There are 6 different styles of text, but 5 different typefaces were used; 3 main ones, and 2 little ones. The second and third sub-headings used the same narrow sans serif typeface, the different colour and size differentiates them.

All the typefaces are sans serif and they're all thick and bold, and all have a lot of treatment applied. They are all lowercase with a capital letter at the beginning. They are all however completely different. Some are all quite curvy forms, and they all have very high x-heights.

The heading (is also the logo) is right aligned and sits large at the top of the label. All other text is also right aligned. The text in divided into 3 grouping; heading (positioned in top third), subheadings (positioned in middle third), and small text (positioned in bottom third). There is very little spacing between the 3 sub-headings, they are crammed together. There is quite a lot of generous space surrounding the heading which makes it more noticeable.

The heading and sub-headings have a slight diagonal orientation, which follows the curve of the label and creates a rounded effect, which is also achieved by the rounded edge of the label.

4. What were the treatments used to differentiate text and organise information - size, scale, treatment (colour, effects)?​​​​​​​

Each typeface is a different colour and size; therefore making clear hierarchy. The size of each gets smaller the further down the label. The heading begins with many hierarchy components, and each new row of text loses one component:

The heading - bright white colour, shadowing to make it 3D and stand out, sharp and bold typeface, outlined in black.

Sub-heading 1 - bright yellow colour, shadowing, bold, but curvy.

Sub-heading 2 - white colour, no shadowing.

Sub-heading 3 (same typeface) - black, no shading.

Tiny text 1 - white colour, outlined in black (but very small)

Tiny text 2 - no colour or any other treatments (and tiny)

The heading of the label is also the logo. There is one image of a mop cleaning shiny reflective tiles with graphic sparkles surrounding it. The heading sits in a graphic bubble of red, the rest of the background is a bright pink. The image is situated in a stroke shape within the pink. The sub-headings sit above the curve of the image frame which is why they're aligned to the right with a diagonal orientation, to follow the curve. 

The bottle itself and the background of the label is pink, and pink must have been chosen because of the descriptive 'fresh sent' heading, or because their target market were females.

There are lots of reflective and shiny elements on the label, mainly achieved by the extensive use of gradients of colour. Such as the shiny silver line that frames the image and continues up to frame the logo heading bubble. The gradients create interest but also volume and a denseness to the label.

I think the label has great transparency and its communication is clear. The heavy-weighted bold typefaces allow the content to be deciphered easily by the viewer, even on the bright pink background. How the writing and the imagery blend is aesthetically pleasing. The colour choices go well together; pink, orange, red and yellows. The coloured typefaces match the background colours well, with still standing out, the shadowing does this. With all the treatments that are used, such as colour and shadowing, I don't think there needs to be 5 different typefaces, it's too excessive and not needed because there's other things that differentiate hierarchy and create interest and contrast. The huge use of pink does stand out and is engaging. 

The typeface in black isn't readable. There is a slight gradation of the pink background, from a reddish pink hue, to a purplish pink hue, perhaps is this gradation was flipped the black would have stood out more on the red. It can be read Ince up close, and all other text is very readable. As Ina Saltz states in 'Typography: Hierarchy and Navigation' (2013), the orientation of text should always serve a purpose, and in this case the orientation of the text does have a reason so it works well. The leading of the 1st and 2nd subheading is slightly too small and the ascender of the 'h' clashes with the descender of the 'g'.

So overall, the label is fairly effective.

Reflecting on the elements that determine good and appropriate typefaces, as Jessica Hische spoke about in 'Upping Your Type Game' (2013), these typefaces don't encompass the simple elements of good type, instead they are more graphical elements rather than actual typefaces. 

Despite the slightly rough use of typefaces and treatment, overall I think the label is effective with conveying the its message and clean, fresh and bright.

7. How does the use of type and its organisation on the label influence the aesthetic quality and inefficiency of this label? 

The hierarchy of the heading and sub-headings are clear and effective. Handy Andy is the logo and heading, it is the largest and obviously what the brand wants to be seen first and what it wants to be known for. No description of what the product is is on the front label, the picture is the description. This keeps it minimal and efficient. The right alignment of the sub-headings works.