5.2

Campaign – Space to Be

Goal – To raise awareness about the hidden challenges neurodivergent people face in public spaces and inspire communities, designers and everyday people to make those spaces more inclusive. 

 Key message – “see the unseen. Include the unheard.”

                              “Public spaces should work for every mind.”

Target Audience – General public

                                      Urban Planners & Architect’s

                                      Transport authorities 

                                      Shop owners and business managers

                                      Local councils

                                      Families and communities 

Core Idea 

Many barriers to neurodivergent people are invisible. This campaign makes them visible through storytelling, art, and simple explanations of how sensory environments affect different brains. 

Visual Identity 

-              Soft, soothing colours (teals, purples, muted yellows)

-              Clean typography

-              Icons representing different sensory experiences (sound waves, brightness, crowds, etc.)

-              “Glitch” or “highlighted edges” effect to show invisible challenges becoming visible

-              Illustrations of everyday spaces with sensory triggers highlighted

Campaign Components 

A. Posters: “What You See / What I Feel”

Side-by-side images placed in public spaces.

Example: A bright supermarket aisle

·       What you see: A normal shopping trip

·       What I feel: blinding lights + overwhelming noise + confusing layout

 Educational Materials

Infographics – Simple explanations of:

·       Sensory overload

·       Executive function challenges

·       Social anxiety in unpredictable settings

·       Wayfinding challenges

Each end with a practical tip like:

·       “Use simple, high-contrast signs.”

·       “Offer quiet zones.”

·       “Reduce fluorescent lighting.”

·       “Provide predictable information.”

Impact Goal

By making hidden experiences visible, the campaign sparks empathy and drives real environmental change. 

Not just awareness - action.

Reflection

I enjoyed working on the neurodiversity campaign because it allowed me to design with empathy and purpose, focusing on real experiences rather than purely aesthetic outcomes. Researching how neurodivergent people experience public spaces helped shape my visual decisions and made the project feel socially meaningful. One of the main challenges was translating invisible sensory and emotional experiences into clear, accessible visuals without oversimplifying them. I had to carefully balance impact and sensitivity, ensuring the work raised awareness without feeling overwhelming or exploitative. Developing a consistent visual language that communicated complexity while remaining approachable required multiple iterations and refinement. Despite these challenges, the process was rewarding, particularly when the concept began to clearly communicate its message through layout, tone, and interaction. 

Overall, this campaign deepened my understanding of design as a tool for communication and advocacy. It encouraged me to consider accessibility not only as a functional requirement, but as a conceptual driver of the work. I learned the importance of research-led design and how visual systems can be used to make unseen experiences visible. The project also pushed me to think beyond static outputs and consider how design can operate across different contexts and audiences. This has influenced how I approach future projects, particularly those with social or ethical considerations.

Space To Be: An Awareness System for Neurodiverse Public Spaces

Space to Be is an interactive digital project that expands my neurodiversity awareness campaign into a responsive system that simulates how public spaces feel to neurodivergent people. The project allows users to interact with familiar environments, streets, transport hubs, shops and experience how changes in sound, lighting, movement, and signage can cause sensory overload or relief.

Who is it for?

·      The public

·      Designers, architects and urban planners

·      Local councils and organisations 

Why it matters

Public spaces are designed as if everyone experiences them the same way. For neurodivergent people, everyday environments can be overwhelming, confusing, or inaccessible due to sensory overload, unpredictability, and unclear wayfinding. These challenges are often invisible.

This project makes those invisible experiences visible through interaction, encouraging empathy and demonstrating how small design changes can significantly improve inclusivity.

How the brief and outcome combine

-              System Expansion: The original “Space to Be” campaign identity is expanded into an interactive system that works across screen-based environments.

-              Interaction: Users actively engage with the work, adjusting variables and experiencing cause-and-effect, rather than passively viewing information.

Skills to Develop

·      Interactive design 

·      Motion design 

·      Understanding neurodivergent sensory needs

Tools

·      After effects

·      Adobe illustrator 

·      Figma

Research Required 

·      Neurodivergent lived experiences 

·      Inclusive design and accessibility guidelines 

·      Existing neurodivergent friendly spaces 

Reflection

I enjoyed developing this project because it challenged me to work within a defined framework while still making creative decisions. Choosing a brief and outcome required me to be intentional about my direction and consider how concept, medium, and execution could work together. One of the main challenges was ensuring that the outcome genuinely fulfilled the brief rather than feeling superficial. I had to continuously reflect on whether my design decisions supported the core concept and whether the interaction or system added meaningful depth. Managing scope was also challenging, as it was easy to overcomplicate the idea. Through testing and refinement, I learned to prioritise clarity and focus, which strengthened the final proposal. 

Overall, this project helped me better understand my own working process and how I respond to creative constraints. It reinforced the value of revisiting and expanding previous work rather than always starting from scratch. I gained confidence in developing ideas through iteration and self-direction, and in justifying my decisions through research and experimentation. The project also clarified how briefs and outcomes can function as productive limitations rather than restrictions, shaping stronger and more resolved work. This experience has helped me recognise areas of my practice that I want to continue developing, particularly system-based thinking and interactive design.

One Hundred Covers

This project explores generative design as a method for producing variation within a consistent visual system. Using Processing, I developed a rule-based program to generate 100 unique A5 book covers for the limited-edition publication Variations. The emphasis of the work is on the system itself rather than individual outcomes.

I established a fixed framework to maintain visual consistency across the series. I kept the page dimensions, typographic placement, and overall layout constant, positioning a square grid at the bottom of the page and a sequential reference number in the top-left corner. These elements remain unchanged across all 100 covers, allowing the collection to function as a cohesive set.

Within this structure, I introduced variation through the algorithmic generation of a grid of circles. I used random values within controlled ranges to determine the size, spacing, and distribution of the circles, ensuring that each composition is distinct while remaining visually balanced. I selected a limited colour palette to maintain contrast and coherence, while still allowing subtle variation between covers. 

By using Processing to automate the generation and export of each cover as a high-resolution PDF, I treated code as both a creative and production tool. Through this process, I demonstrate how designing systems, rather than fixed outcomes, can generate meaningful variation at scale while retaining authorship and control.

I enjoyed working with Processing because it allowed me to approach design in a more systematic and experimental way than I am used to. Writing code to generate visual outcomes was rewarding, particularly seeing how small changes to parameters could produce significantly different results. However, I also found parts of the process challenging. Translating visual intentions into logic required me to think differently about composition and control, and I encountered difficulties balancing randomness with visual coherence. At times, the outputs felt either too chaotic or too uniform, which led me to repeatedly test, refine, and constrain my variables. Debugging errors and refining the generative logic was time-consuming, but it ultimately helped me better understand how the system functioned and how to shape the outcomes more intentionally. 

Overall, this project strengthened my understanding of generative design as both a creative and technical practice. It encouraged me to shift from designing individual artefacts to designing systems, where the rules and constraints are as important as the final visuals. I found that working iteratively testing, adjusting, and exporting multiple outcomes helped me develop greater confidence in using code as a design tool rather than a limitation. The project has influenced how I think about repetition, variation, and authorship, and has shown me how computational methods can be used to produce meaningful design work at scale. I see this approach as something I would like to continue exploring in future projects.

Title Sequence Workshop 

During the title sequences workshop, I found working with animation in After Effects challenging and less enjoyable than expected. While I liked exploring how typography, imagery, and pacing can establish tone and narrative, I struggled with the technical complexity of the software. Managing keyframes, layers, and timing felt overwhelming, particularly as I was still becoming familiar with the interface. I found it difficult to achieve smooth, controlled motion without spending a lot of time adjusting small details, which disrupted my creative flow. Although the workshop helped me understand the structure and sequencing of title design, I found the process of animating in After Effects more technical than expressive.

Introduction to Motion Graphics Workshop

The introduction to motion graphics workshop gave me a clearer understanding of the fundamental principles behind animation, such as timing, rhythm, and easing. While I found working in After Effects challenging, I appreciated how the workshop broke down complex ideas into manageable steps. It helped me better understand how motion can be used to guide attention and create visual emphasis, even when working with simple forms. Although animation is not an area I naturally gravitate towards, this workshop helped me build foundational knowledge and confidence and allowed me to recognise how motion thinking can inform my wider design practice. It also clarified which aspects of motion design I find most valuable, particularly concept development and system-based thinking, rather than detailed animation refinement.

Screen Graphics Workshop 

The screen graphics workshop helped me understand how motion can support hierarchy, clarity, and communication in digital interfaces. However, I found After Effects limiting when trying to imagine how animations would function in real, interactive screen environments. The work felt more like simulation than actual interaction, which made it difficult for me to stay engaged. I also struggled with timing and transitions, particularly when trying to make animations feel subtle and purposeful rather than decorative. Although the workshop was conceptually useful, I found the execution challenging and less intuitive than static design work.

Automation Workshop 

In the automation workshop, I appreciated learning about efficiency and repeatability in motion workflows, but I found the technical side of automation in After Effects difficult to engage with. Using expressions and automated processes felt abstract, and I struggled to fully understand how they affected the animation without constant trial and error. This made the process feel frustrating rather than empowering, as I often felt disconnected from the visual outcome. While the workshop introduced valuable concepts around systems and repetition, I found the technical learning curve challenging and it affected my enjoyment of animating in this way.

Reflection

Overall, this series of workshops helped me better understand my own design preferences and strengths. While animation is not an area I naturally enjoy, engaging with motion graphics has been important in shaping how I think about screen-based communication and interaction. The experience highlighted the value of stepping outside my comfort zone and allowed me to reflect critically on the tools and methods I choose as a designer. I now feel more confident in recognising when motion is appropriate and meaningful, and how it can support my work without becoming the focus. This understanding will influence how I approach future projects, and the role motion plays within my practice.

Module Reflection 

Overall, I found this body of work engaging and valuable in helping me understand my strengths as a designer. Projects such as the neurodiversity campaign and the generative book covers allowed me to work conceptually and systemically, which I found particularly rewarding. I enjoyed research-led design, developing visual systems, and using tools like Processing to generate outcomes through rules and constraints. These projects encouraged me to think beyond single artefacts and consider how design can operate across series, interactions, or contexts. I also appreciated being able to revisit and expand previous ideas, as this helped me build depth and confidence in my practice. Across the projects, I developed a stronger sense of intention in my decision-making and a clearer understanding of how concept, system, and execution can work together. Despite these positives, I found some aspects of the module challenging, particularly those focused on animation and motion graphics. Working in After Effects often felt technically demanding and disrupted my creative flow, as small adjustments required significant time and precision. I struggled to fully enjoy animation-based tasks and found experimentation more difficult within time-based software. At times, this made the process feel more about problem-solving than creative exploration. Balancing technical learning with conceptual development was challenging, and I became aware that certain tools and approaches do not align as closely with how I prefer to work as a designer.

Overall, this module has been important in helping me better understand my own design practice and preferences. It reinforced my interest in system-led, generative, and concept-driven work, while also highlighting areas where I feel less confident or engaged, such as traditional animation. Working across different briefs, tools, and outcomes encouraged me to reflect critically on my process, from research and experimentation to iteration and refinement. I now feel more confident in identifying the types of projects and methods that suit my strengths, while also recognising the value of stepping outside my comfort zone. This experience has helped me develop a more self-aware and intentional approach to design, which I will carry forward into future projects.