A student project and a studio commission pass through the same two stages: the technical check for file specs, category fit and rights clearance, then scoring by a rotating jury of practicing designers. If your work sits somewhere between disciplines, the check is where the right category gets confirmed, so it is judged on its own terms.
Submissions close at the next cutoff. If you would rather ask something first, the contact page is the plain way in.
A student project and a studio commission enter the same two-stage review. What changes is the work, not the process around it.
Commissioned work is judged on craft and finish. Category fit is confirmed first, so a packaging piece is read as packaging, not as a general graphic entry.
Internal projects enter through the same open platform. Rights clearance matters here, since credits and usage often sit with the employer rather than the designer.
Student entries are scored on the same rubric, read for intent and process. A clear idea often carries further than a polished result without a point of view.
Graphic design, packaging, motion, type design and digital craft each carry their own category rationale, so work is assessed in the right terms rather than against a single house style.
Shortlisted entries join a searchable archive with jury notes, category rationale and credits. Studios in Buenos Aires, Santo Domingo and beyond use that consistency to benchmark work and build a submission record across cycles.
The platform does not split entrants into separate tracks. A student project and a studio commission move through the same two stages, and the categories are wide enough to hold both without stretching the terms.
Small teams submit client work and self-initiated projects side by side. The technical check confirms file specs, category fit and rights clearance before scoring, so a two-person studio is read on the same terms as a larger one.
Work made inside a company often carries constraints that never show in the final file. The submission record keeps those entries traceable across cycles, which helps a team compare its own output year over year.
Coursework enters through the same open platform. The jury reads student entries for intent and process rather than finish, and a single clear project tends to travel further than a scattered portfolio.
Print-led work is checked at print scale before it reaches the jury. Resolution, color profile and the physical logic of a packaging system are part of the first stage, not an afterthought.
Screen-based entries are watched the way a jury actually watches them, usually once. Export settings and a cut that reads early matter as much as the concept behind the piece.
A narrow category with a different tone of debate. Drawing quality, spacing rhythm and how a family holds across weights carry weight, and the published rationale often reads closer to a critique.
Shortlisted entries from every one of these paths join the same searchable archive, with jury notes, category rationale and credits. If you want to see how the review is structured end to end, the program overview lays out both stages.
A student project and a studio commission move through the same two-stage review. What changes is how the work is read, not how it is handled. These are the practical differences entrants run into on the Adaptations page.
A studio entering a client commission gets scored on the work as delivered, not on the brief behind it. Category fit is confirmed at the technical check, so a packaging piece is judged against packaging criteria rather than stretched into a neighbouring category.
Internal work often carries constraints that never appear in the final file. Rights clearance is where that shows up: typefaces, commissioned imagery and collaborator credits all need to be accounted for before the entry reaches the jury.
Coursework enters through the same open platform and the same rubric. The jury reads student entries for intent and process, which means a single resolved project usually travels further than a scattered set of experiments.
Graphic design, packaging, motion, type design and digital craft each have their own scoring conversation. A type entry is argued over drawing quality and spacing rhythm; a motion entry is watched once, sometimes twice, and judged on what reads in the first seconds.
Shortlisted work joins a searchable archive with jury notes, category rationale and credits. Studios in Buenos Aires, Santo Domingo and elsewhere use that record to compare cycles and see where their own work sits over time.
The panel changes between cycles and is made up of practicing designers. That rotation keeps scoring from settling into a house style, and it means the criteria are argued fresh each time rather than inherited.
Curious how the first stage is run? Read how the program is structured or get in touch before the next cutoff.