a. I believe the overall research went well. We found a lot of statistics and different things that we could potentially use for the info graphic, so there was a lot of freedom when deciding what to put and what to not put.
b. I believe when it came to putting the right information into the graphic we fell short. We have things that resulted in the oil spill, but not so much how it was caused or what happened afterward. I believe we needed to include more of this in the info graphic.
c. I think I would include more information about the before and after, we included a lot about what happened because of the spill, but not so much how they cleaned it up, how long it took and how much oil is still there (according to some of our sources there is still some oil remaining in the area).
d. I think we excelled in "be visual" and "be transparent." I think the "be varied" and "be smarter" elements were not as well represented. I think the "be varied" and "be smarter" elements were not as well represented because when it comes to variation, if there is too much variation things can look sloppy and they will not be consistent. So when it came to variation, it was hard to add as much due to the fear of looking sloppy or the info graphic being hard to understand. I think when it came to "be smarter" we didn't want to add too much information because it would have been overpowering and maybe even cluttered. If there was too much information, it may have been harder to understand and read.