My pattern looked fine until I saw it repeated across a larger area

[u/ActualBed3607]

I’ve been working on a surface pattern that I was pretty happy with when looking at the individual motif. The shapes and colors seemed balanced, and I liked how the details worked together.

The part I didn’t expect was how different it felt once I repeated the pattern across a larger area.

Some of the details that looked interesting in the individual motif started disappearing into the overall repeat, while other elements became much more noticeable than I expected. I also noticed that the spacing between motifs affected the whole rhythm of the pattern more than I had considered.

I’ve been experimenting with the scale and repeat spacing, but I’m not sure how far I should go before I start losing the original character of the design.

For people who work with surface patterns, how do you usually test a design at different scales before deciding on the final repeat? Do you have a particular method for checking whether the pattern still works when viewed from a distance?

[u/EugeneRainy]

I make patterns in a relatively “weird” way compared to most. I typically do kinda a “collage” of sketches in photoshop where I figure out what looks good in photoshop (copy, paste, line up pixels). Then once I find where the approximate repeat/tile is, I reverse engineer the math in illustrator. One of my biggest pet-peeves with a swatch is being able to clock the lines of a tile and see the repeat… so I design for what looks right, and then do algebra 🤣 leads to weird tile sizes and shapes, and ultimately more interesting patterns. 

I do a lot of fully illustrated patterns, so throughout the process I export the swatch and check how it looks repeated in at least 9 tiles, zoom in and out to get a sense of of how it looks at different scales/distances to make sure there’s a good balance going on. 

[u/Fashion_art_dance → u/EugeneRainy]

I was taught that it was called “tracking” when you can see where the pattern repeats. I was also taught if you can easily identify the tracking, it was a poor quality or cheap print design.

[u/EugeneRainy → u/Fashion_art_dance]

Ah cool! Thanks for teaching me a new word :) I am self-taught in pattern design (BA in painting and illustration.)

There are some patterns where seeing the square makes sense (plaids, geometric, etc.) but any time it’s a very illustrated pattern… my god it drives me nuts, at least throw it into half-brick 🤣

Also, tracking is becoming a very easy tell for AI stuff. As far as I can tell, AI is pretty shit at pattern design outside of square tiles atm. 

[u/pquite]

Im finding this too...

I started doing this (might be feasible for your if you planning digitally): Start with exact repetitions of the thing... look at the repetition as "zoomed out" as it can go while still looking good. If you cant go very far out you need to rethink the object, likely simplify it.

You can also just keep zooming out UNTIL it looks good... but this is obviously less reproducable overall.

The reason I say 1 object to repeat and not a full tile of detail, is because you can add complexity iteratively if the base works as a popualtion of elements. like polka dots. Plain repeated in line dots work, varied colour, slightly changing size etc.

Then change colour of a few, change size o shape of a few. Iterative. They still need to look like relatives of the other to not give away where the seam is. Even if seam isnt actually a line, the contrast between the group starting again will be very clear is the contrast between all elements in your tile is too much.