Personal measured art-layout review
The workflow behind my Personal AI fail. I gave Codex measurements, art, and references; it produced multiple schemes and an editable Figma file, but the visual design still fell short. I’m retaining the process and the critique it needed, not recommending it as a proven design method.
Workflow steps
- 1
Collect the wall measurements, exclusions, artwork source inventory, and annotated room references into a private evidence packet
Action
- 2
Build measured elevations and an artwork-size library; mark furniture dimensions and perspective calibration as assumptions
Process
- 3
Review editorial reference examples for grouping, frame weight, mat width, whitespace, and composition; record which principles inform each scheme
Process
- 4
Create distinct layout schemes and a frame-and-mat schedule, using outer frame dimensions rather than image sizes alone
Action
- 5
Operator compares the measured layouts and mockups; choose a direction, rewrite the composition, or stop before buying or installing
Decision
- 6
Build the editable playground with separate image, mat, and frame layers; keep measured studies, original room references, and photo experiments on separate pages
Process
- 7
Verify layer dimensions, caption attachment, page spacing, and selected visual evidence; correct overlap without flattening editable artwork
Process
- 8
Before installation, operator confirms actual furniture and opening dimensions, clearances, source resolution, and final frame specification
Decision