I guess I’ll kick off the comments here. This is in the spirit of teamwork, since we want whatever cover goes on the next issue of STEP to be good if it has our name on it.

Team 1: Your wallpaper pattern is better this round, but the dimensionality of the wall in the previous round is better than the flatness of this one. Merge. Then add a lens flare to cap off an otherwise awesome design.

Team 2: How about some kittens. And lens flare.

Team 3: I choose not to divulge our secrets. But I know this will look great on a news stand.

Team 4: Mic and head are too far apart. Plus, it looks like you’re using a fat head that looks suspiciously like my own fat head. I suggest using a sexy-girl head (or heads) and adding lens flare to win.

Lens flare?? Must be an inside joke.

Team 1: Still groovy. Not much to suggest here other than what Armin said about shading and light sources.

Team 2: No recovery here. As you continue to simplify the design, the concept is being revealed as lacking depth. There’s no relation between the various 100s being depicted and the content of the magazine beyond that there are 100 winners. I wish we would have seen one attempt at another source of imagery. I still think your round 2 design was the most visually engaging.

Is there a reason you’re not using the STEP typefaces for the cover lines?

Team 3: I love the depth of this illustration. I’d ditch the production trick. It’s unnecessary and would distract from the illustration itself.

The cover headlines need some heirarchy instead of all being the same size. And bullet points? Seriously?

Team 4: I concur with most of the previous comments on this one. There’s too much disconnect between the microphone and the figure. The reader’s eye actually focuses on the blank space between the two. I kinda liked the hidden trophy image in the microphone. Clever.

its hard to choose, but my favs are 1, 3, 4 and 2. I like the subtle trohy in the mike, but it look like a martin glass at first. Might wnat to punch it up just a little more.

Team 1: I do like the wallpaper concept. It just seems a little to busy for me. I no longer enjoy reading the text because eye wants to go everywhere. I liked the wallpaper with wall concept but the solid color seemed to detract from the pig. Maybe add some grass instead of a flat surface or something.

Team 2: I had a great teacher who had us read, Hey Whipple, Squeeze This, and I distinctly remember it said something like, “to never say what you show or show what you say.” Which is exactly what you are doing. The reason I liked the one hundred spelled out with the pictures and the pictures included abstractly was I it said it without being in your face obvious. Also the human and emotional aspect of the decisions and the interviews behind the award is not being shown.

Team 3: I love the idea behind the lock. I just figured out what was bothering me about it. Maybe I’m just prodigious against red and black but they remind me of a high school yearbook or my college brochures from AI or the Academy. I am still concerned about the text size and weight. What I liked about the 4th one was the die-cut/fold-over front cover idea because it invited you to interact with the concept of the lock.

Team 4: I agree with most of what has been said about this round for your design. Where I didn’t exactly like the actual trophy in the last round I liked the idea of it speaking and the motion it created. I don’t like the mike and interviewee for the same reasons I don’t like Team 2’s pictures of 100. It is as if you don’t think the audience will understand you so you dumb it down. Now Round 3 while a bit out there gave the reader, whom is artists, the benefit of the doubt that they would get it.

Stephanie, Thanks for your comments, and I will do my best to not sound defensive.

I’m not exactly sure how our design is “dumbing it down”. The goal is to get the viewer to understand the concept on first glance and then give them something a little extra when they pick it up. This is also not just a straight forward idea of what is in the cover line. What is on the cover is a metaphor. I’m sure STEP doesn’t sit all 100 winners in a booth and record their answers.

It looks like we might need to work on getting a better representation of the “designer” and work on the placement of said designer. I stand by the concept. I think our design fills the request of being poster-like just as good or better than the others.

TEAM 1
The original iteration of the pig is still the most true to message. The first version reads as a group of pigs, where a single pig has been chosen as the “best”. Round 4 and 5 read as a lone pig in a stylishly-wallpapered room. I can only see the wallpaper working if the larger pig is eliminated, and one of the pattern pigs was awarded.

This is at once, the most fun and the most biting of the four covers.

TEAM 2
I’m going to disagree with the comments thus far. While the concept is borrowed from BADG itself, I like it. These photos place the number 100 in a context outside the magazine. They ground what is otherwise just a convenient decision (100 winners).

I can’t tell you that I like any specific iteration better than another, but this concept works for me.

TEAM 3
Fantastic. It’s amazing how many ways your message can be approached visually. Without a doubt, this is the strongest. You’ve found a way to make the concept manageable and deep at the same time.

In the midst of this, you’ve built on your already-intriguing approach. We all know that winning a design competition isn’t just a matter of using the right typefaces. While a winning entry might appear simple (the dial) - a successful design is beautifully complicated (the inner lock mechanics).

TEAM 4
Thanks for working so hard to apply this concept in so many ways. No need to work on Round 5. Round 2 was way ahead of its time.

To all the Teams: My goal been to get each Team to; first grasp a good concept, then design a workable execution, and lastly slog out the details. What I didn’t want was everyone going back to the “drawing board” every Round for a completely new design. I’m trying to take all four Teams to completing four usable covers for us to choose from, so hopefully my comments will lead to that end.

Team 1: I have been trying to move the pig cover closer to a finished piece and here’s where I’ve been going. Everything about this cover is in the “first glance”. You are grabbing people at first glance, but you’re losing them on the “closer inspection”. The closer inspection phase [ when they read cover lines and go over every detail in the picture ]—if we are successful is what takes them inside. That’s the cover’s job. I understand your desire for “unfinished” feel, but it needs to look intentionally simple and not just unfinished. Others apparently feel the same way hence the odd cast shadow comments. Give me a cover that on closer inspection I don’t question “Is that all there is?”

Team 2: I’ve been trying to move Team 2 to a concept or at the very least a compelling cover line. I liked Round Three’s design better, it had a nice look, but it lacked cover lines. As with Team 1 your first glance was an interesting design, but on closer inspection you’ll lose the audience, and starting all over isn’t moving us forward. Give me a cover that when I read the cover lines the “100s” pictures make sense, and then that makes me want to open the book.

Team 3: I’ve been trying to move the lock/decoder ring to simple. Either concept can work but the execution needs to be simple. On first glance this still doesn’t look like a lock dial, and on closer inspection, and I can’t read all that text [ and to be honest I don’t want to ]. Give me a cover that convinces me that when I get inside I’ll learn design secrets from the winners.

Team 4: I’ve been trying to get you to stick with a cover direction. Every Round has a completely new cover design. Trends was a good concept, but after Round Three you threw that out. Design Speaks is a fine concept too, but I have two completely different designs. We need to settle on a cover and work on that. Gus like the spiral—and so did I—but the copy [ closer inspection ] was lacking. Others liked the talking trophy, I liked the spiral more. If you want to stick with this direction, here’s my concerns; Can’t use the silhouette because it looks too much like the iPod. Plus we used a “firehead” silhouette on last year’s annual [ and we debated the iPod issue then ]. Give me a cover that when I look at it I know its either a lock dial or a decoder ring, and then when I read the text I want to go inside the read what design says “when it speaks” or what the current trends are.