Today I was researching something of advertisements and cultural symbols. I was reminded of something that has always fasinated me, and that is old print advertisments. It doesn't matter what decade, but the ones from the United States are always particularly interesting. Expecially from the 10's to the 40's.
Their use of text is always limited to the same font it seems for each decade. Or at least the series I was previewing for the 80's.
Here's a link to a website containing some
What struck me as particuarly interesting is this ad here.
- An ad for the Mazda RX-7 GS Sports Car in the 80's. (Which is a fair sporty car I think)
- The gas milage is approx. 17 city and 28 on the highway.
Depending on the speed of highways back in the day, may be a lot or a little. However the advertisement states that it is "Excellent".
What I'm trying to say is, that gas milage for sports cars, hasn't particularlly changed in 50 years, I know about 17 and 25 is what my mother's 6 cylinder Malibu 2010 gets, and I find it quite atrocious.
My '97 six cylinder Grand Am gets about 20- and 25ish or so on the highway depending on how fast I'm going.
Well, that's my rant for today. That's all I had to say about that. Besides I really think we should start regulating a certain standard for gas mileage for various vehicles. Though of course, the gas company's wouldn't like the consumers to be buying less gas.
To rant about the actual ads of the 80's via format and text:
I find that the use of photography is used much more extensvively in photos. Except where it's not possible at the time, such as taking a picture of an airplane whilst its in the sky from the wing shot.
It also seems that using them in general to establish the context was very popular. Or using them as some sort of haphazard assortment, then letting the text.... justify it's way around the images was easy accepted. The 'rivers' that we were so sternly warned against are freely used here. Without much of a reason, save formatting restrictions. (I'm mainly speaking about to the Right of the Helicopter)
Monday, September 19, 2011
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Critque for Assignment 1
There were a lot of good images up for our first assignment. Especially given that most of us haven't done this sort of thing before. I think.
As with any critique I found my own set of likes and dislikes. Along with my own curiosity for how some things were done.
The first set of images was very grungy, but beautiful in a way. The use of black and white photos, with layered text above it was most successful in my opinion, as opposed to the justified text of the other.
I'll have to remember the layering photo technique for another time. How to make text dirty, and typewriter-esc would've worked a little better for some of the larger words in the image I think. And the 'Kodac' wasn't distracting at all in the background. In fact, it added just the right texture to the whole thing. And gave you a hint to what some of the incorporated materials were. Though I thought it was a negitive of the film. Mm.
I took a few notes down during the critique, but as usual I didn't flesh them out. So some of this, I have no idea what it means.
Courier = my written notes
Where as this = my response.
Making things with more substance, by using symbols, ect.
(Not sure either, I think I meant backgrounds. Or perhaps the use of the And Symbol in one persons image)
Representing words via pictures.
(I thought to do this at first, in the method of some old childerns books. That would have the picture of a cat, instead of the word. But this really relates more to the second statement below)
What does the word "future" look like/ represent.
(Another snippit from someone's image. They had the words, 'unwritten' and 'redrawn' as litteral interpretations of the words using those words. How would I make future look? Would the word be sleek and refined? Or dirty and un-efficient? Or maybe even a circuit board to represent computers. Would that make sense to others?)
How to represent that with text vs. Pictures?
(Covered by Above.)
Sentences within sentences
(This was much more visual. In two instances. The first, was a sentence written, with other words within the sentence. In a smaller font. The other, was a sentence or two written, with certain words highlighted to create another sentence.)
Text Choice.
(The choice of which the text is most appropriate. Perhaps I meant if something is old, to make the text look old. Or something of the like. Otherwise this is pretty obvious to me. )
My comments [Comments for my critique]-
Not needed photo/picture
(I had an image of a boy screaming, the image wasn't needed as the written sketchy text was enough to say so.)
Changing the text. "ME"
(With the ?! I had [It's actually called something, but I can't remember the name.] IT looked like the written text said Me3l or something.)
Making the text swirls beginning larger, then text smaller towards the center
(My second image was two swirls of text. By doing the above, it made more sense.)
Stronger context on the first one.
(My first image displayed much more of a anger, and had more emotion then the second.)
As with any critique I found my own set of likes and dislikes. Along with my own curiosity for how some things were done.
The first set of images was very grungy, but beautiful in a way. The use of black and white photos, with layered text above it was most successful in my opinion, as opposed to the justified text of the other.
I'll have to remember the layering photo technique for another time. How to make text dirty, and typewriter-esc would've worked a little better for some of the larger words in the image I think. And the 'Kodac' wasn't distracting at all in the background. In fact, it added just the right texture to the whole thing. And gave you a hint to what some of the incorporated materials were. Though I thought it was a negitive of the film. Mm.
I took a few notes down during the critique, but as usual I didn't flesh them out. So some of this, I have no idea what it means.
Courier = my written notes
Where as this = my response.
images verse text
(No idea on this one.)Making things with more substance, by using symbols, ect.
(Not sure either, I think I meant backgrounds. Or perhaps the use of the And Symbol in one persons image)
Representing words via pictures.
(I thought to do this at first, in the method of some old childerns books. That would have the picture of a cat, instead of the word. But this really relates more to the second statement below)
What does the word "future" look like/ represent.
(Another snippit from someone's image. They had the words, 'unwritten' and 'redrawn' as litteral interpretations of the words using those words. How would I make future look? Would the word be sleek and refined? Or dirty and un-efficient? Or maybe even a circuit board to represent computers. Would that make sense to others?)
How to represent that with text vs. Pictures?
(Covered by Above.)
Sentences within sentences
(This was much more visual. In two instances. The first, was a sentence written, with other words within the sentence. In a smaller font. The other, was a sentence or two written, with certain words highlighted to create another sentence.)
Text Choice.
(The choice of which the text is most appropriate. Perhaps I meant if something is old, to make the text look old. Or something of the like. Otherwise this is pretty obvious to me. )
My comments [Comments for my critique]-
Not needed photo/picture
(I had an image of a boy screaming, the image wasn't needed as the written sketchy text was enough to say so.)
Changing the text. "ME"
(With the ?! I had [It's actually called something, but I can't remember the name.] IT looked like the written text said Me3l or something.)
Making the text swirls beginning larger, then text smaller towards the center
(My second image was two swirls of text. By doing the above, it made more sense.)
Stronger context on the first one.
(My first image displayed much more of a anger, and had more emotion then the second.)
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Matthew Fuller, and Paul D
Upon my first inspection of these two works you get a true feeling for both of them. Matthew Fuller's work, I get quite the impression. An hour or so later after reading it I found myself bored, and perplexed about where all of this was going. The type face was a classic 'No-no' if you wanted anyone to actually enjoy what you're writing. Thin, with serifs, on a computer monitor, or an iPod it was terrible to read. Formulaic, exact, boring.
Informitive though. The text iself.
Upon hunkering down to read Paul's work, "Rhythm Science" I found it interesting at least, visually the book was stimulating, and indeed a remix of a book. It broke, all of the rules I know of, except for the justified text rule. Paragraphs were non-existant, text blocks where all over the place. Text itself when it came to being a graphical item, spanned over pages, and took a simple color scheme. Much different then text ment to be read at length. Text was in massive walls, blocks and chunks. Separated by the hole within the page, and squished by various margin widths.
Perhaps the professor is meaning to give us the two extremes of text and see what we do with them.
The texts:
Matthew Fuller's "It Looks Like You're Writing a Letter: Microsoft Word."
Paul D. Miller's "Rhythm Science: The Art of the Mix Creates a New Language of Creativity"
Informitive though. The text iself.
Upon hunkering down to read Paul's work, "Rhythm Science" I found it interesting at least, visually the book was stimulating, and indeed a remix of a book. It broke, all of the rules I know of, except for the justified text rule. Paragraphs were non-existant, text blocks where all over the place. Text itself when it came to being a graphical item, spanned over pages, and took a simple color scheme. Much different then text ment to be read at length. Text was in massive walls, blocks and chunks. Separated by the hole within the page, and squished by various margin widths.
Perhaps the professor is meaning to give us the two extremes of text and see what we do with them.
The texts:
Matthew Fuller's "It Looks Like You're Writing a Letter: Microsoft Word."
Paul D. Miller's "Rhythm Science: The Art of the Mix Creates a New Language of Creativity"
Monday, September 5, 2011
Just My Type
It was at most very interesting to get a brief history of different fonts. A snapshot of why some choices may be better then others. And a blast from the past when digital type was just starting to be. Fonts a thing of the future, and Mac's shipping out with a variety of fonts to allow the everyman to be a designer. I never thought of the history of some fonts, and the fact that in the past there was only one type of typeface for everything.
In the end, my thoughts for fonts were purely gut. I know that this font doesn't go with another font because it just 'doesn't look right'. As for the how, or why I know that I never thought of. This is most interesting to me.
--- Written after reading :This Excerpt
In the end, my thoughts for fonts were purely gut. I know that this font doesn't go with another font because it just 'doesn't look right'. As for the how, or why I know that I never thought of. This is most interesting to me.
--- Written after reading :This Excerpt
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Garden of Forking Paths
Upon having a few readings of "The Garden of Forking Paths" IT didn't quite connect with me until the professor mentioned that it could deal with the internet, and to check out wikipedia.
It soon made a little more sense, but not quite.
My thought was that it had something to do with the manipulation of logic, and how words are spoken. How things can come back on to themselves, or how people can interpenetrate one thing different from some one else.
My last thought was more correct at least. I couldn't help but on my secondary reading after digesting the story itself, think of Choose-your-own adventure stories. The ability of people to enter a situation at two different places and achieve different outcomes is one of the bigger themes in the story.
Alright, cool. Then something about infinate possiblities. And the internet, I still don't quite understand. I Suppose the internet is filled with infinate possibilities, anyone can post about anything. A link can take you thousands of places. Say, stumbleupon? Yeah. I guess that makes sense.
I'm so terrible with words. -.- I think in pictures, and short statements.
It soon made a little more sense, but not quite.
My thought was that it had something to do with the manipulation of logic, and how words are spoken. How things can come back on to themselves, or how people can interpenetrate one thing different from some one else.
My last thought was more correct at least. I couldn't help but on my secondary reading after digesting the story itself, think of Choose-your-own adventure stories. The ability of people to enter a situation at two different places and achieve different outcomes is one of the bigger themes in the story.
Alright, cool. Then something about infinate possiblities. And the internet, I still don't quite understand. I Suppose the internet is filled with infinate possibilities, anyone can post about anything. A link can take you thousands of places. Say, stumbleupon? Yeah. I guess that makes sense.
I'm so terrible with words. -.- I think in pictures, and short statements.
Artist Statment
My art is a free flowing of my own self. My lines, loose and free flowing within illustrated work. My lines represent my flexibility to various situations. My art will represent not all art is serious, that I’m not serious. What I make is not taking a stand to point out some sort of political or social situation. It is also open to interpretation, you make my art, my art is carpe diem.
The subjects of my art are usually of sarcasm, humor or unrequited truth. Sometimes the subjects don’t quite make sense to everyone, my belief is that people will bring their own background to my art, and make my art, their art.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)