Color Presentations

I found several of the presentations on color very interesting. One of them was the presentation on green meaning "passion"--I have always considered green to be the color of greed, illness, or envy, but never passion. Several of the quotes that Ardis quoted from Old English texts, I would have interpreted completely differently had I not known what she taught us. It was a very fascinating subject because it is an iteration of the color completely unexpected to me.

Another surprise was that pink used to be a "boy" color. The logic does make sense--red means strength and courage and therefore is a "man's color," yet a baby boy is a small man, so pink (a very light red) would be his color. It is fascinating how deeply embedded within ourselves our notions of pink are in America. When the trend first broke for men to incorporate more pink into their outfits, I know that several people were shocked, and many men did not want anything to do with the trend. It's funny how a simple color can bring out such threats and insecurities in people.

The last thing I learned that was extremely interesting to me was the use of orange in weight loss campaigns. As was said, the color stimulates the appetite, which seems like a cruel marketing ploy--but at the same time, the color denotes ambition and success as well. It is interesting that the "hunger monster" in the Weight Watchers ads (AKA the "bad guy") is the same color as the color that signifies ambition and success. When I think of orange, the only food that comes to mind is oranges (or products made of orange flavoring, like orange sherbet, dreamsicles, etcetera)--and suddenly, without fail, I find myself hungry! I do have to wonder, though, if it has an affect on my appetite only because I was told that it's supposed to.

Color

I really enjoyed the readings on color in Lutpon and Phillip's book. The most interesting feature about color to me is the science behind it. I never thought about it before reading about color, but the decision of which colors complement each other and which are analagous is completely scientific (based on placement on the color wheel). Because of this, color choice should be completely foolproof--as long as one has the knowledge and the tools.

Something else I find very interesting is the difference between RGB and CMYK. I never gave it much thought, but I did find it peculiar in the past that printer ink cartridges contained cyan, pink, and yellow as opposed to the primary colors that I had always been taught can create any color. Again, though I found this peculiar, I never put too much thought into it--I just accepted it for what it was. Now I have a better understanding of why this technology is successful.

In class, we discussed the 216 web friendly colors, and though that is a lot of colors, it really isn't that impressive. There are so many slight variations of colors that it is almost surprising that (not all) computers have the technology to display the differences. I think computers that had the ability to process and display these colors would be truly revolutionizing--but I wonder if that attention to detail on the computer screen might be harmful to our eyes.

Color

When I took the color code test at www.colorcode.com/free_personality_test, I was analyzed as being a "blue." According to the site, blues:

...have distinct preferences and have the most controlling personality. Their personal code of ethics is remarkably strong and they expect others to live honest, committed lives as well. They enjoy sharing meaningful moments in conversation as well as paying close attention to special life events (e.g. birthdays and anniversaries). Blues are dependable, thoughtful, and analytical; but can also be self-righteous, worry-prone, and moody. They are "sainted pit-bulls" who never let go of something or someone once they are committed. When you deal with a BLUE, be sincere and make a genuine effort to understand and appreciate them.

I was surprised at how accurate I find this to be. I did not expect it to give an accurate depiction of who I am whatsoever, but many of the points raised here are fairly accurate. However, blue is not the color I ever would have used to describe these personality traits. When I think of "stubborn," I think red, and I don't know what color I'd use to describe a "controlling" personality--but it's not blue. To me, blue is peaceful and tranquil.

When I took the color aura test at www.testcafe.com/color, my results were that I had a purple aura. This site did not explain what a purple aura was, but the site www.divinelight.biz explained a purple aura as:

Magical, original, tends to be unconventional, often has psychic abilities, unusual charisma and charm, the uncommon ability to make their dreams come true, or manifest their desires in the material world, wish to charm and delight others and can easily connect with higher planes of consciousness. Playful, non-judgemental, tolerant of others' eccentricities. Sensitive and compassionate. "Purples" appreciate tenderness and kindness in others. Not especially practical, they tend to prefer to live in a dream world of their own creation. You'll find many "violet or purple" entertainers, movie stars, free thinkers, visionaries, revolutionaries, and otherwise singular and magnetic individuals. Dark violet could indicate a need to take charge of their life, or perhaps, that the person needs time to spiritually ground him/herself.

I tend to not take this interpretation very seriously, and I doubt this is a very scientific interpretation. Interestingly, though, purple is my favorite color.

The most interesting results came from the test at www.colorquiz.com. I did not expect this test to be very accurate, either, because it was simply choosing colors by order of preference (twice). The results seemed very in tune with my personality, however. I don't know how scientifically accurate a test like this is, but I know I was shocked at two out of three of these tests surprising me with their accuracy!

Despite my own experience with these color tests, I don't think they are very credible sources. I think they could be wildly incorrect. One of them asked questions based on how one acted as a child, and though certain qualities may be intrinsic to oneself, I don't think everybody is as related to the ways they were as a child as others may be. The aura test is not based on anything credible, in my opinion--it was a list of preferences that are supposed to define one's "aura," which is an astrological attribute, if my understanding is accurate. I don't know how one liking to dance and one not liking to dance would define the separate colors they exude.

One thing that I do think these tests are good for is detecting mood--but depending on how we associate colors. In the Western world, there are some tried-and-true definitions of what it is to feel "blue," and other color associations, but just because the mass majority associates blue with depression doesn't mean that the individual does. When choosing colors by preference, they may choose blue for a totally different reason, but it may be interpreted as the most common analysis of the color. With that said, I think it's as close as one can get to an analysis of this magnitude without making an appointment to visit with a psychologist.

Module 2

For my module 2 project, I did a portion of a song by Bright Eyes called, "Bowl of Oranges." The first half of the song is a story, and the second half is basically the author's analysis of the story he just told. The portion I am working with is the analysis. The text I'm working with is:

So, that is how I learned the lesson that everyone is alone
and your eyes must do some raining if you're ever going to grow
but when crying don't help and you can't compose yourself
it's best to compose a poem;
an honest verse of longing or a simple song of hope
that is why I'm singing, baby don't worry 'cause now I got your back
and every time you feel like crying,
I'm going to try and make you laugh
and if I can't, if it just hurts too bad,
then we will wait for it to pass
and I will keep your company
through those days so long and black
and we'll keep working on the problem that we know we'll never solve
of love's uneven remainders, our lives are fractions of a whole
but if the world could remain within a frame like a painting on a wall
then I think we would see the beauty
then we would stand in awe
at our still lives posed
like a bowl of oranges
like a story told
by the fault lines and the soil.

I really enjoyed working with this text because it was so interesting to play up certain words with fonts and colors. I thought I would struggle to convey the way I decoded the text without being able to use images--but I found that font and color substitutes for images surprisingly nicely. I was able to employ imagery in my text, too, by drawing out the word "long" and by turning the line, "could remain within a frame like a painting on a wall," into a square-like frame. I also turned the two lines, "at our still lives posed/like a bowl of oranges" into a bowl-shaped text. Originally, this was the only color I used in the whole piece--I made this text orange, so that both the imagery of the oranges and the bowl was in tact within the text. Later, I changed the colors on other words, too, because it seemed fitting.

My favorite fonts I used were the broken-up and distorted fonts I used for the phrases "uneven remainders" and "fractions." I wanted to really express that these were uneven, broken, and not full--as opposed to the bold and full text of "whole" in the words, "fractions of a whole." The font I used later on for "fault lines" was similar, but slightly different. I wanted my audience to decode all of these words as being unsteady.

As I revise this draft, I will play more with creating shapes out of my words. Some of my classmates really employed this technique, and it worked very nicely. I hope to incorporate some of that method into my final copy.

Reading Response: Williams

I always knew I was annoyed when People Capitalized Words for No Reason in the Middle of Sentences.

I also knew that I hated when people WROTE ME E-MAILS IN ALL CAPS.

But I never knew why I disliked these things; I assumed it was because it was simply obnoxious--now, however, I realize that it's more than me thinking those are annoying things to do. I dislike them because they are more difficult to read. There is a science behind it!

What I gathered from the readings on readability and legibility are that things are intrinsically more readable and legible due to the font face, the size, and the spacing. The reason that CAPS are difficult to read is because we recognize words by their shapes--and a word in all CAPS has a shape of a rectangle. Therefore, we have to comb through each word, letter-by-letter, until we recognize it and can move in. This adds time to our reading process.

A similar thing happens when we read sentences written in Title Case, because our brains are not accustomed to reading in that manner.

I was also surprised to learn that this font, Courier, is less legible (and less readable). This font looks very reminiscent of the font used on old fashioned typewriters. Typewriters were used for several years, so I wonder why the standard type would be one that is now criticized for its legibility and readability.

It is fascinating the things we learn about how our brains absorb information by studying typefaces. I always figured these things were simply preference--some people like these types of fonts, other likes these. Now I know there is much more to it. I have already started noticing the difference between headlines and body text, sans serif and serif. Studying this is quite scientific and quite psychological!

Political Cartoon

I found this political cartoon on the website for the Committee for Countering Military Recruitment (http://www.countermilitary.org/WhoWeAre/index.html). They are a site that aims to educate America's youth and the reality of military recruitment because they feel that students are often undereducated by military recruiters--especially in low-income and rural areas. This committee aims to advocate against joining the military, and pursuing other options like attending college directly after high school.

In this cartoon, the person on the left dressed in military garb is speaking to the graduate, saying, "I figure it's easier to find a war than a job these days." The cartoon is a clear retaliation not only to the military in general, but specifically to the message military recruiters are sending to America's youth. As a viewer of the cartoon, my assumption is that recruiters are sending the message that joining the army is the best option for recent graduates, especially due to the current state of the economy, where job insecurity prevails. How this cartoon is decoded clearly depends on one's personal beliefs about the current war. As a person who is against the current war, I decode the image as depressing that anybody is receiving this message about the military and choosing to go to war over getting an education because they feel that is their only option--and considering the web site I found this cartoon on, I believe that to be the way the message was encoded.

However, if someone is pro-war, or has a close friend or family member going to war or choosing this option, they may not see the message in the way it was meant to be decoded. They may see it as the truth--that it is easier to find a war than a job, and that it is the most viable option for young people. After all, the degree-holding graduate on the right is the silent person in the cartoon, even looking sheepish in his cap and gown. It is the military man who has a gun, is active in the cartoon, and looks as if he has a plan. He, too, is holding a degree after all. Despite what I believe to be the aim of the cartoon, it is reasonable that it would be interpreted differently by someone with a differing political stance than myself.

Chocolate

Because I have a part time job at Fannie May, I chose to analyze one of their images for this week's artifact. When I'm at work, I am surrounded by images, advertisements, and packaging that is meant to be decoded by consumers as "gourmet," "indulgent," "sinful," "delicious," and the last goes on. A pound of chocolate in-store is $22.99, and on the website is $24.99--this is not a cheap treat, so the price must be justified to customers, especially customers unfamiliar with the chocolate. Besides being part of my job description to "talk up" the candy and its quality, there is visual evidence all over the store (and website) trying to paint the candy in a way that makes it irresistible--as a gift and for a treat to oneself.

I chose an image of truffles because truffles are the most expensive chocolate Fannie May carries. Whereas a regular pound of chocolate is $22.99 (and depending on the candy, this is usually about 22 pieces--so around a dollar per piece), the price for 10.7 ounces of truffles (16 ounces being a pound) is $17.99. The cause for this price difference is that truffles are handcrafted--but to someone unfamiliar with the process, they would be put off by the increased price of this candy compared to others. So why would they buy it?

The first thing to notice is that the truffles are boxed in packaging that is red and gold. Red, as I mentioned in my last post, is a color that is used to get one's attention. A regular box of Fannie May is white, so immediately this is different. The gold text gives the box an extra embellishment--gold is coveted, gold is expensive, and gold is one of the colors that signifies royalty--therefore the mere packaging of this product gives the impression that it is fancy, pricey, and special. Even the font has an artistic, cursive "T" followed by all caps, which are meant to get our attention.

This image continues to play up the colors of gold and red. The truffles are lying on a red napkin upon a gold tray. When I see a gold tray, the first thing that comes to my mind is that whatever is on the tray is fit for a king. I have never known anyone to eat off of a gold tray, but it is what I imagine would be the dishes of choice of kings and queens. This may be decoded differently by others, but my decoding tells me that whatever is upon this tray is extremely pricey. Even the white cushion the truffles are placed upon looks royal--as if someone (a butler or maybe even a servant) has brought the food to someone who is perhaps eating them in bed.

For all these reasons, the truffles may appeal to a customer who doesn't mind spending a little extra for something that appears to be worth it. For people that won't only the best when they purchase a gift, or even a treat for themselves, they may spring for this more expensive option simply because of how they decode the colors, text, and imagery. However, the cynics may decode the advertisement as being excessive or maybe too showy or too extravagant, and may prefer to spend less on a candy that is more suited to them. Perhaps the extravagance of the truffles makes them feel uncomfortable and they'd rather have an "average" box of candy.

Paper Towels

In class, we briefly discussed the packaging of three well-known brands of paper towels. I wanted to further that discussion by offering my analysis here.

The brand that stands out to me most is Scott. Bounty and Brawny have several similarities, which I will get to later, but Scott is the most unique of the three. Its lettering is white rather than dark--and the font is "fancier" than the font for Bounty and Brawny. As was brought up in class, it looks more feminine than the others--which genderizes not only the paper towels themselves, but the act of cleaning. Paper towels are most commonly used for cleaning, especially in kitchens--and it is some people's school of thought that the kitchen is part of the women's "sphere." With all this said, if I were buying paper towels, I would not go for this brand. It may have a better aesthetic, and it may look prettier or even "frilly"--but paper towels should look strong and durable, and those are two adjectives I would not use to describe Scott brand paper towels given this packaging.

This brings us to Bounty and Brawny, both of which have strong, dark font that does paint the paper towels to look durable. Similar to Scott, Brawny uses a red background. What I know about the color red is that it is used to bring attention to something--therefore, both Scott and Brawny stand out because of the red. However, I am put off by what appears to me a lumberjack. It seems that this brand is marketed toward men, and because I am not a man, I might not spring for this brand given this packaging. When I see this packaging, the first thing I think of, as far as audience goes, is that this brand is aimed toward single men, perhaps divorcees, who want to feel as if they, too, can clean effectively even if they are not women. A stereotype that stems from the stereotype of women having to do the household cleaning is the stereotype that men are not efficient or effective at cleaning. The Brawny packaging reinforces to its target audience that men, too, can clean. If I were a single man, maybe this packaging would appeal to me.

The most effective packaging though, in my opinion, is Bounty. Though the font makes it seem strong and durable, the packaging is fairly gender neutral. The font may not be ultra feminine, but the remainder of the packaging is void of other gender markers. Some may view green and blue as a masculine color--but it is complemented with orange, which is a pretty gender neutral color in my opinion. As a consumer, I am not put off by any images (like Brawny) and I am not untrusting of the brand due to the font or color choice (like Scott). The font size is the largest on this brand and covers the most space--it really pops out at the consumer. Though isolating an audience is a good marketing ploy because it isolates about 50% of people, I would be weary of any product that has a "manly man" or a "girly girl" trying to "sell" the product to me--but to others, this may be successful. As always, it depends on how the consumer decodes the color scheme, text, and images.

Reading Response: Thinking with Type

I found the sections on text extremely interesting. I have never formally studied text and font, and I was surprised to learn that many of the fonts that I know by name are named after calligraphers and printers from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries--the "humanist" fonts. I never considered fonts to be a form of art, especially relatively simple fonts like Times New Roman. I am beginning to look at text much differently.

Another point the authors make is that italic type is, "not simply a slanted version of the roman; it incorporates the curves, angles, and narrower proportions associated with cursive forms" (15). I took a careful look at italic Times New Roman after reading that passage, and I took notice to things that I otherwise may never have noticed. For one, the letter "a" looks different in italic type ("a"). It does not look like that in the italic version of every font, but it is something that I either never noticed, or something that I always overlooked.

I think I also enjoyed reading these sections because I enjoy learning about the history of the Early Modern world, and much of the readings were about the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and how fonts have evolved throughout history. However, when the authors started getting into the technical terms--x-height, line weight, leading, etc--I lost focus. I am not very familiar with this jargon, and it was difficult for me to comprehend because I don't have any prior knowledge of the subject.

An interesting point that was brought up was the redundancy of paragraphs (94). Paragraphs are traditionally marked by both a line break and an indent--and besides that, paragraphs are wholly invented by the literary world and do not occur in nature. I had never thought of this before, but it is true--it is an essential part of how we make sense of communication. Similarly, in my opinion, true sentences do not occur naturally either. When people speak, it is often simply a very long run-on, littered with "um"s and "uhh"s that take place for proper punctuation. It is interesting, though, that it is acceptable for the redundancy of paragraphs, but verbal redundancy is frowned upon ("past history," etc). I wonder why redundancy in design and organization is more acceptable.

Module 1

I had a lot of fun creating and sharing our Module 1 projects in class. It was very interesting to see how different everybody's map of themselves was. There was a very wide variety of types of visual maps, and it was interesting the choices people made to represent certain symbols. Some people only used text, and people, like me, only used images.

When I was making my map, I realized that a prevailing theme for everything I was including on it was the idea of education or using one's mind to its fullest potential. The top half of my map was things that I was born into and had no say in (being burn in a suburban town, and being born female)--and though these were things I couldn't change, I also had symbols to represent that I challenged those parts of me in order to become the person I am. Critical thinking is the key of my life--careful analyzation is paramount.

Because I had so many symbols on my map to represent critical thought, I made my button to say, "Think Outside the Sphere" with an image of a globe in the center. Obviously, this is a play on the saying, "Think Outside the Box," but to me, the 'box' represents man-made constraints that we create to give meaning to life, but there is so much more to this life than that. It is also a play on the symbols of my map representing environmentalism and animal rights--the environment and animal life are huge components of Planet Earth whose interests can easily be forgotten or ignored--thus, thinking outside the "sphere" means thinking about the planet and its interests as a whole.

I wasn't conscious of it at the time, but I realized in class that my map follows the model of a decentralized network. Many people had their maps completely connected like a series of events, and others had themselves in the center and a centralized network expanding outward. Mine, though, had three larger images (these would be the "hubs") and smaller symbols pointing outward from those parts of the network. In the end, everything is inter-related, but I could have expressed this better had I used more arrows. If I could change anything about my project, it would be creating more of a defined network. It is difficult to decode my map without explanation because of the lack of text present. I have several symbols that can be decoded in a number of ways, depending on who is doing the decoding.