steve: full disclosure–the client happens to be a family friend which made this process different than most, but was also the reason we didn’t use a brief.

the scope of this project actually got out of hand very quickly. i chose the packaging as an application to demonstrate the brand’s visual language because i knew it would be needed down the line and was something they could easily visualize. however, during the process the client became overly focused on the mock packaging, talking about how the dimensions were not correct and it was missing the required labeling, etc. this began to consume most of the discussion that should have been spent discussing the logo and branding, which is what i was contracted to design.

in light of this, i drew up a new contract for the packaging to be worked on simultaneously. this is not an ideal situation, but as i said in my post, i think that especially in today’s world, a coherent visual system is more important than just a logo and it was clear that we would not make any progress until the packaging was sorted out. if i had to do it over again, i would not have chosen such a specific application and might have spread it across three or four different mediums.

This series has been very valuable to me for my own work as I move forward and rework some project descriptions, making it more about the process.

Thanks for sharing!

Also nice to hear you taking the time to push them past the standard “quality, service, and value” keywords towards the true authenticity of the brand.

Good work and thanks.