Trying to decide between two versions of the Fauna Wellness app store screenshots before submissi...Trying to decide between two versions of the Fauna Wellness app store screenshots before submissi...
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
Trying to decide between two versions of the Fauna Wellness app store screenshots before submission.
Version A uses the sage green from inside the app; cohesive with the brand and immediately recognizable.
Version B has a warm brown background; rich, grounded and editorial.
Both show the same screens. Which one catches your eye first and makes you want to download? Any other suggested changes?
Same flower house, same layout. We only took the color out.
1. Full color. The iridescent petals do the selling: lilac, pink, a little shimmer. The photo is the brand, and every accent on the page borrows from it.
2. Monochrome. No color at all. Shape, texture and typography have to carry everything, and the page suddenly reads like a gallery catalogue.
Color sells the flower. Monochrome sells the exhibition.
The problem with monochrome is that, throughout computer history, it has conditioned users to associate gray and monochrome with being disabled, dysfunctional, or something to ignore and avoid.
In my INKFLESH identity work, the wordmark runs off the can's curve and gets partly hidden behind artwork on posters. That crop asks the rest of the identity to carry more recognition. The mark has a job when the name is only partly there.