 developers but in the artistic field for me it's really really unusual so I think it was really a nice approach to open your practice graphic designer. So after the UI design I wish here to talk about typography and I would like to talk about velvetyne type foundry and OSP foundry. I like that work and I use the phone families. I will give you a few examples of VTF and OSP so there are two small foundries. You can download the fonts, you can use them and there are some fonts on Github repositories so you can download the fonts, you can create your own version and distribute your own versions and in this case I advise you to look at the readme file because they are different licensed in open source. So in our work we have to choose font families for websites and for apps and what can we choose? So we can pay a font in a foundry and thus we pay the work of typographers and they are really really beautiful typefaces and then you also have three fonts some are properly drawn and others are less properly drawn and in this three fonts you have the open source fonts. Here I'm giving you two examples from velvetyne type foundries. First you see the Femme Gardeau which is used for the Elysée website. This is the presidential services website and here you have the Elmont which is used for a theater in the city of Lyon. So why is it interesting to use open source fonts here? I would say that first you have a quality of the drawn typefaces because of the mastery and because of the experience there are really remarkable typefaces and then for example here there are also typographers who are designers, artists who have an experimental approach and who really push the limits and question their tools, their questions, their practice and for example here for open source publishing the typefaces have really particular appearance and it creates a really specific atmosphere for your website for example and I think when we use open fonts we also fight against uniformity because mostly we use Roboto, we use open source fonts, we use source fonts pro and here for me it's really refreshing to see new typefaces and unexpected design. I would like some other words about what it also brings to us to use open fonts. In this case for example if you choose VTF or OSP fonts it's for me it's really a strong artist choice from you because you also support their open approach and you can create your own versions and distribute it so you become an actor and actress of the open source field and it's really great for me to jump in this field and also as associations, as public organization or as freelance designer if you don't have any budget to buy a typeface I think it's really a good alternative for you. Look at this font and see if there's something that you can use. So what else about these two foundries? VTF and OSP which is a Brussels organization, they try to give a talk estimate to print this year but unfortunately they won't give it. So they also give workshops so here you have the font fork workshops and you were invited to create your own versions of the Cooper Ewits. During two days they accompany you to create your own versions and on Sunday evening everyone shows its results. Here you have a few examples. So if you have a typeface drawing basis I do recommend you to follow in Brussels OSP workshops and VTF it's more in France and Paris. Otherwise just go there discuss with them look at the results and that's what I did two years ago. To finish with part I would like to say a few words about originality and copy. So these are the logos of copyright and and copy left and maybe in the audience designers might think I won't share my design I won't share my work because it's my original work and I wouldn't say it I do understand it but you could open a selection of your projects because if you share your techniques the designers who will use it will create something completely different and developers are used to help each other they give a technical help which is only a starting point and when you share your techniques you allow creativity and you allow everyone to progress. So for me we really add skills knowledge and intelligence and I think it's really for designers it can only be be enriching for us and when you really really that you have help or inspire someone I think it's really rewarding. So we saw how designers share their work now we will see how an organization can share the creative process and I wish to talk about modular rebranding. My goal here is not to give my opinion about the logos what I want to point here is how designers can commit in this open process. So in this case how do we show design process how what are the raised questions and how to think further. In June 2016 Madeline launched an open consultation and maybe you read things about it for the new logo and the new identity during the one of the bi-annual meeting international meeting and this was in London. So I think here you can see the process was open to everyone it was more than 1200 people everyone can read the process and you also can give feedback so for me it was a first remarkable point. Then we can follow the creative process and then process on that blog and the third point is that they open the seven logo suggestions to the comments. So here you have the first seven concepts. I read lots of comments from all over the world people saying I like this one because it's what Madeline represents for me and I don't like this one because what I wish to remind here is that the comments are based on the knowledge the experience and the culture of everyone and it's not so easy to judge a logo because in this case first it will be used for years and in this case it's for a big and important organization and brand and just to compare it something else I will give you a comparison in the architecture field. If you ask the audience to choose a building in the architecture contest on which criteria would the public be able to judge and to decide if this building or this building will be acceptable because in architecture you studied resistance to the materials, drawing techniques, you have art history, architecture history and you design projects and these points make that you are a little bit more capable than something else to judge a building and for me it's the same graphic design and whatever field it is you have to acquire technique and artistic basis to assess the field and what you are looking at. So to come back at these seven concepts I would like to give some tips for non-designers to look at them. So for example when you have this the question you can have is does it work in high scale for tarpaulin for example, does it work in small scales, does it work in colors and does it work in back and right? What are all the meanings each of them conveys? Which is the rhythm in each of them? Are there tensions between the between the empty and the filled parts? Also how is it integrated in the graphic history? Does it add something new? Is it to come on? Is it too ordinary and does it respond to your client's requests? Because here you have Mozilla but you also have its users, users in all over the world and volunteers in all over the world. So for me in this case it's really really difficult to create and to judge these suggestions. So this year's case will enforce my feeling that we do need a toolbox to learn to look at them. We need designers to share our knowledge and so the way I see how designers can commit in this case is that share with your family, with your colleagues, with your friend, your knowledge, how do you look at these logos, which are the qualities and the weaknesses of each of them and which one is acceptable and which one is not and that's what I wanted to point out here. So talking about toolbox, I will here give you tips to share and practice with your team. You know designers usually used to say, I don't understand, the outcome is different from my design and then you ask for the reason why the answer is, oh I'm sorry, the answer is yes but it works good enough. I would say no. Design is not about good enough because designers don't put in a hit and miss way graphic elements. We don't throw in the air elements that would just drop on a page and create a random composition. Familiar design is to answer to particular proposals by offering an ICT basis, by offering ICT quality and base on research and reflection and that's why our design is strong and justified. And so why do some developers feel free to modify our design? Here I would like to point out one reason and for me I think there might be a lack of understanding of what design is and what it brings. So for me when designers give a design, it's based on what they have learned on their researchers and their practice and I would like to go back to the etymology of the word design. So it comes from the Latin word the sign, the mark the sign and unfortunately in French in the 18th century we lost the desing, the purpose, the ID part and we only kept the drawing part so unfortunately we lost it in French but in English we have the ID and the drawing, the purpose and the drawing and that's why when we give a design they are meant decision and based on theory, on ICT sense that we do develop during our stories and during our practice. So for me we have to complement each other to create the best project that we can and here I will give you some tips to share your design and practice with your team because we don't have time to talk about design principles and call off principles for example. So I would say that before showing any mock-up and design you should introduce your graphic and artistic choices so you give context to your stakeholders to get on board. Then if in your discussion you are told okay I don't like it, make it bigger, make it yellow and put it in here use the question why. Then you force your interlocutors to give their to present their arguments and then you can explain to them that their concepts are not really justified and the last point I would give here is pin the wireframes, your mock-up and your design to the wall so everyone can access it you will trigger discussion and thoughts. The team will have common steps and goals and also you avoid teammates to discover the design only when it's online because it's really helpful for me. So it's nearly the end. I'll give you some links and references so if you wish to have a look at the Ricardo Vasquez videos you just search for the IWF design YouTube, you have a value team type foundry, OSP foundry. I don't have time but if you wish to to learn to read something about originating copy I advise you this book from Walter Benjamin you have the blog spot from Mozilla and if you wish you have also the Gestalt theory so you can have some informations here. So I hope it was helpful as an introduction to open design even if maybe mostly designers here. I hope that you have some tips and some tools and to go further and maybe change the way we design, the way we collaborate, the way we work together and the way we would communicate the design process. Thank you. How many questions for me? You have 10 minutes. Yes. Thank you for your talk. It was interesting. I have a question how do it smell like a philosophical question I don't know. So I'm not a graphic designer and I wonder in open source you can change code and many people can contribute to that. I also assume that usability design also can be a product of collaborative ideas and many people can adjust it. How do you think it can work when it comes to logo design or any other artwork? Do you think there could be some collaborative? I will I'm sorry. So when you do collaborate in many fields this kind of rest and location is about usability and logo if we work together on the project. But about logos. Yes, that's how to work together. This is a personal point of view for me when we create a logo we can be more than two. It's very personal. It's really difficult because for me we can't. I believe that we can work together really properly when we are two because when I worked as print graphic designers to work together you have to share common how do you say it, knowledge, skin and artistic basis. So first if you work with someone that don't share this with you it's really hard and the case where I see that it works is when the people is really a kind of how do you say in English some views we really can work together we talk together we understand each other just by drawing for example and for me personally I don't believe in logos created by I don't know 20 people it's personal but we can discuss more about it maybe some of the viewer only only logos for me the collaborative process when you are with the many many many people it's I think we're hard we are you really have to understand each other and you have to make compromises so when that for example 10 people I think it's difficult. My question would be I really like your your idea that you say the most important things to understand it's not about the aesthetics it's about the purpose first and then like what you make out of it and that common problem is that people don't know about design that much right so they go into the discussion and they say oh that looks fancy yes and my question is do you think as designers do we have to be more self-reflecting and more critical the way we talk about design to others because I feel sometimes we we fall into this trap as well like we say I really like his work and then we start we don't say why we like it and then say ah he explained like this is the concept so so kind of in order to make this better we have to talk to people about it like we would talk about the designers like we have to show them hey yeah this looks nice but yeah so the question is as designers do we have also have a critical attitude and to question maybe our our goals our design etc and yes I agree totally with you because if we only give our designs and we stop here without explaining why we made these choices etc in fact we keep our knowledge for us and that's why I talk about the toolbox and the tips it's if we share our skills our knowledge and our choices first we make everyone understand it and for example for me if decision makers had a better visual culture we wouldn't suffer such low quality interfaces for example for example and so also between between different work fields if we share our knowledge with developers with I don't know marketing team etc and if we explain that okay maybe you find this great but now let me explain why I did this and because of design principles composition principles here of colors etc and I think that as designers we really should open up practice and explain what we did and what we did we did it because it's kind of we just share knowledge and we share culture and it's really really important for me it's really I believe in education really and if you keep it just for designers we'll have a lack of understanding between the public but also with other other people in your team and with stakeholders so I completely agree with you we we also have to have a critical attitude with our work thank you very much thank you