Book Cover – Project 2

 

coverfinalhard3

Before I begin to go into detail concerning my book cover, I would like to admit that I had a lot of fun working on this project, despite its difficulty and style. I’ve always tried to bend the rules when working on school work, more often to challenge myself than to challenge the rules, and I believe that my attitude shows through this work. While I’m unfamiliar with cleaning, old fashion, or even guide books, I decided to tackle it to see what would happen.

The original book cover was very dull, to say the least.  “The Queen of Clean’s” in big letters, and everything else in tiny letters, with no variety of color or even images. Having read through parts of the book, I knew that a book as interesting as this book easily deserved something a little bit more happy. So, in order to increase the Happy Value of the book cover,

I decided to go with a light purple and purple background, with simple, white text. Overall, I went for simplicity.

I decided on a retro-ish theme for the book cover to tackle a style I’m not used to seeing all the time. While it was fun, it was also painful and difficult, due to my inexperience. Since the original cover was bad, many other guide books I looked at were bad, and the retro images were limited, I really had to guess and check to get one that would “feel” right.

Feedback from others really pulled this one through. The first design was very icky and dirty-looking, and it transformed into something nice and clean. I wrote down all of their suggestions of font unity, placement of images, and other great feedback and worked on it constantly.

Overall, after the designing process and the placing of the book cover on the actual books was over, I’m pretty proud of what everyone has made. I just hope that in the future, I will also have great feedback to push me through my problems.

Got Junk?

I was satisfied with the final result of my type composition that relates to the image pair for Bulldozer vs. Panda. From the beginning of the project, the bold words Got Junk? appealed the most to me. My thumbnails were rather dull, simple, and predictable, but thanks to feedback, I really think I was able to push my limits. While at first, viewers provided me with feedback that the image was too chaotic. After several steps going backwards and adjustments, Ive balanced the text well with the image pair. Anyway, onto the actual composition.                                   

In the end, every single line of text on the composition was planned and placed to create the form that appealed most with the image pair. At first, I had placed them in a visually appealing way, but rather randomly. Classmates gave me great feedback, complimenting the good composition, but with awkward placement of the few extra words placed for eye candy and no particular reason. Finding the balanced I desired required me to make several adjustments. The words, Got Junk? were bolded in the classified ad, and as it stood out most in the ad, I placed it in big, bold letters on the canvas to attract the viewers to easily see the focal point. I associate the word junk with very random, piles of garbage, like a picture of a typical junkyard. Junk Removal was also a line of copy that I wanted to stand out, to hint at the focus as well. The rest of the words were extra, like junk. I laid the extra words out appropriately by placing the image pair next to the composition, and carefully placing the extra words to continue the track of junk next to the bulldozer. If the two completed compositions are separated, the junk can be viewed as the panda. Afterwards, I carefully adjusted the white space in every line, creating small, subtle white images of machinery-like objects within the Got Junk? area to represent the machine, and to eliminate as much awkward white space as possible. The junk words in the bottom left were also adjusted, but it was impossible to eliminate all of the small white spaces, due to its nature. Overall, Im satisfied with the result, and feel that I learned quite a bit from the experience about composition and relationships.

Got Junk? – Project 1_2

For this project, we were to take our text presentations and expand to create a new artwork that reflected the words. From the initial draft, I decided to go beyond my normal boundaries again, much like I did to create my type composition. From the beginning step of my creation process, I brainstormed, but reminded myself, not to create a composition that simply plays off of what my type composition says, but rather, to create a composition that the type composition can play off of. Therefore, I worked with the thought that perhaps I could make a piece that looked like it was created prior to the type composition, not after.

Every piece of this composition, save one, comes from the Paste Magazine, a magazine for upcoming bands and musical information. The zombie televisions were to represent the “junk” that a common person (the guy in the chair) must face today. A connection I made by using a musical magazine, though subtle, shows certain television channels that once devoted to presenting the people with good music that now shows nothing but “junk” consisting of reality shows and other dull shows of little intelligence.

The man’s upset expression and direction that he is looking was perfect. The man looks as I wanted him to look: afraid, worried, and uncomfortable by the media. For the background, I decided to find a light, blue-ish background to bring some contrast and depth to the chair and zombies. Thanks to the tips of classmates, I really managed to get the depth done the way I wanted to.

Image Pairs and Synopsis

Man vs. Dog

            For the first image pair, I selected an icon of a dog-like creature and a cadaver out of an almanac. Initially, I sought to find any relationship that could be formed from two very strange images, and found the task to be difficult. I identified the dog as mysterious and unusual, but still natural and innocent, and I have identified the cadaver as a man who is no longer alive, and has returned to nature, no more superior than the dog. By placing the white dog to represent an innocent animal, as if it was eating from the detailed and exposed guts of the cadaver, I try to show that to nature, they are the same, and that the dog is reminding the man of nature’s balance. While men may feel superior to animals like dogs in life, they are not immortal, and share the same dirt that the dogs do in death.

Bulldozer vs. Panda

            For my second image pair, I selected a typical icon of a panda, as well as line art of a bulldozer, pushing junk. I present the panda with solid contrast, with an innocent look about it, to represent its unawareness to danger. Pandas are endangered species, mostly due to their constant loss of habitat, low birthrate and target of poaching that humanity has caused over the years. Therefore, just as pandas are being pushed off of the world, the bulldozer, which represents man, is pushing the innocent panda off of the canvas. The driver’s facelessness is my attempt to universalize the driver as any person, and allow the viewer to put him or herself in that position. I wonder if it was merely a coincidence that both of my image pairs ended up with the popular conflict of man vs. nature.

Synopsis

I was satisfied with the final result of my type composition that relates to the image pair for Bulldozer vs. Panda. From the beginning of the project, the bold words “Got Junk?” appealed the most to me. My thumbnails were rather dull, simple, and predictable, but thanks to feedback, I really think I was able to push my limits. While at first, viewers provided me with feedback that the image was too chaotic. After several steps going backwards and adjustments, I’ve balanced the text well with the image pair. Anyway, onto the actual composition.

In the end, every single line of text on the composition was planned and placed to create the form that appealed most with the image pair. At first, I had placed them in a visually appealing way, but rather randomly. Classmates gave me great feedback, complimenting the good composition, but with awkward placement of the few extra words placed for eye candy and no particular reason. Finding the balanced I desired required me to make several adjustments. The words, “Got Junk?” were bolded in the classified ad, and as it stood out most in the ad, I placed it in big, bold letters on the canvas to attract the viewers to easily see the focal point. I associate the word “junk” with very random, piles of garbage, like a picture of a typical junkyard. “Junk Removal” was also a line of copy that I wanted to stand out, to hint at the focus as well. The rest of the words were extra, like junk. I laid the extra words out appropriately by placing the image pair next to the composition, and carefully placing the extra words to continue the track of junk next to the bulldozer. If the two completed compositions are separated, the junk can be viewed as the panda. Afterwards, I carefully adjusted the white space in every line, creating small, subtle white images of machinery-like objects within the “Got Junk?” area to represent the machine, and to eliminate as much awkward white space as possible. The “junk” words in the bottom left were also adjusted, but it was impossible to eliminate all of the small white spaces, due to its nature. Overall, I’m satisfied with the result, and feel that I learned quite a bit from the experience about composition and relationships.

 

Virtual Idea Notebook 2

In everyday life, we look at images all over the place, and usually know what each of them mean, but in semiotics, such images are broken down into different categories, such as icons and symbols. Icons and symbols can be compared and contrasted as images that represent meaning to something else.

A picture of a red man in a seatbelt represents itself: a seatbelt. The color red is a symbol, though, that usually represents a warning. Please wear your seatbelt!

Icons are images that visually relate to what they represent, and most likely, if it is a public sign, people can identify its meaning just by looking at it, even if they have never seen the image before. For example, if you get in your car, and turn it on, your car may display a picture of a seatbelt, usually in red. While the color red is a symbolic characteristic, the picture of the seatbelt still clearly represents just that – a seatbelt. Of course, one could take it a step farther and see it as a symbol, if instead of looking at it as “a sign that represents a seatbelt ” it is instead looked upon as “this sign is representing a warning that the driver is not wearing a seatbelt.”

A U-shaped arrow overlapped wth a red crossed circle can somehow tell drivers that they are not allowed to turn around on the road.

Symbols, unlike icons, have no relationship between what the sign looks like and what it represents. People only understand symbols through an agreement (mentioned earlier). For example, any red traffic sign. While the color red does not represent the act of yielding or stopping, it is agreed as such. We have learned through cultural training that all red-colored traffic signs represent information that involves stopping, yielding, or forbidden actions, such as No Parking. A U-shaped arrow, overlapped with a red crossed circle, while it doesn’t say what it means, we know that it means we cannot U-turn.

References:
FreeFoto.com – Picture of No U Turn Road Traffic Sign – http://www.freefoto.com/images/41/07/41_07_54—No-U-Turn-Road-Traffic-Sign_web.jpg?&k=No+U+Turn+Road+Traffic+Sign

Subaru Canada – Tech Tips – Seatbelt icon image – http://www.subaru.ca/Content/7907/Media/General/WebImage/maintSeatbeltLight.gif

First Visual Post

 

 

The green light in this action shot tells the driver that he/she may continue.

 

Agreement in the world of semiotics is the statement that all sights and sounds that represent something to  certain group of people, through the agreement (in a regular definition of the word) of the people in the country, those sights and sounds become such representatives. In more simple words, when a group of people decide that something means something else, that is agreement. In the United States, the green light that hangs over the traffic roads is represented as “your car is safe to go,” while the red light is seen as “stop, or face possible destruction.” The red light and green light are looked upon as such, because of an agreement in the past that stated that the red light would represent “stop” and the green light would represent “go” had been made and put into action. An interesting note to add on the matter is that while it is called a “green light” in America, the green light in Japanese is called a “blue light,” despite the fact that the color is still green.

 

The word electric fan does not cool you off, despite the fact that the object it represents, does.

 

 

Also, the concept of Duality in the world of semiotics is that the signifier, or for example, name of an object, is  not related to the object, also known as the signified (in most cases). Duality is a somewhat confusing concept to grasp at first, because it involves detaching the object from the name of the object. When we look at a machine that blows wind at you to cool you off, we identify it as an “electric fan”. Yet, the word “fan” itself does not cool you off, and the machine is identified as a different name, to different groups of people, despite it being the same thing. Going back to using Japanese as an example, because it is where I am from, and am most familiar with it, the electric fan is called a “senpuuki.” An interesting side-note about duality and the reason I mentioned the fan’s Japanese name, is that the signifier does relate to the signified, when multiple signs (or names) in the signifier represent what the signified does, and therefore, relates to it. The word, “senpuuki” can be broken down into three words: sen, puu, and ki. “Sen” means “fan”, “puu” means “wind”, and “ki” means “machine”. And as we can see, a “fan wind machine” is exactly what it is.

 

The Japanese word for electric fan.