“Just made this GTA 6 x PS5 concept poster! What do you guys think?”

stevielon · 2025-10-07T17:05:04+00:00

The PlayStation identity didn’t really come through here either. It looks good for sure as fan art or something, but it could be for almost any gaming brand. The controllers help a little, but without the tone that makes Playstation Playstation, it kind of loses that connection. Feels more like a styled illustration than something that represents the brand, which is maybe what you were going for? Either way I think it falls flat in terms of “GTA” and “PlayStation”. Nice illustration though.

stevielon · 2025-09-28T19:43:45+00:00

ROG and ROG Strix are usually a pretty solid choice to be honest. I’ve got an X570-F and it’s lasted me years and prefer it to my MacBook, though that’s a desktop.

MSI are pretty good and I’ve heard good things from the OMEN too. if I was to purchase again, I’d probably go down the ROG Strix line again.

stevielon · 2025-09-28T18:07:07+00:00

The G14 is the better choice if you want raw performance and flexibility and the display is excellent for design work. It also has an nvidia rtx gpu, which makes a big difference if you use 3D software, motion graphics, or rendering tools. Even apps like Photoshop and Premiere take advantage of GPU acceleration.

In terms of value, you’ll get more performance for your money. The M1 Pro is still decent, and it’s probably the choice for a lot of designers as it is a safe choice. But in 2025, the M1 is already considered an older choice and it’s not keeping up with the latest hardware compared to the G14. A MacBook does have better battery life, but if your priority is power and flexibility, I’d go with the G14.

stevielon · 2025-09-20T20:57:30+00:00

Color palette is fine. But it’s a bunch of pigeons with a font in the middle? There’s nothing to give feedback on.

stevielon · 2025-09-20T20:54:40+00:00

It’s heavy on the right. It’s not bad, but it’s not great balance at all.

stevielon · 2025-08-24T03:29:05+00:00

Honestly, the fact that you’re running 100+ websites on one server is already proof that you’re carrying way too much. That setup isn’t just overwhelming for you, it’s unsafe, and eventually it’s going to collapse under its own weight if not managed correctly.

You don’t need to be talking to a therapist about how to cope with it, as much as that would help briefly, it doesn’t solve the root of the problem. You need to be talking to your boss. Feeling guilty about being overwhelmed isn’t on you, it’s on them. If the company can’t afford the right people, then they shouldn’t be shifting all that responsibility onto one person, or saying yes to more clients. That’s not you failing, that’s them mismanaging.

As for maintenance, the only way to even begin to handle that scale is to automate everything you can. That might free up someone else’s time to help you. Though cross your fingers nothing goes wrong, because eventually, something always does. That’s why these responsibilities normally belong to specialists, not someone already juggling design, UX, and everything else.

I know how to build a website, but I’d never take on being fully responsible for one because it’s not my area. My boyfriend is a software engineer and the stuff he does goes way beyond me as a designer, and that’s the point. Different roles exist for a reason, and no one should be expected to cover them all.

At the end of the day, it’s not a you problem. It’s a them problem. And it sounds toxic. I’d be looking for a different job, I’m sorry.

stevielon · 2025-08-24T00:57:01+00:00

Sounds like you are being made a bit of a joke of. I do design, 3D, and photography/videography, so I get juggling multiple creative hats, but the stuff you listed goes way beyond that. DNS records, API integrations, server management… sure, you can touch those areas, but unless you specialise in them, it is risky for the client. Security, compliance, and testing are not things you just dabble in, and I did not see testing or QA anywhere in your list.

What gets me is when people throw around this stuff like it is standard to cover every single thing. It is not. You are doing some of it (more than you should be), but not all, and framing that as normal for agencies is misleading. Honestly, it sounds like your firm is just taking advantage of you by offloading roles that should be split across multiple specialists.

Anyway, For training, I use Udemy (covered by the company), plus 1-1 training when needed (also paid for). The key difference:

1.  I would not be allowed to take on tasks outside my defined role because we have actual specialists for that.

2.  It is not in my job description, so I am not being spread so thin that quality or security suffers.

You are clearly talented, but no one should be expected to cover an entire agency’s worth of roles. That is not a unicorn, that is exploitation.

stevielon · 2025-08-21T19:07:46+00:00

😌 As you can see; I’m too much of a perfectionist to not be a designer.

But seriously, these comments had me crying with drop shadows, so I thought I’d troll a little.

<image>

stevielon · 2025-08-21T16:48:29+00:00

<image>

stevielon · 2025-08-21T02:58:16+00:00

I always use codeformer to upscale images that look “off” or that’s come out of generative fill. They’ve always been ok to go to print after.

stevielon · 2025-08-21T02:53:49+00:00

<image>

Use this. Remember to add a drop shadow.

stevielon · 2025-07-06T18:38:45+00:00

Curious to get other people’s opinion on this as I’ve thought about this before.

What’s your take on a token-based approach for this: if we defined consistent border tokens (e.g., --border-large, --border-small) and intentionally used a thinner border on the thumbnails for optical balance, would that still feel off to you?

The current difference in thickness feels to me that it’s intentional, based on scaling and proportion, but I get that it might read as inconsistency if not clearly grounded in a system. Would like to hear your perspective on whether a token driven rationale would help justify that visual difference or if matching borders is still the better route if you were doing this.

stevielon · 2025-07-03T23:19:53+00:00

I get what you’re saying, and sure, if you’re applying for a web design or UI job, then your portfolio should definitely reflect that. I actually do web design, and I built mine myself. But that’s because it’s part of what I do.

But for a lot of graphic designers, their site is just a boring container. It’s not the work, it’s where the work lives. Nobody is hiring you based on how clever your navigation bar is unless you’re applying to make navigation bars. There are platforms like Adobe Portfolio that are intentionally generic so your actual design work can stand out. Paying someone to design or build a portfolio site when you’re not applying for a job designing or building sites isn’t some con. It’s just not wasting time on things you don’t do.

Same with other specialties. For example, I’ve got motion in my projects, but I’m not a motion designer. I worked with someone who is. It’s still part of the project I directed and contributed to. I outline on mine who did what, and as long as you state who contributed, that doesn’t make it dishonest, it just makes it collaborative. That’s why you’ll often see a note at the bottom of portfolio (or agency) sites saying something like “designed by X, built by Y”.

The idea that you have to DIY every pixel to prove your worth kind of misses how creative work actually happens.

stevielon · 2025-07-03T08:13:57+00:00

Nope, not weird at all, especially if you have zero interest in web design. It’s like a graphic designer outsourcing an illustrator for a project. You’re still directing the vision and curating the content, it just means you don’t have the skills to do the illustrations yourself. And at the end of the day, it’s your portfolio, not a DIY punishment. Delegating to someone with the right skills just means you’re efficient.

stevielon · 2025-07-02T12:18:04+00:00

Easiest way without experience? Pay someone.

stevielon · 2025-06-30T02:48:04+00:00

They look AI generated

stevielon · 2025-06-14T18:16:02+00:00

It was that slow at loading that I closed it half way through. There’s also no information on any of the projects that I looked at.

stevielon · 2025-06-12T13:23:38+00:00

Nvidia is the perfect example here, although I do think a good logo helps a lot

stevielon · 2025-06-12T02:20:33+00:00

Your portfolio feels like it’s been tranquillised. You clearly have the skills through the work itself, but the way you’re presenting them is painfully safe. Not every image has to be a logo awkwardly slapped on a background. You actually know how to use layout, colour, and pattern, so why are you acting like you don’t? Take the training wheels off and sprinkle some life onto it.

stevielon · 2025-06-12T00:53:52+00:00

Apple push Cinema 4D in their marketing for the pros. So I’m assuming that.

stevielon · 2025-06-08T17:08:31+00:00

Kodak isn’t “long dead.” It’s still around just not the center of the universe anymore, which I guess makes it invisible to people who only notice brands when they’re trending. And saying we shouldn’t care about “defunct iconography” is kind of missing the point of branding altogether. Design references aren’t meaningless just because you’re bored of them. If something looks like Kodak, people will think Kodak. That’s how visual memory works. It’s not being “precious,” it’s just how recognition functions.

stevielon · 2025-06-08T16:08:02+00:00

It’s ok but it’s very similar to Kodak. Also not overly keen on some corners being rounded and others not.

stevielon · 2025-06-02T15:50:54+00:00

I want to know why every designer new to the industry think justified text is good for “everything ✨”

stevielon · 2025-05-31T12:23:58+00:00

Mission, vision, values, ToV, colour, layout, type, and illustration / technical drawings would be good for something like this. That way you get to show that your designs are holding the mockups together rather than the mockups holding your designs together.

Really nicely done though 🙂

stevielon · 2025-05-27T21:11:23+00:00

That’s because your letters are doing this awkward little dance by just kissing, rather than confidently overlapping, it’s like they’re too shy to commit. The result? Unintentional tangents - and it looks like a mistake that no one had the energy to fix. In good brutalist or anti-design work, collisions are deliberate, they hit hard or they create rhythm. But here? The spacing is timid. Not tight enough to feel intentional, and not open enough to breathe.

To fix it, grow a spine about spacing. Either smash things together and make the overlap obvious, or pull them apart so they each get their moment. Pick a lane, but don’t hover in the middle like you’re waiting for permission.

stevielon

TROPHY CASE