Planning! moderators report

 Planning - Moderators report

Points of guidance: 

1) The strongest work had clearly been supported by focused research, detailed planning, attention to detail and a strong, sustained central concept based solidly on the requirements and details of the brief, as reflected in focused, unambiguous Statements of Intent.

2) The best work used a variety of images on the contents, with page numbers on the images anchoring them to the written contents, and appropriately laid out and sized text.

3) Work should be polished, sophisticated, appropriate work to reach a high standard

4) The stronger magazines chose their fonts with discrimination (not relying on standard body-text fonts to create sell lines or the masthead) and showed control in terms of size and leading

5) Some of the most interesting work questioned issues of normative gender stereotypes

6) Was clear that where candidates had conducted focused research into the codes and conventions

7) The best work used a variety of images on the contents, with page numbers on the images anchoring them to the written contents, and appropriately laid out and sized text.

8) candidates produced excellent pieces that were either simply not mainstream enough to support the industry context

9) Magazines where excellent front covers were not matched by the quality of the contents pages; for example, no sub-headings, limited use of images, little/ no copy, no use of columns or use of a wide variety of fonts, inconsistent column structure, too much white space, very little in terms of actual written contents, font sizes which were overly large in order to fill the space.

10) Candidates needed to fulfil both specific lists of requirements of the brief and all production detail.