“Such a range!” says juror Elaan Ventura Bourn. “Sometimes you feel that when looking at industry publications or going to events, there is a uniformity to design or a current trend. It was refreshing to see so many different sensibilities and approaches in these submissions.”

“I’m delighted to see the ubiquity of design has led us to a place where no clear trends are apparent,” juror Rich Hollant says. “This year, the visual languages were quite varied, and that’s refreshing.”

“Stylistically, while there are trends, there’s really just everything all at once—new takes on old motifs. And there’s room for everything,” says juror Matt Titone.

The exuberant use of color was also cited by several jurors.

“The color palettes across the categories had a freshness that felt rich and alive,” juror Jennifer Mahanay says. “For me, there was this element of psychedelic escapism in the projects.” 

“It was wonderful to see some bold expressions with color and type coming through and tempting to think this joyful visual approach is a result of the world slowly returning to normal after the last few years,” says juror Adam Giles.

I asked the jurors what surprised them most about the entries.

“How Canadian they were,” juror Jason Mannix says. “I was exposed to a lot more of Ontario’s and Quebec’s visual cultures than I was expecting.”

“The amount of CBD companies entered,” says Giles. “It’s clearly a huge growth industry, which the United Kingdom has yet to enter.” 

“It is always surprising to see threads of similarity in submissions,” Mahanay says. “Sexy illustrative typefaces utilized just right. The creative application of a simple concept bent and pushed to the limits. Something that feels old becoming new again and sparking so much delight!”

“There was a really strong ap- proachable tone of voice in a lot of these works,” says Bourn. “[It was] a notable shift from wanting to sound or read like an authority and much more to be on the same level as each project’s intended audience.”

Several jurors commented on the quality of the submissions by students.

“The high caliber of the thoughtfulness in the student work was surprising,” Hollant says. “There’s a lot of hope in that and a testament to the strong advocacy for change in design education.”

“Many of them stood out in their concept and quality of execution,” says juror Chany Lagueux. “In several projects, a desire for sustainability could be noticed no matter the subject.”

“I was extremely surprised to find that the level of design was very much on par with the professional categories,” Titone says. “I don’t remember my own student portfolio being nearly as advanced.”

“I was impressed that the student entries were often visually stronger than the professional entries,” says juror Kristine Matthews. “However, I could see that quite a bit of this may be attributed to the fact that students can be very savvy with mockup tools, which can make ‘fake’ projects look more compelling than real projects [with restraints like] clients, budgets and the number of applications.” 

When asked about their biggest disappointments with the entries, the judges cited a reliance on mockups more than once.

“A large portion of entries used digital mockup tools to show applications that were clearly not part of the actual deliverable of the project,” Matthews says. “For example, many branding projects were shown applied to poster series, canvas bags and packaging, etc.”

“For projects with a certain materiality, I think it is part of the job to see them produced and physically completed when possible,” says Lagueux. “I would love to see more final projects, materiality and maybe even slight imperfections!”

Other disappointments? “There were some really interesting intellectual thoughts and ideas that unfortunately had been let down by the level of craft used to bring them to life,” Giles says.

“At times, it felt that some of the entries cared more about style over substance,” says Bourn. “There was an eagerness to try out an aesthetic without examining if it worked for the actual brief.”

“My biggest disappointment was with some of the excessive per-piece budgets that businesses continue to spend in order to buy hearts and minds,” Hollant says. “While many of these types of pieces can be lovely, the overdrawn lobbying for attention was sometimes iniquitous.”

“So many of the entries were well polished and highly produced—but they were so safe,” says Mannix. “Graphic design has always been an imitation game of sorts, so repetitive tropes, trends and styles are expected. I wanted more visual poetry, authentic attitude, swagger and delight.”

“I would like to see the level of sophistication and visual poetry applied to even more diverse products and media,” Mahanay says. “We should constantly push to elevate in every arena because everyone deserves the respect of smart design.”

I asked the jurors what business, cultural and social developments will alter the role of design in the future.

“Artificial intelligence and robotics will have a strong impact on design,” says juror Sophie Rubin. “The challenge for designers will be to keep a creative and imaginative spirit that the machine won’t be able to replace.”

“Socioeconomic turmoil—from mounting inflation to continued supply chain issues—will lead us to re-evaluate our relationship with objects and purchased goods,” Hollant says. “Design will have to come to terms with its role in how we got here. With these dire conditions, design is poised to lead our various cultures through a global exercise in introspection, simplification, empathy, care and maybe even capitulation.”

“In my design teaching, over the past several years, I’ve started to see a real backlash—or at least pushback—against technology and tech companies in my college-aged students,” says Matthews. “Before, everyone wanted to work for a big tech company—aside from high salaries, it was the ‘it’ place to be. Now, there’s more questioning of that goal.”

“It seems as though the world is changing faster than ever with social media, AI, pandemics, cryptocurrency and political discourse,” Titone says. “Design plays such a big role in communicating all these changes, making them palatable and relatable to the world at large. It’s our job as designers to interpret the roles and functions of these new products and movements and translate their intent to the masses. It’s a lot to keep up with and a big responsibility that continues to be more important as these new products and platforms make bigger impacts on our world.”

Lastly, I asked jurors where they think the design industry is headed.

“As our cultural skepticism about all designed systems increases, I think we will see a more restrained economy of expressive methodology emerge,” says Hollant. “Our next generation is open- eyed and demands a level of inclusivity that will challenge the protected class of design-system creators.”

“There is a strong desire and demand for inclusivity, sustainability and equity in my students, which was not even on the table when I was in design school,” Matthews says. “This is a positive thing that will help to push some bottom-up change in the industry for the better.”

A minimum of six out of ten votes was required for a project to be awarded in this year’s competition. Judges were not permitted to vote on projects with which they were directly involved; I voted in their stead. I would like to extend our grateful appreciation to our jurors for their conscientious efforts in selecting our 63rd Design Annual. —Patrick Coyne ca