2010 March « Jenny's Blog

Gestalt March 18, 2010

Filed under: Design Theory — Jenny @ 11:45 am

Three definitions:

Gestalt principles, or gestalt laws, are rules of the organization of perceptual scenes.
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Gestalt_principles

This idea of seeing the whole before the parts and even more the whole becoming more than the sum of its parts is Gestalt.
http://www.vanseodesign.com/web-design/gestalt-principles-of-perception/

Gestalt principles of form perception: Gestalt psychology attempts to understand psychological phenomena by viewing them as organized and structured wholes rather than the sum of their constituent parts. Thus, Gestalt psychology dissociates itself from the more ‘elementistic’/reductionistic/decompositional approaches to psychology like structuralism (with its tendency to analyze mental processes into elementary sensations) and it accentuates concepts like emergent properties, holism, and context.
http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/gestalt_principles_of_form_perception.html

My attempt at illustrating Gestalt:

Leave a Comment

My Aesthetic Style – a rough draft March 13, 2010

Filed under: Design Theory — Jenny @ 8:36 am

I’m a resourceful designer with a high sense of pride and a desire for perfection. With a clean style and a sense of purpose, my designs focus on simple yet bold. Strong passion, inner determination, and pride are contributing factors on how I craft designs.

I was recently assigned the task of determining my aesthetic style. I took a shot at it above. Any thoughts on it?

Leave a Comment

What I Learned from “Ways of Seeing” March 13, 2010

Filed under: Design Theory — Jenny @ 6:55 am

The book, Ways of Seeing, has an interesting way of discovering what art can tell us besides just showing us a picture. Essays and visual essays are used as a way to get the reader to think and question what is really being said through art. The book presents different themes: women and men, nakedness vs. nudity, possession, wealthy vs. poor, and materialism.

Each chapter focuses on one of the themes and explains with visuals what the artist is really saying. In the chapter about oil paintings, chapter 5, the book reveals that the artists are illustrating procession and the importance of it with every oil painting – with a picture of a hall with paintings covering every inch or a table filled with different items. Land owners and other individuals of wealth wanted to show their wealth to people and that was accomplished with paintings. One sentence stood out to me as curious within this chapter – “mythological scenes functions like a garment” on page 102. Displaying procession can take many forms. Here the authors explain that mythological images are hollow, there is nothing inside them besides the straight forward story they are telling.

Another interesting chapter is 7 on publicity (or materialism). Here instead of artists telling us through the medium of art, companies (designers) are telling us stuff through print ads. An interesting theme here is that they are convincing people they need things because they will be more like the wealthy, happy, successful people in the pictures. As long as they look like and do what the people in the image then we will have everything too. On pages 136-137 the authors show a pairing of several images – an old painting and a new image. Within the pairings, the new image has copied the other almost to a point of plagiarism. The prints are relying on the same themes that have been around for a long time.

After reading this book, I have walked away with a little more knowledge on how to look at images and objects. There is always more then just the image. The artists is trying to say something – whether it is positive or negative.

Leave a Comment

Signs: Symbol, Index, and Icon March 7, 2010

Filed under: Design Theory — Jenny @ 3:08 pm

A sign can be defined as a lettered or patterned board that conveys meaning, command, or directions. Another kind of sign is more intangible or spiritual, like, “a sign of success.” For a graphic design discussion, let’s stick to the first definition. Generally speaking, there are three types of signs: symbol, index and icon. Depending on the project requirements, we may be asked to design one or more of these sign types. Let’s look at the differences and some examples of each.

Symbol

A symbol does not have direct connection to what it represents. The meaning usually needs to be learned through association.

Examples

This is a symbol created by Disney. She is a symbol because this drawing can be any female character. One will need to know the animated movie to be able to know that this is Princess Jasmine and associate it with Disney.

The gecko has nothing to do with insurance, but everyone knows when they see this cute little gecko that he is representing Geico insurance. He is a symbol for Geico.

This image of an anchor is a symbol of hope in most cultures. Hope is the main theme behind the image. Without culutural knowledge, someone might just see this image as an anchor.

Index

An index is a sign that directly points to the message or instruction.

Examples

This sign is an index because it tells the audience that he or she must be at least 40” tall to take this ride.

This is an index sign, giving direction and information.

These images of bicycles are considered indices because they are instructing or informing the viewer. Even without the text underneath the image, you would have a fair idea of what to do.

Icon

An icon is directly related to what it represents, the meaning is immediately evident and it can be a smaller part that represents a whole.

Examples

Mickey Mouse is one of the iconic figures for Disney. He is an icon for the company because he is the character that Walt Disney started the company with.

Everyone knows that when they see this icon they must watch out for deer crossing the road.

The RSS image is an icon because it simply represents a concept. It does not tell the view to do something, nor does it have an underlying concept. It is just an image that if the view saw it, they would understand what they where referring to.