The negotiation between doing too little and doing too much.
This was one of the iterations for a visual identity I developed for Curaty. It wasn’t the chosen design obviously , but I believe this iteration had a lot of storytelling merit.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/13663/13663db5187f69d0fd2e74b4b704d91c3dfd1382" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/61f42/61f42d0527cb3a6eff3e33d502dd9d7db975a45b" alt=""
The concept revolved around the idea of a frame, and how placing an object inside it could shift its meaning. Add a person, and it becomes a room. Hang a painting, and it feels like a window. Place an object inside, and it turns into a shelf. With no object in it, its like an elevation of a Tesseract! There were so many layers to its usage and narrative potential.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b2961/b2961137842af9f1af996bed987f865ff7795674" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa2f4/aa2f46703309227d6291933bf05d7d929cb7e54a" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/37a46/37a467e4ce85076a446cb57bdb7d7070624916a9" alt=""
We decided to scrap this option internally before even presenting it because it strayed too far from the original identity. It felt like a more abstract take on the chosen design, which is still rooted in the same framing concept but leans more on typography.
Looking back, I understand why we didn’t go with this—the chosen one was a cleaner, neater choice. But sometimes, especially in design, I find myself wondering: how much is too much?