Additional Testing via Survey Monkey

While we tested our near final concept in Rotterdam, we also made the decision to broaden our results and feedback by testing the concepts via survey monkey. We sent 20 friends and family around the globe the below. We made two different versions to test the two different routes.



Click here to take survey

VIDEO

In order to make the video for the final presentation of the assignment, the team developed a simple storyboard as a guideline.

In it, different stages of the process are shown, including those moments where the struggle to get a good concept took place.

A planning for the shooting was also done.

Creating a video

ASKING FOR GUIDANCE

After having a new idea, it was important to talk with the course's coordinator, A. Visser. The idea about meeting with him was to confirm the direction we were aiming to since we had already misinterpreted the assignment before.

The main outcome of the meeting, was that our idea, though reflected the classes theory, was not sufficient on giving information about the city. It was important then to go back a bit to our first idea, where Delft was presented too literal.

Once again, the team got together to come up with a final concept placed in the middle of the previous: not so literal as a delft map but not so abstract so it doesn't provide information,

The team gathered together

ALMOST THERE

After the user test, it was clear that a new concept had to be developed.

The team got together in order to come up with a new idea!

The main goal of the meeting was to discuss how to unify all of the previous maps into one, in order to achieve a clear concept which transmits Delft's tourist information while using subtile cues learned during the course.

The concept maintain the beauty of former concept 1 while incorporating icons from concept 2 to give more information. In addition, street names were added as was presented on former concept 3.

New concept

CONCEPT TEST 1 - ROTTERDAM (March 27)

Because three concepts were made, it was necessary to narrow it down into one to do a first user test. The goal of this quick first test was to narrow the concepts into 1 idea in order to generate a final concept with the resultant key elements.

In order to select which concept is to be chosen and tested a visit to the tourist info office in central Rotterdam took place. This visit was mainly done because at tourist info points they are use to deal with visitors and have an idea about how to indicate direction to them.

From it, it is important to highlight that the three concepts have elements to incorporate on the final version of the map.

According to the person interviewed, concept 1 has a better overview but is lacking information, which can be confusing. The color contrast works to indicate direction.

Concept 2 is clearer about pointing museums and shops. This is achieved with the icons. Concept 3 is useful because of the text. Street names help the visitors to locate themselves on their own map.

Because concept 2 is the clearer based on shopping and cultural visits, it was used for a quick street test.

For the test 6 randomly picked people on Rotterdam center were questioned. Two questions were asked; firstly, if they could note any differences between both of the concept versions. Secondly, which direction would they walk when looking at the concept as a map?

In general, people didn’t understand the relationship between the concept and a map. The difference that was mainly noted was the gray color changing from one version into the other one. The user

s did not see a clear distinction between shopping and cultural visit icons. They didn’t relate the images with the activities and they wouldn’t walk on the desired direction.

In conclusion, the team has to develop the map further. The icons must be clearer. It is necessary to use more “direction guide” tools in order to point the route better.

The team considers that it may be a good idea to unify the three concepts. This means, use a nice overview with color contrast and pop out for direction, include shopping and cultural-sites icons and add the street names for better comprehension of the map.

NEW CONCEPTS

On Friday March 22 the team got together in order to discuss different concepts that had been elaborated after the presentation. Three concepts were discussed.

Concept 1

Basically, the concept uses fading in and out of lines in order to indicate direction. In addition, high color contrast (yellow-black) is used to guide the visitor into the right direction.

Concept 2

The concept shows museums and shops with an icon. It also adds different shades of gray in order to indicate walking direction. In addition, it uses pop out to highlight the icons.

Concept 3

This concept is based on street names; it seeks to provide more information to the visitors. The size variation of the first letter of each street as well as the text direction gives the idea of which way to walk.

INSPIRATION

After the presentation we sat down to talk about new concept development and looked for some images to inspire our selves!

CONCEPTS PRESENTATION

On the course lecture on March 15, concept 1 and 2 were showed to the class group and professor. During this presentation several remarks were pointed.

In general, the concepts stepped out from the assignment boundaries; not using a geometric circle and incorporating a line to mark the route were the main objections. The map concepts were too literal for the assignment’s purpose.

The use of color and popping out (by using drop shadow) brings a highlight effect to those places that required standing out. These are ideas to keep in mind for the posterior elaboration of concepts.

The team requires further development of the map. The presentation served to a better understanding of the assignment itself.