These two signs are from a city 850 miles away from my home. I chose them purposely to avoid letting any personal political view bias my design critique. Also, I used a fast-view approach, as I drove through the streets. I wanted to see which sign had the fastest, bigger impact. Helping me decide as to who did the better, more effective sign campaign.
Tom Forese. campaign was clear and concise. The use of reversed type was simple and effective as well as the use of high contrasting colors. It contributed to my effective fast reading experience. it seems that without a picture this campaign is focusing more on people who already know Tom, or perhaps hoping that people will vote for the party or go to the website and do some research. This could be detrimental to the campaign as most people will be lazy to take such steps.
Justin Olson. This sign was impressive. This campaign managers are reaching to a wider audience than those who already know him. Hence, the use of the candidate’s face. This is a great implementation of Attractiveness Bias and Picture Superiority Effect, which won’t be necessary if he was reaching to the known crowd. These attributes plus others used by both campaigns, gives this sign the best chance of success. After spending a few days in Arizona this sign was the one I remembered the most.