Re-re-revisions...around like a record.

Ah back to square two.. it seems. I felt I was having trouble conveying the dancer in the same manor as the rest of the set. There were some minor legibility issues with a few of the people i showed this icon to. They were mistaking it for a skateboarder or the action of hitting something.
After dealing with this problem, I first made a small revision to the original by splitting the shoe from the pant. I also added the dark blue color to the sleeves, only making the hands the accented electric blue.
Then I revisited the icon all together. I created the second one, with wide legs and skinner pants so you can see the leaning of the figure. Although I think the legs look better, I had to sacrifice the baggy 'phat' pants to achieve this. I noticed just now (after seeing the image small) the arms look a little thin, but I think it's okay because this Dutch style of dance known as hakken (jumpen) focuses on kicking the feet up high in the air.
The final adaption I created shows a girl with a lot of funk and soul doing her thing.

1 comment:

jamie said...

Excellent that you have sought out audience feedback and critically responded by furthering the evolution of your set.

It's necessary for the icons to be read quickly and at a small scale - (for the ultimate litmus test I suggest you review ALL the icons via these low res thumbnail posts).

Dancer #2 is most successful in this regard b/c of the clarity in the legs. I don't know the culture enough to determine whether thin pants are an issue - but once again you are educating us (hakken).

The head & arms need a lot more definition (and surface area). The extreme light and shadow compromises legibility (was an issue with the original dancer too).

Lock down the single color version before you work on the two-color.