GUYS, THIS IS SOOOOO.....COOOOOL!!!!
A SUPER PIECE OF WORK!
(Phew! I thought I had to give up on you!)
Now that I am a bit more relieved, let me give you my impressions. (I can only comment on the OVERALL impression as the image is too small for me to make out the details.)
1) First impression: It looks very professional! Quite unlike most 1st Year students' work. I think it's the cool-grey colour scheme that gives it that mature air.
2) The graphs and satellite photos give it a scientific, cool-logic characteristic.
3) The personal icon pics really add a human dimension to the authorship! And they complement the "cold rational" material mentioned in (2). Viewers relate better to the human face and will warm up to the presentation. The sunglasses really add a dash of style! Give it an MIB aura of mystery! And those sunshade pics are about the right size. The others are way too small and look a bit passport-stunned. These mini pics need to change---must have gaya!
4) The site photos (I don't mean the landmark ones) need to be a bit more prominent (larger?) as I think you are trying to highlight the unique and "nice" views of or from the site. This is where you give viewers a tour of the site, let them enjoy the site. We need to know what's so special about the site, and I think when you do your final design presentation a lot of you will be referring to these photos.
5) All the elements of this presentation have more or less the same emphasis. You need to make ONE thing dominate--to catch the eye--create an hierarchy of emphasis.
6) The team names really lend a festive and multi-participatory air to the board and that's really good!! They give a "we're-all-together-in-this" sense of unity. But they have to be clear. Viewers need to know that they are names of teams comprising..... As they are at the moment a little bit confusing to those seeing this piece for the first time.
7) Related to the previous point: it's all about COMMUNICATION, which means it must be TOTALLY CLEAR, INFORMATIVE, CONCISE & ENTERTAINING. To the public in general.
8) It needs a more comprehensive title which should answer at least the following: site analysis for what project? by whom? from where? when done? maybe even tutored by whom?
9) Now for the very important component: The PERSONAL SITE RESPONSES, the text, the content. I can't read them yet until I receive the other file that allows me to zoom clearly. They have to be in PERFECT ENGLISH. Get help if yours isn't. I would like to suggest that you have 2 levels for consumption of your response. The whole text is one. The other could be an extract of THE MOST IMPORTANT SENTENCE/THOUGHT in you response in a much bigger Fons. (I'm sure you've seen this in mags & newspapers.)
10) Finally, I must say again that I like the graphics a lot. If you want to make it even better---try layering some things to give it more depth. I think you guys have become quite confident in visual board presentations (hopefully it hasn't been from too much hammering from me!) and as for this site analysis you can go ahead and do up the "final" one for either next Monday or Wednesday. (Monday preferred, so that we can admire both the Case Study and Site Analysis together--and get them out of our hair!)