted colours), or theme components. At the moment there is some
disagreement over the colours that should be used, whether other colours (if
any) should be combined with the "palette".
- Contrary to some views, audience and message does matter, because design
tends towards functional/communicative as it is towards artistic/creative. All
this work is going towards certain markets or viewers. Who are these viewers,
and what are they to get from the design? This should be one of the starting
points in the planning process -- establishing image and audience. It might
seem irrelevant to a "meta-debate", but it's part of how the design process
should be approached and, eventually, executed. It's also one of the things
that gives consistency in the visual experience, because everything will be
working towards a common goal or trying to say the same thing to users.
Consistency usually indicates that a good amount of thought went behind the
entire process, rather than something b
eing thrown together because the parts were at hand.
As for some execution details, the wiki and forum could probably do for now.
Artists looking for feedback specific to their designs can open up separate
wiki/forum pages and link to them on the Hardy page next to the thumbnails, so
that a comments section on the main page will contain comments on the general
process, while separate sections are available if the public wishes to directly
contact the artists (e.g. via the artists' pages).
In addition to "Forum Ambassadors", any important dates/deadlines should also
be posted to the wiki -- IRC and the mailing list are fine for the design
"team", but the rest of the community shouldn't have to root up months of
archives and transcripts trying to figure out what's happening. Having a
roadmap up for everyone to see adds to the impression of transparency, that the
"team" has got itself together and is making progress. When someone asks, all
the Ambassadors have to do is link people up to the proper documentaton and
field additional questions. It avoids sending mixed messages and confusion.
Overall, the resources are there, but better direction and more communication
are needed to mobilise them properly.
Regards,
Misosaki
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:25:11 +0200 (CEST)
> From: lasse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ubuntu-art] Let one thousand flowers bloom
> To: ubuntu-art@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Message-ID: <33994.84.208.22.2.1190633111.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
|
