After the gallery walk, I was mainly surprised to see how different people interpreted our newsprints differently. For example, one person found our “Oar Clip” deign (the one that includes a snowboard binding) cumbersome, while somebody said it would be easy to use. Additionally, our sketch of it in the pew chart was not very detailed. Next to the pew chart sketch, people commented that they were unsure how it would function. On the more detailed sketch, however, people noted that the drawings were descriptive. There were also mixed reviews on our “Oar Wrap” design. Some people questioned the velcro’s durability, while others praised the simplicity of the design. We also included our concerns about the materials which probably helped others think critically about our design and generated more constructive feedback. I think the feedback we received helped us decide that our “Loop” design was the most ineffective and that a carrying handle will not be necessary. We also could have done a better job at being more descriptive while describing our “Loop” and handle designs because a lot of our feedback asked for clarification.
We also got mixed reivews on our design specification chart. Some people praised our specs while others questioned their wording. We corrected our table accordingly and are now confident in our specs. We will also include a “Goal” section describing the purpose of our product.
Aside from the comments on our products themselves, we got feedback on the legibility of our newsprints. Our sketches were done in pencil which made it difficult to read and understand our sketches. They also did not stand out or pop. I can see why having an eye-catching display would be important in the professional world.