OUGD504 - Brief 1 - Secondary Research: Design Process

OUGD504: Brief 1: My Design Process

Secondary Research: Design Process 

If I am expected to produce a leaflet on the design process I first needed to be aware of exactly what this means. I have my own personal design process but I wanted to look further to see if there are generic conventions that are adhered to in order to substantiate if my design process works and if there is a standardised process available. 

I firstly looked at a range of secondary data from internet sources to identify a number of variations of the design process, this included info graphics that were punchy and had high impact to wordier definitions that explained the process in detail. The first source I found interesting was from Discover Design, a website produced by the Chicago Architecture Foundation as shows a simplified cyclic process with stripped back definitions covering the basics of design. I like this definition of the process as it covers the basic design process and can be transferable across all design treatments from architecture  to fashion to graphic design, I also like the minimal infographic anchored by more detailed definitions and feel this is an approach I could develop when creating my own initial ideas. 

http://discoverdesign.org/design/process

I then looked at more detailed variations of the design process and found this article on Tech it out UK  which documents a more detailed design process consisting of 13 steps. The picture below highlights the summary (full document found in link) however I feel this variation is too wordy and distracts from crucial components, it would also be difficult to arrange aesthetically within a leaflet publication.  

http://www.techitoutuk.com/knowledge/designprocess.html

Deciding that some variations were too wordy I became interesting in looking at pictorial representations of the design process which included a lot of info graphics, image 1 I found fun and surprising relatable however was not very informative so would be inappropriate for my leaflet. Image 2 I initially though was too childish and unengaging however when I actually read the information found this to be the most relatable design process to my own. I found the stages detailed and accurate to graphic design although was put off by the informal childish aesthetic. Finally image 3 I also found to be a successful design process as it stripped it back to the basics that can then be tailed to the individual subject or person I liked the illustrated aesthetic as it looked well designed and even found the lack of colour made the infographic simple, easy to follow and undistracting from the actual point. Overall I  related to the process of image 2 however was personally attracted to the aesthetic and simple design of image 3. 

Image 1

Image 2 

Image 3