Last week I had the honour of judging a category in the D&AD Student Awards. Joining me was a whole host of luminaries from the design world, who'd judged the professional category the day before (including post-judging drinking partners Erik Speikermann and Rian Hughes). As well as judging the Typography category I was also responsible for setting the brief, which was based around our work for Ministry of Sound's Saturday Sessions.
Aside from the esteemed company and the incredible amount of other work on show, the biggest thing that grabbed me about the judging was the variety of work, not just in our category, but in general. It was also interesting to see how people had interpreted the brief I'd written, and in turn to work out how much this should colour my judgment of their work.
There are a few things I wanted to talk about that relate to the work itself and the process of judging it, so here goes:
1. Stylistically and conceptually there was a lot of variety.
What was refreshing from my point of view is that there wasn't one clear trend in ideas or styles (even though the brief was quite prescriptive in areas). Having seen student projects in the past, this was my one worry, but thankfully there were myriad approaches to the brief. What I was afraid of was a lot of very tidy and formal Swiss layout; this fed into a lot of work, but thankfully was generally used as a starting point, rather than a destination. In places there were some truly detailed approaches, such as Joel Baker's 468 character set bespoke font.
2. How do you judge student work?
The shortlisting phase of the judging got quite heated at times, mainly because there were a lot of different opinions about work and what actually constituted 'good' pieces. I think it's also important here that I mention we didn't award a pencil - nothing really poked its head right up there, but a lot showed promise. I think this made the judging all the harder, especially with my first-hand knowledge of the brief and the client. For me, there was a little too much work that fell into easy clichés, or conversely whose reference points were just too far way from the brand they were meant to be representing.
3. There was a lot of debate about what is a poster and what is typography.
This caused quite some chatter - on the one hand some judges saw this brief purely as a single-sided printed A2 poster, while others applauded those students who challenged the conventional notion of a poster and what it could be (and perhaps is becoming). For that reason James Isbell's entry was the subject of great debate, mainly because it existed outside of these standard formats and looked to add an element of interactivity and user-generation to its process.
4. What is an 'on-brief' response?
It's interesting writing what you think is a clear brief and then seeing it interpreted in so many different ways, and ways that you initially might think are 'wrong'. One of the big lessons I've learnt from the judging day is how subjective even answering a brief can be, and that actually it's good to see details challenged and interpreted in the loosest of ways.
Have a look here at the winners for this category and you'll see what I mean about the variety and quality of the work.
Also well worth looking at is the Illustration winners, all working to a great Little White Lies brief set by Church of London.
And finally, if you want another take on this year's Student work, then take a look at the NB Studio Tumblr.