Week 9 Text and Image

Our final ITAP lecture consists of only one single principle – the lecture itself, on the use of text and image. Knowledge of this topic is essential for visual communicators, particularly graphic designers and illustrators. Text gives images a context if they don’t have one, or a new one if they do. Consider the image below:

There is little that we can gather from this. Maybe the artist likes fields, but that’s just wild guessing. The point is, on it’s own, the image means nothing. If it were alongside other photos, we might gather a little more. If it were in a police station, we could assume that it is a crime scene. Images need some form of context to be meaningful. That’s not to say that a caption or a second image is needed, necessarily, the context can be easily integrated, but it must be there.

Something else to consider though is that context can be misleading. It is only in our minds that two things next to each other are connected – there is no logical reason for this to be the case. The fact that we associate two things next to each other is used by us subconsciously all the time. When you caption an image, you do not feel the need to tell the viewer that you are captioning that image and not just writing there, as it is accepted in our minds that the things are related. But this concept can also be exploited, and often is. Tabloids often use it to shock, putting headlines that alone are acceptable (or at least not as shocking as with a picture) next to unrelated and similarly innocuous images that together mislead the viewer and create something very provoking.

Related to this, is that even when captions are deliberately attached, they are not always truthful. The photo below I took at the student protests in London over the rising tuition fees. By changing the caption, the meaning of the image completely changes:

The bonfire party was a huge success.

Mob of youths kidnap South London woman and burn her alive during horrific
spree of gang violence.

Another artist that uses changes of context is John Hilliard, a conceptual artist who uses photography to show its uncertainty as a documentary tool. Of particular note is Cause of Death (below), which depicts the same staged murder scene framed and captioned in 4 different ways, leading the viewer to a different conclusion for each one. At the time it was made, it was revolutionary, as black and white photography was heavily associated with documentary photography, and therefore truth.

Clockwise from top left, words read: Crushed, Drowned, Burned, Fell

Week 8 Production for Visual Communicators

I found this ITAP a bit more difficult to complete than usual, as the overall theme was extremely similar to earlier lectures that I’ve already written about, and the 5 principles weren’t really the same type of principle as the other 7 sets we’ve had. But lets give it a go.

Click this text for his website (which I highly recommend)

The first principle I’m going to look at is “Experts”. Within Visual communication, there will be many experts in each discipline, who approach a given task each with different preferences in approach to and incorporating their own unique style.

Even within a specific specialism, such as illustration, there will be many experts, each excelling at different things, and one working in their own style is not necessarily better than another working in an opposing style. The expert I am looking at in regards to this task is the illustrator Kekai Kotaki. I feel that he is an expert in the art of concept design, an area that I am particularly interested in.

He has spent almost 10 years working for ArenaNet, the makers of the MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game): Guild Wars, mostly as a concept artist, and 5 years as the Lead Concept Artist, and his designs are breathtaking. The drawings themselves are not all in intricate detail, but they are very atmospheric and you can feel the energy captured in the scene. Some of his work is beside and below this post:

The next principle that I am looking at is “a Brief History of Production”. It can be useful to know what our heritage is and the history behind the technology we use as visual communicators, as it informs our designs.

The Diamond Sutra is the earliest printed and dated book that has completely survived. It was produced in AD400, created using wood blocks and ink on paper. The wood blocks would have been hand carved, and then pressed onto the paper, in this case in the form of a scroll.

Below is a picture of a print within the Diamond Sutra. Considering the method used to create it, and how long it has survived, the level of detail is quite amazing:

In the mid 15^th century, Johann Gutenberg invented the mechanical printing press (including many of the components it was made up of, and processes upon which it relied), which was able to mass-produce prints, making them affordable for printers and readers alike, introducing printing to Europe. Prior to this invention, the method of book production in Europe had been hand-made manuscripts.

Our methods of production have changed dramatically throughout history, but knowledge of the old methods is nevertheless useful in creating new and interesting forms of art. As they say, knowledge is power.

Week 7 Production and Outcomes

Today’s lecture was on “Production and Outcomes”, and first I’ll be looking at “Interpretation”, both on the part of the viewer and the artist. Controlling how a piece of work will be interpreted by the viewer is very important in visual communication, as you will always have a purpose that you are trying to achieve in the viewers mind. A big influence of this is the artist’s own interpretation of the work based on the culture of the time. This is known as Zeitgeist (literally, “spirit of the age”), and can be seen in many places if you look for it. An example of this can be seen in the portrayal of the “good” characters (particularly superheroes) in the 30’s 50’s, compared to now. In the past, heroes will always be purely good and never have any negative qualities, regardless of any kind of traumatic upbringing. Obviously these kind of characters still exist in places, but are not close to as widespread, whereas media now has much more variety (and perhaps more humanity) in the characters, ranging from brooding heroes to ruthless anti-heroes and even sympathetic villain-protagonists. There could be many cultural factors relating to this, and it is difficult to analyse a time period that you are living in, but it may be that with the birth of the information age with the world at our fingertips, we are now very much desensitized to the idea of death.

Compare Batman in the 40’s in which he will never, ever kill...

...To the 2000’s *spoiler alerts*, in which he has deliberately left his mentor to die and blown up a building full of people.

The second principle I’m looking at is delivery. Choosing the correct method of delivery is very important for communicating effectively, as failure to do so can cause your message to go unnoticed, or misunderstood. A very effective delivery of advertising is to give the audience subtle puzzles, so they have to work out the message. Working out the message intrigues the viewer and draws them in, and solving it makes them feel good and associate that feeling with the message or product. A good example of this form of delivery is a certain recruitment campaign by Google. They placed billboards (pictured below) with a complicated puzzle leading to a website with another puzzle, which led to more puzzles of increasing complexity until the dedicated problem-solver would be asked for their CV.

In case you cannot read it, the writing says "first 10-digit prime found in consecutive digits of e"

Week 6 Narrative and Structure

This week’s lecture is on Narrative and Structure. The first principle that I am going to look at is “Stories”. This doesn’t just cover fiction, but any set of causally linked events, of any genre or media, fiction or non-fiction. Humanity as a whole is a social species, and we have always enjoyed stories, whether they be told in cave (or other) paintings, verbally, in books or in films. We are generally more likely to remember things if we associate them with stories rather than just lists given to us. The most important thing when making stories for any purpose – but especially for art and illustration – is communication. There will be an intention to your work, maybe to enlighten, maybe to entertain, but whatever it is it must be communicated effectively to the target audience, in order that they will get the intended message and pass on your story.

Linking on from Stories, is Developing Narrative. All stories have a narrative in some form or another, but at a most basic level, a narrative consists of the conflict between protagonist and antagonist. These roles do not necessarily have to be filled by people or even individual entities (though they almost always are). The protagonist will be the main character, who has some sort of objective, whereas the antagonist will be someone (or maybe something) attempting to hinder the progress of the protagonist, and from their interaction, the conflict is born. This is really what all narrative boils down to.

There are many things that can set one story apart from another, but purely in terms of narrative, something that can make a story much more interesting is in telling it a different way. A good example would be the film Memento (trailer below), which mixes a non-linear narrative with in which the protagonist has a disorder that means that he can only store his memories for 6 minutes, after which time everything from the last 6 minutes disappears. The film is told in a way that mirrors his disorder, as the storyline is split up into 3 smaller narratives which it alternates between in short 5-10 minute sections, 1 starting from the most recent events and working backwards, 1 starting from a few days earlier and working forwards, and 1 starting somewhere in the middle of the two and also working forwards. These segments eventually meet for an exciting climax in which we as the audience have finally seen the protagonist’s entire journey leading up to the end, but are still left confused as we try to piece together the events. Alternatives to traditional narrative can be very interesting, and is definitely something worth exploring in the future.

Week 5 Visual Vocabulary Essay

The first principle that I’m going to look at is Legibility. In this context this does not simply mean how easy something is to read; this principle delves deeper, into how easy it is to identify and understand the intended message behind the piece of work, and how efficient the communication is. Good legibility is essential for the practice of visual communication. Without it, work will look unprofessional, and you will fail to communicate effectively. An example of bad legibility is having text over an image with little contrast between the two, as the image below shows:

The bottom section where the pictures are looks like it has been slapped together by a child, and if it had one it would confuse the message. It makes it look as if the image is not important, but you cannot easily read the text either.

It raises an interesting issue however, as work being difficult to read is not necessarily a sign of bad legibility. For example, on the sign below, the fact that it is hard to read is the intended message, so in this case the difficulty in reading the text is actually good legibility. Similar examples can be found in advertising, where a good technique is to make the message not immediately obvious, as the act of working out the intended message creates immediate gratification in the mind of the viewer that they then associate with that product or service.

The next principle I am going to look at is Tone of Voice. This is the idea that text and image have an equivalent to a tone of voice, so their message can be communicated by their style in addition to the meaning of the word or what the picture actually is. Like with legibility, there are specific instances where applications of the tone of voice can confuse the image where in another situation it might work much better. An easy example of where the tone of voice can confuse the image is with single word images.

If the typeface is not representative of the meaning of the word, as above, then it looks odd. Compare below:

This typeface makes much more sense in the context of the image, and makes it clear that the intended message is a loud shout. There are undoubtedly instances where you could use a conflicting typeface to the meaning of the word, and be communicating effectively, but this would be much more specific and situational. The only example I can think of would be in a graphic novel having characters ‘whisper’ in a huge typeface, and be called out for being unable to whisper quietly.

Week 4 Reliability and Creative Process Essay

The first principle that I want to look at is research. The dictionary definition of research is “the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions”. Within visual communication, it is the reaching of new conclusions that most interests us, but even then, this is actually a much broader scope than you might initially think. Research does not simply mean ‘looking things up’; it means gathering data in any sense. As a visual communicator, most of my research would be visual: collected items, drawings, photographs, etc. So for example testing out a new material is gathering data on how to use it effectively, and is therefore an important form of research. Research is always important within a project. Starting on ideas without doing any kind of research first will normally lead to less interesting ideas and failure to communicate effectively.

On top of the essentiality of doing research, an important point to consider in that definition is the word systematic. In other words, the research you do is not simply a small step at the beginning to get a foothold on your project, but a continuous process. You should always be looking at things that interest you as you continue to build up a visual understanding of your subject.

Below are some pages from a short project that I did on foundation, but worked on in more depth in my gap year. The continual research I did throughout the project on different artists and different methods of working was incredibly useful as a resource and allowed me to come up with some much better outcomes.

The next principle that I am going to look at is very similar to the first: it is inspiration. We find inspiration through our research (which is another reason why we should always be doing it). Unlike research however, the methodologies for gathering inspiration are not as clear-cut. Anything and everything can be of inspiration (and so you should ideally collect and research everything), and this inspiration leads into a cycle of more research and inspiration, but the starting spark requires you to be more engaged with your practice than research does. When collecting data, it is possible to switch off, and collect on autopilot. When looking for inspiration, your creative brain must be engaged with your practice, and you must really find what you are doing interesting, as one would hope that you do (I certainly do!). When you are engaged and inspired, you can create fresh and creative ideas.

Week 3 Originality Essay

It’s been a while between blog posts recently. I have actually got some stuff I’ve been meaning to put up, but I’ve been a bit busy with these lectures, and with actually doing the stuff that I’ve been meaning to put up.

Okay, anyway, I’m not quite sure what’s going on with this lecture… We were given 5 principles at the beginning, and reminded of them at the end, but everything in between was filed under the first one, and I’m not sure what 3 of them even mean… But lets give it a go. Here’s this weeks essay:

This week’s lecture is on originality, or when it is okay to steal someone’s idea. The immediate reaction (or mine anyway) is that you cannot steal someone’s idea – it’s more interesting to come up with an original idea, and stealing someone else’s can get you sued. However, this is not as strict as you would immediately think. First of all, everyone is inspired by something, so all ideas come from somewhere else. In addition, as time goes on people become inspired by things that were created by people that were inspired by other things. For example; (spoiler alert if you haven’t read/watched/listened to Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings or The Ring Cycle by Wagner) The Horcruxes in Harry Potter (written over 1997-2007) are very similar in nature to the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings (written over 1937-1949), as both contain the soul of an evil being, both are central to the plot, the destruction of each are the aim in order to destroy an evil overlord, etc. In turn, Tolkien took inspiration for his world from mythology. Though it shares some of his source material, he denies taking inspiration from The Ring Cycle by Wagner (written over 1848-1874), despite the fact that two of the characteristics possessed by the One Ring (it’s malevolence and corrupting power) were not in the mythical sources, but have a central role in Wagner’s opera. You can see from this how ideas have been taken from one source to the next and passed down as inspiration. Regardless of whether you personally enjoy them, these are all fantastic forms of media, and yet the ideas are not original.

Another way in which stealing ideas is accepted practice is in recontextualisng them. This is to take an old idea, and put it into a new context, thus creating something new and interesting and perhaps relevant to contemporary culture. This can occur in varying degrees, with different ramifications. For example, the (rather appropriate) quote by Picasso "The bad artists imitate, the great artists steal", stolen by Banksy (pictured below) makes for an ironic piece of work that is funny in a quirky sort of way. The act of stealing is itself the artwork in this case.

The work of Banksy is controversial – he is considered by many to be a vandal, due to the nature of most of his work. In this he is somewhat similar to the Chapman brothers, who have previously been accused of ‘cultural vandalism’. Their work involves taking classical masterpieces and defacing them. 

Chapman brothers 'vandalism' on the right, next to Goya's original Contra el bien general

They consistently seek to overstep social boundaries, and in doing so they create pieces of work that are built on provocation, rather than being an inherently original idea. In this sense, how original the idea is, is irrelevant. The purpose is to provoke; there is an argument in there, and it redefines the whole notion of what art can be.