For the first one, we were thinking for a bus shelter ad; we could do a women with growing sideburns.
The next one is for the ESPN website with a banner that is selling breast-pump. It plays with the idea that somethings can't fit right with certain things.
The last two are print ads where the women had a lower body of a man where we would photoshop her legs out and replace it with a tan man legs. Vice versa for the man's print ad too.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
+copy.jpg)
The ones you showed in class were more stronger than these.
ReplyDeleteMore stronger? Please tell me that was Megan. That would be delicious. I kid of coarse... I wasn't in class, did the instructors get a chance to look at the suggestions I posted about this campaign? I really just don't feel that pigeon holing the masculine/feminine is the direction to move with in this campaign, mainly because it specifically says in the brief that while the watch could be worn by either sex, to stay away from terms like unisex. Each ad here plays on the idea that the watch is NOT unisex... but in reality, it is. Just an observation.
ReplyDeleteHi Tim, we're not going towards unisex at all, we're just trying to say that some things don't look right when put together from different genders. The whole idea is that men's watch is for men and women's watch is for women. We have 3 ideas about the gender separation thing approved from class but we need a strong copy to really explain our idea. Megan and Ryan has approved on this idea so that's where we're going, Megan thought that there's something in one of your copy about putting labels on men and women.
ReplyDeleteI will send you an e-mail on what Megan said. I agree with Syanne that we are just trying to show that somethings don't fit right together. We are still flushing out more ideas and hopefully we could get it just right about what we are trying to say. Maybe we all should meet up and discuss about new ideas?
ReplyDeleteUltimately, if the instructors signed off on this idea, then great. But there is a huge disconnect between the creative intent of the brief, and the executions of the concept.
ReplyDeleteNooka does not have a male or female line. It is the same line of fashion for both, which by definition is "Unisex" Yet, Nooka admittedly hates that term. Unisex, the word is ugly, and pedestrian. It does not compliment high fashion, therefor in the brief it is banned. But, that doesn't change the fact that the product IS unisex. Your ads convey a completely different message. Your ads are saying that feminine things don't belong with masculine ones and vice-
versa. My solution, and the copy Megan liked, salvaged both the intent of the brief and your visual solution of the Tampon vending machine next to a urinal. But you can't campaign that one idea. What other ideas did Megan like? And, more importantly, do you understand where I am coming from?
At the end of the day, if you both want three male/female ads, I will do my best to put some great copy on them. I just don't want you to waste your time on a selling point that ultimately is false. Check out the products, reread the brief, and think about the redirection I offered earlier, or perhaps we could think of a new one.