True Colours: Make a Visual Comparison Legible Without Turning It into Proof

Read the campaign story

Faber-Castell’s True Colours print family joins recognisable subjects with pencil forms. The Ads of Brands archive dates an execution to December 2010, while contemporary February 2011 coverage documents the series. The One Club’s 2011 entry confirms Serviceplan’s authorship and credits; its award year is not treated as a launch date. The different subjects remain one family.

Editorial interpretation: the viewer performs a small act of recognition, noticing both the depicted subject and the tool inside the same image. That relationship can express an idea with little text. It also leaves room for several interpretations: the pencil resembles the subject, produces its colour, or enables the entire image. A responsible creative team should determine which inference the actual evidence supports rather than assuming that visual simplicity guarantees a single meaning.

This study does not adopt colour-accuracy, drawing-skill or sales claims from the creative representation. No campaign image is reproduced or used as a template for imitation. The exercise below uses original flat diagrams for a fictional paper-organising service. It tests the clarity of a symbolic connection, not pigment properties, realistic rendering or anyone’s artistic ability. It involves no sharpening, cutting, animals or food handling.

Define the relation that the audience is meant to discover

A visual combination needs more than two recognisable components. State the relationship between them in a plain sentence before developing the image. A fictional reading index might connect a bookmark shape with a labelled position in a list, communicating that the index helps someone return to a chosen place. Ask reviewers to explain the relation without being offered multiple-choice interpretations. If they recognise both objects but cannot connect them, the concept may be a decorative puzzle. Simplify the junction or add a short explanation rather than treating confusion as evidence of sophistication.

Distinguish an illustrative analogy from a demonstration

A polished representation can imply a stronger claim than its makers intend. List what would require an actual test and keep those propositions separate from the visual metaphor. For a fictional organising service, a neat diagram can explain categories without proving that users will always find things quickly. Ask reviewers which benefits they believe have been demonstrated. If they mistake the image for evidence, change the caption, the rendering style or the proposition. The goal is not to remove imagination but to make its explanatory role clear enough that it cannot quietly substitute for substantiation.

Retain meaning when the visual cue is unavailable

A colour-dependent or intricate image may be difficult to understand at a small size, in a different viewing condition or through a text alternative. Describe the relationship in words and check whether that description still explains the intended offer. A small team can compare a full diagram, a simplified monochrome version and a concise text description. This is a communication review, not certification of accessibility. If only one polished rendering carries the proposition, consider whether the idea needs a more robust structure. A useful visual system should not require every person to perceive precisely the same surface detail.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: a fictional reading-index service could present an original diagram that joins a bookmark outline with a clearly labelled place in an invented book list. Compare it with a separate icon and plain explanation containing the same information. Provide text descriptions for both, and ask consenting adults what relationship each expresses. Do not copy the historical image compositions or portray a realistic performance test. The exercise asks whether the fused symbol explains a bounded return-to-place function, while leaving actual search speed, comprehension and user preference unproven.

Record accurate explanations of the intended connection, mistaken interpretations and unsupported performance inferences. Compare comprehension with visual interest. A more memorable image is useful only if people understand the limited proposition; preference does not demonstrate accuracy, skill or practical improvement.

Stop if the analogy is mistaken for testing, depends on copying a distinctive campaign image, or loses its meaning when a particular colour or visual detail is unavailable.

• Create original geometric diagrams with labels that do not rely on colour alone.
• Keep the same fictional list and offer description in both versions.
• Provide an equivalent plain-text explanation of each relationship.