Some more try-outs for my process folio. Last feedback moment with Livin, I’ve had some critique, so I was forced to think a bit more about the organization of my process folio.
The first critique was about the fact that I put my blog in its entirety in the book. To me, this was logical because I wanted to give an objective view of my past year, by putting everything chronologically in it – together with my pins on Pinterest, and other cultural activities that influenced me.
But the question arose what the value would be to put the same content in a different medium, without changing anything. Coming to think of it (and after discussing with other people), there’s not really an extra value of just copy-pasting the blog in a book – except if you put it on a nice paper stock, with some nice extra printing features. But by doing these extra printing features, the actual content isn’t reinforced, so they’re more like a gimmick to me.
The solution came to me this morning: instead of doing this gimmicking I should make some editing changes (while still holding onto the chronology-idea).
After re-reading my blog, it became obvious I frequently tell the same things twice. Also, my blog isn’t really publishing-ready in terms of well-constructed sentences, etc. In fact, my blog is more like a sketchbook because it captures my first thoughts about things, without thinking of an overall story to tell.
So, I will still be using my blog as a backbone (notice the underline: a backbone is used to build things upon, so it’s not the only thing that will be in the process folio), but I will do some critical selecting in the material. This might lead to spreads with little or no text at all – I will only use text as an argument in my story, as extra information for certain images, or as an important counterpoint in my process. This way, the process folio will still be the way I intended it to be: chronological, chaotic at times, but with a certain strength to it (in Dutch we like to call it ‘Gebaldheid’).
Next, the question was asked what to do with the distinction between own sketches/work and research material. Since my process folio is chaotic (all of the projects running through each other), and I believe research isn’t only done at the beginning of a project, I will be making no distinction between the two in terms of image-handling or position in the book. With this in mind, I came to the solution of making the distinction subtly in the typography by changing the color of it. Research spreads will be showing black typography, while sketched spreads will have red typography. As you can see on the spread below, I will have a small index at the beginning of every ‘step’, with the differences immediately apparent. These colors can also be seen at the page numbers, categories and date at the bottom of every page.
Also, i’ve got an idea for a cover. It’s taken from the very first pages of the book with all the briefings. Actually, it is one of the briefings, so the book starts at the cover really. As you can see, it’s a blank page, cut off to the left, but if you look at it in real life, you will see it runs over the spine trough the back cover – and it shows the briefing page of the process folio itself, which I think is a nice reference the book itself. Next to this, I think it’s a good cover because it looks like the infamous ‘blank page’ at every beginning of a project.