I believe that the four of our projects have similarities of subtraction and consolidation: Tom and Luke both subtract from letterforms to push legibility into a new realm or art, Lance consolidates two messages into one form (which takes the form of an ambigram, that creates an aesthetic and functional form), and mine which also condenses two messages into one form, the primary vehicle is the 3D realm that aesthetically serves as a sculpture.
Taking the aesthetic/art elements of these four projects, they all have the by-product of becoming art. The question seems to be how far we are pushing the typographic side in communicating and how far are we pushing the aesthetic side to primarily serve as something visually stimulating in the world of today? We are constantly standing on the border of TYPE and IMAGE and sometimes can't be sure if we are utilizing one more than the other. Using different vehicles and media, the 21st century is constantly pushing technology, contexts, and changing our perception of what should art... and what should information/communication be or look like. Are we really serving typography's goal of communicating logical information or are we making art that acts as an ideogram that tries to articulate a broad idea?
THEME DESCRIPTION BRAINSTORM our goal for Friday: 'Define and describe the depth and breadth of typographic focus and it's importance to the field.'
Just thinking outloud...
The basis of our idea, communication in the modern age/21st century, consists of the concept/theory of visual language. Today type and message play very visual role, no longer are type and image separate entities. This is where we can push the limits of the message and determine what is works and what doesn't based upon legibility and complexity of the message. With this idea we can explore the impact of appeal; deeper connections and feelings with the message as well as the ability to form various points of view upon a single message. This could even open up and reach across cultural and language barriers?
Also, the vast majority of communication today is being spread across the internet and other interactive/electronic mediums. With effortless access to most of these mediums there is a flood of content and we may explore some ways to fight that by creating meaningful content. We should also take in to consideration that the viewer/audience, in this age, is often the producer, or participant, in creating this communication language as well as the consumer; prevalent in social networking, internet, and interactive. In a way they are also participants solely by their individual interpretation and point of view.
Micah makes a good point of where to draw the line of being logical versus abstract (art); how can we utilize both to create a message? How do you know when you go too far? This conference could prove to be important to the field due to its innovation and experimentation, it could shed light on how to entirely alter messages and communication, while being implemented into the 'style' of 21st century communication.
This is what I have for now but I want to do more brainstorming on our typographic focus and how it can be used across mediums and such...
Type and Image I think this would be a good title for the conference. It is broad enough to include all of our work and include a large group of people. We can push legibility and communication techniques (visual language), type as art (including type as image) and how the mind works (ambigrams etc).
I'm liking the way this is developing...any idea on how we can collaborate for out 'theme description'?
I just found an international type conference that is exploring similar things with speakers such as Neville Brody and Andrew Byrom. Check it out, I think it will be really helpful!
I just had a GREAT idea...so i discovered the Kansas City Walkable Convention District and it is really unique and I think it could play very well with our convention. It would add some diversity and culture to our campaign, let me know what you think!
I think the "Type and Image" idea works to our advantage, Tom is right, it is very broad, but we can have the specific focus that primarily weighs upon "how the mind works" with todays visual language media's, techniques and context of application.
I do like the KC Walkable Convention, its a pretty neat Idea! What if the foundation (or supporting element) of our convention revolved around traveling to different venues to see how our different experiments work in action within their specific contexts' or environments. It could be a tour based convention with certain workshops and presentations at their appropriate venues.
Beyond that concept I think we are narrowing our theme down to how the mind works in reading type or image first, information or just art, subjective or objective?
I am thinking we include the 3 subjects Tom mentioned and relate them back to the communication in the 21st century idea. Based on the email, Tyler really liked that idea and the potential it has...so I think that should ultimately be out focus with subcategories such as visual language, legibility, etc.
So our theme brief is due tomorrow..any ideas on how to accomplish that??
*We could start a blog for our type conference...seemed to work well for Tom and I versus looking up comments.
And as Micah mentioned on his comment that has now disappeared, regarding Tyler's email I do not mind working in our large group. I think we will be a force to be reckoned with and we should get along and communicate quite well.
Hey, My comment disappeared because Lance and I were discussing a few things. I really don't want to stray from the group, but I'm really trying to convince myself that my experimental project fits in with this "Type/image" borderline art.
I'm sorry guys, but I don't think the essence of my project fits in the current theme of You-Luke and You-Tom. I'd just be kidding myself to say that I am comfortable with how my project will take a 180 degree. My Project is completely 3-D and all about type communication, I Didn't see an in-balance of type/image & art in my experiments. I emailed tyler about it, no response yet. But I think my project and Lance's, to a certain degree, throws a wrench in the gears.
So for the sake of being true to all of our projects, which I think is the most important element here, I am respectfully bowing out of this group and sticking with the original pairing of Lance and I.
Sorry, I didn't know we were all meeting up at 1pm to have a discussion haha. jk.
Well here's the thing. After reading Tyler's email, I think it might be best if we stick in pairs rather than all four. Micah and I were discussing some things, and I don't think we're quitting...we're just downsizing the group. I think it would be best if we were in pairs. After thinking a while, I think my project dealt with Micah's a little more in creating two or more messages into one form, and although the outcome became a piece of art...it was not my original goal. Hopefully this does not become a problem, but we both wanted to say something before we got too far into the project.
No, in all seriousness I understand where you guys are coming from and it makes sense. Either way we would have gone with this project I think it will come out great; glad we resolved this early and everything.
Indeed, well good-luck to both of our groups, and I think it would still be good to bounce ideas off each other and have informal crits about the others' project (for an outside opinion). Should be fun to see both of our Conferences develop!
Well, this is the most amount of comments I've received on any of my posts! Wat up!
I'm now sitting here with a mouth larger than Texas, having just had one of my wisdom teeth pulled. Not fun. Is the reason I'm just now chiming in.
I have to say I was quite looking forward to being a big group and the challenge of that. Micah and Lance are you saying that your work doesn't fit into Type and Image? Could it not be a branch of that? in some way?
This is what Tyler said as far as a group project, for the theme: "When is communication hampered and when is it enhanced by an experimental approach?" I think that could be a decent theme for us. I think the type and image/art approach doesn't fit with us all, you're right there Micah, but, could we all fit into a conference theme like 'Type Expo 2010: Explorations in Communication' something like that? I think we're all basically looking at different ways to communicate and if that turns into art or not, so be it?
I definitely think that Lance and I's project is a branch of the Type/Image theme, I just feel the essence of both lance and I's projects revolve around double-meanings & the economic solutions of consolidating two message-forms into one. I think being a branch of something... is just not utilizing the potential of the core concept of Lance and my experiments.
I definitely think we can justify anything and find commonalities between all of our projects; that much is apparent. I love Tyler's definition as well, but in my opinion, (not to be rude in the slightest), to me that concept is way to broad and I could see how that could fit everyones project. I was looking forward to the challenge of working in a big group too, but I don't think this project is the right one with such defined existing concepts loosely fitting into an umbrella term of Communication Exploration. Its really what everyone is trying to achieve = communication through the learning curve of experimentation and exploration.
I'm not saying that we couldn't all make our projects work in a title like Type Expo: Exploration in Communication, I just think the initial core concepts of our original experiments would just be a by-product next to "communication."
I believe that the four of our projects have similarities of subtraction and consolidation: Tom and Luke both subtract from letterforms to push legibility into a new realm or art, Lance consolidates two messages into one form (which takes the form of an ambigram, that creates an aesthetic and functional form), and mine which also condenses two messages into one form, the primary vehicle is the 3D realm that aesthetically serves as a sculpture.
ReplyDeleteTaking the aesthetic/art elements of these four projects, they all have the by-product of becoming art. The question seems to be how far we are pushing the typographic side in communicating and how far are we pushing the aesthetic side to primarily serve as something visually stimulating in the world of today? We are constantly standing on the border of TYPE and IMAGE and sometimes can't be sure if we are utilizing one more than the other. Using different vehicles and media, the 21st century is constantly pushing technology, contexts, and changing our perception of what should art... and what should information/communication be or look like. Are we really serving typography's goal of communicating logical information or are we making art that acts as an ideogram that tries to articulate a broad idea?
THEME DESCRIPTION BRAINSTORM
ReplyDeleteour goal for Friday: 'Define and describe the depth and breadth of typographic focus and it's importance to the field.'
Just thinking outloud...
The basis of our idea, communication in the modern age/21st century, consists of the concept/theory of visual language. Today type and message play very visual role, no longer are type and image separate entities. This is where we can push the limits of the message and determine what is works and what doesn't based upon legibility and complexity of the message. With this idea we can explore the impact of appeal; deeper connections and feelings with the message as well as the ability to form various points of view upon a single message. This could even open up and reach across cultural and language barriers?
Also, the vast majority of communication today is being spread across the internet and other interactive/electronic mediums. With effortless access to most of these mediums there is a flood of content and we may explore some ways to fight that by creating meaningful content. We should also take in to consideration that the viewer/audience, in this age, is often the producer, or participant, in creating this communication language as well as the consumer; prevalent in social networking, internet, and interactive. In a way they are also participants solely by their individual interpretation and point of view.
Micah makes a good point of where to draw the line of being logical versus abstract (art); how can we utilize both to create a message? How do you know when you go too far?
This conference could prove to be important to the field due to its innovation and experimentation, it could shed light on how to entirely alter messages and communication, while being implemented into the 'style' of 21st century communication.
This is what I have for now but I want to do more brainstorming on our typographic focus and how it can be used across mediums and such...
Type and Image
ReplyDeleteI think this would be a good title for the conference. It is broad enough to include all of our work and include a large group of people. We can push legibility and communication techniques (visual language), type as art (including type as image) and how the mind works (ambigrams etc).
I'm liking the way this is developing...any idea on how we can collaborate for out 'theme description'?
ReplyDeleteI just found an international type conference that is exploring similar things with speakers such as Neville Brody and Andrew Byrom. Check it out, I think it will be really helpful!
"lending grace to language"
I just had a GREAT idea...so i discovered the Kansas City Walkable Convention District and it is really unique and I think it could play very well with our convention. It would add some diversity and culture to our campaign, let me know what you think!
ReplyDeleteKansas City Walkable Convention District
I think the "Type and Image" idea works to our advantage, Tom is right, it is very broad, but we can have the specific focus that primarily weighs upon "how the mind works" with todays visual language media's, techniques and context of application.
ReplyDeleteI do like the KC Walkable Convention, its a pretty neat Idea! What if the foundation (or supporting element) of our convention revolved around traveling to different venues to see how our different experiments work in action within their specific contexts' or environments. It could be a tour based convention with certain workshops and presentations at their appropriate venues.
Beyond that concept I think we are narrowing our theme down to how the mind works in reading type or image first, information or just art, subjective or objective?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking we include the 3 subjects Tom mentioned and relate them back to the communication in the 21st century idea. Based on the email, Tyler really liked that idea and the potential it has...so I think that should ultimately be out focus with subcategories such as visual language, legibility, etc.
ReplyDeleteSo our theme brief is due tomorrow..any ideas on how to accomplish that??
*We could start a blog for our type conference...seemed to work well for Tom and I versus looking up comments.
And as Micah mentioned on his comment that has now disappeared, regarding Tyler's email I do not mind working in our large group. I think we will be a force to be reckoned with and we should get along and communicate quite well.
Where in the world is Lance Flores!?? haha
Hey, My comment disappeared because Lance and I were discussing a few things. I really don't want to stray from the group, but I'm really trying to convince myself that my experimental project fits in with this "Type/image" borderline art.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry guys, but I don't think the essence of my project fits in the current theme of You-Luke and You-Tom. I'd just be kidding myself to say that I am comfortable with how my project will take a 180 degree. My Project is completely 3-D and all about type communication, I Didn't see an in-balance of type/image & art in my experiments. I emailed tyler about it, no response yet. But I think my project and Lance's, to a certain degree, throws a wrench in the gears.
So for the sake of being true to all of our projects, which I think is the most important element here, I am respectfully bowing out of this group and sticking with the original pairing of Lance and I.
Here I am!
ReplyDeleteSorry, I didn't know we were all meeting up at 1pm to have a discussion haha. jk.
Well here's the thing. After reading Tyler's email, I think it might be best if we stick in pairs rather than all four. Micah and I were discussing some things, and I don't think we're quitting...we're just downsizing the group. I think it would be best if we were in pairs. After thinking a while, I think my project dealt with Micah's a little more in creating two or more messages into one form, and although the outcome became a piece of art...it was not my original goal. Hopefully this does not become a problem, but we both wanted to say something before we got too far into the project.
This is nonsense!! haha jk
ReplyDeleteNo, in all seriousness I understand where you guys are coming from and it makes sense. Either way we would have gone with this project I think it will come out great; glad we resolved this early and everything.
Indeed, well good-luck to both of our groups, and I think it would still be good to bounce ideas off each other and have informal crits about the others' project (for an outside opinion). Should be fun to see both of our Conferences develop!
ReplyDeleteWell, this is the most amount of comments I've received on any of my posts! Wat up!
ReplyDeleteI'm now sitting here with a mouth larger than Texas, having just had one of my wisdom teeth pulled. Not fun. Is the reason I'm just now chiming in.
I have to say I was quite looking forward to being a big group and the challenge of that. Micah and Lance are you saying that your work doesn't fit into Type and Image? Could it not be a branch of that? in some way?
This is what Tyler said as far as a group project, for the theme: "When is communication hampered and when is it enhanced by an experimental approach?"
ReplyDeleteI think that could be a decent theme for us. I think the type and image/art approach doesn't fit with us all, you're right there Micah, but, could we all fit into a conference theme like 'Type Expo 2010: Explorations in Communication' something like that? I think we're all basically looking at different ways to communicate and if that turns into art or not, so be it?
I definitely think that Lance and I's project is a branch of the Type/Image theme, I just feel the essence of both lance and I's projects revolve around double-meanings & the economic solutions of consolidating two message-forms into one. I think being a branch of something... is just not utilizing the potential of the core concept of Lance and my experiments.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think we can justify anything and find commonalities between all of our projects; that much is apparent. I love Tyler's definition as well, but in my opinion, (not to be rude in the slightest), to me that concept is way to broad and I could see how that could fit everyones project. I was looking forward to the challenge of working in a big group too, but I don't think this project is the right one with such defined existing concepts loosely fitting into an umbrella term of Communication Exploration. Its really what everyone is trying to achieve = communication through the learning curve of experimentation and exploration.
I'm not saying that we couldn't all make our projects work in a title like Type Expo: Exploration in Communication, I just think the initial core concepts of our original experiments would just be a by-product next to "communication."
Alright sounds good. Two groups it is then. Thanks for thrashing this out guys! I appreciate the discussion.
ReplyDelete