R094 TA3: Creating and Reviewing Digital Graphics
The techniques the assessment expects to see evidenced, how to save and export properly, and how to write a review that actually scores.
Vector techniques
Vector software: Inkscape, Illustrator or Affinity Designer. This is where the logo and any scalable element is built.
| Technique | What it is for |
|---|---|
| Shapes and paths | The basic building blocks |
| Node editing | Moving, adding and removing points to shape a curve precisely |
| Bezier curves | Controlling a curve with handles rather than by eye |
| Boolean operations | Union, difference, intersection and exclusion, which is how most marks are constructed |
| Align and distribute | Making spacing exact rather than approximate |
| Grouping and layers | Keeping a complex drawing editable |
| Strokes and fills | Outline and interior, including gradients |
| Convert text to paths | So the file no longer depends on the font being installed |
The four Boolean operations
- Union joins shapes into one
- Difference cuts the top shape out of the one beneath
- Intersection keeps only the overlap
- Exclusion keeps everything except the overlap
Once text is paths it cannot be edited as text, so keep an editable version as well. A printer without your font would otherwise substitute one and change the logo.
- A path is made of nodes. Select a node and its handles appear, and dragging a handle bends the curve. Fill is the colour inside and stroke is the outline.
- Union merges shapes, difference cuts one out of the other, and intersection keeps only the overlap.
- Shapes stack. The last one drawn is on top, and raise, lower and group change that.
Raster techniques and exporting
Raster software: Photoshop, GIMP or Affinity Photo. This is where photographs are handled.
| Technique | Why it is the right way |
|---|---|
| Layers | Elements stay separate and editable |
| Adjustment layers | Colour and tone changes that can be altered or removed later |
| Layer masks | Hiding part of a layer without deleting it |
| Selections | Marquee, lasso, colour range, and refining an edge |
| Crop and resize | Resampling knowingly rather than by accident |
| Levels and curves | Correcting exposure and contrast properly |
| Retouching | Clone and healing tools, used sparingly |
| Filters and effects | Applied on their own layer, at a judged opacity |
Non destructive editing means the original pixels are never overwritten: adjustments live on their own layers and masks hide rather than delete. It is the difference between a file you can revise and a file you have to redo.
Saving and exporting
| Keep | Why |
|---|---|
| The layered working file (.svg, .psd, .xcf, .afdesign) | It is the only version that can be meaningfully changed |
| Every version, numbered | So a rejected direction can be recovered |
| Exports per destination | Print, web and social each need their own |
A naming convention that sorts correctly, bookshop-logo-v04-horizontal.svg, and no file called "final".
Testing the graphic
- View it at 100% and at the final physical size, not just zoomed in
- Print a proof if it is going to print; screen colour lies
- Check the logo at 16 pixels and in one colour
- Check contrast for any text on an image
- Open the exports on a different machine, which is how missing font problems are found
- The background sits at the bottom of the stack.
- The photograph goes on a layer of its own, above it.
- The logo goes above that, so it is never painted into the photo.
- The text sits on top, and can be restyled without touching anything else.
- Flatten it and they merge into one image, and that is no longer editable.
Reviewing the finished graphic
The review carries real marks, and it is where most work loses them by being too positive.
What a review has to do
- Compare the graphic against the brief, point by point. Quote the requirement, say whether it was met, and show where.
- Report feedback from others: the client, a stakeholder, or people from the audience. Record what they said, including the criticism.
- State honestly what works and what does not, with reasons.
- Describe specific improvements and how each would be implemented.
- Reflect on the process: what you would plan differently next time.
The difference between the bands
| Weak review | Strong review |
|---|---|
| "I think it went well and the client liked it." | "The brief required the mark to work in one colour. It does, but at 16 pixels the gap between the two shapes closes up, so the favicon reads as a single blob. I would redraw the icon only version with the gap widened to twice the stroke weight." |
| "Everything worked as planned." | "The photo shoot overran because I had not booked the location for long enough, which cost a day of editing time. Next time I would schedule the shoot two days earlier than the plan requires." |
Identifying a real weakness and explaining how you would fix it is evidence of understanding. Claiming everything was perfect is evidence of the opposite, and it is marked that way.
Key terms you must be able to define
- Boolean operation
- Combining shapes using union, difference, intersection or exclusion.
- Node editing
- Adjusting the individual points of a vector path to shape a curve.
- Non destructive editing
- Editing with layers, masks and adjustment layers so original pixels are never overwritten.
- Layer mask
- A greyscale layer that hides part of another layer without deleting it.
- Adjustment layer
- A colour or tone change stored as its own editable layer.
- Convert to paths
- Turning editable text into vector outlines so it no longer needs the font.
- Proof
- A test print used to check colour and detail before a full run.
- Working file
- The layered master file from which every export is produced.
Flashcards
Say the definition out loud before you flip the card. Retrieving it from memory is what builds recall, reading it again is not.
Reach the top grade on this topic
- Work non destructively, so every change can be revised rather than redone
- Evidence a genuine range of techniques, not one tool used repeatedly
- Keep the layered master and export separately for each destination
- Test the graphic at its real size, in one colour, and on another machine
- Review against the brief point by point, with honest criticism
- Give specific improvements and say how each would be made
Mistakes that cost marks here
- Editing pixels directly instead of using adjustment layers and masks.
- Delivering a logo as a JPG, with no vector master and no transparency.
- Judging a design only while zoomed in.
- Converting text to paths with no editable copy kept.
- Writing a review that claims everything succeeded.
- Giving improvements with no explanation of how they would be implemented.
Boolean operations are how most logos are really built. A crescent moon is a circle with a second circle subtracted from it, and once you see that, half the logos on the high street come apart in front of you.
Knowledge check
Check you could explain this
Five written questions in the style of the real paper. Write a full answer, then let the marker check it against the mark scheme.
- LOriginal pixels are not altered
- LChanges can be adjusted or removed later
- LThe consequence of destructive editing
Working non destructively means the edits live on their own layers, as adjustment layers and masks, rather than being baked into the image, so the original pixels are never overwritten. That matters because design is iterative: a client asking for the crop to be less tight or the colour to be warmer is a two minute change on a masked, layered file. If the same edits had been applied directly to the pixels and the file flattened, the only way to make that change is to go back to the original photograph and redo every step.
- LComparison against the brief or requirements
- LFeedback from the client, a stakeholder or the audience
- LHonest identification of strengths and weaknesses
- LSpecific improvements, with how they would be made
A review should compare the finished graphic against the brief requirement by requirement, saying for each one whether it was met and pointing to where in the work it was met. It should report feedback gathered from the client and from people in the target audience, including the criticism rather than only the praise. It should then state honestly what works and what does not, with reasons rather than opinions. Finally it should give specific improvements and say how each would be implemented, for instance redrawing the icon with a wider gap so it holds together at favicon size, rather than a general statement that the logo could be clearer.
- LIt cannot be enlarged without quality loss
- LWhy that matters for a client
- LJPG cannot store transparency
- LWhy that matters for a client
The first problem is scale. A JPG is a fixed grid of pixels, so at 600 pixels wide it can only be made smaller, not larger; the moment the client wants the logo on a banner, a van or a printed poster it will blur and show compression artefacts, and the only fix is to redraw it. A vector master such as an SVG would have scaled to any size without loss. The second problem is transparency, which JPG cannot store at all. The logo will therefore arrive with a solid white rectangle behind it, so it cannot be placed over a coloured background or a photograph without that box showing, which rules out most of the uses a logo exists for.