Journal 9:
Jason Trollback brought up some interesting ideas concerning design and motion graphics. In his talk, he discussed things like designing for a purpose, using motion to let a story flow in a natural, seamless way, and designing for purpose rather than pure visuals. I thought it was cool to hear how he explained designing with expression, and how one can design with a certain message to create impact. I do agree that designs have more relevance when trying to convey or promote a very particular cause, movement, or action with a lot of emotion. I also liked how Trollback spoke about inspiration. I tend to forget that inspiration can be found outside the world of art and design, it is just a matter of exploring. The strength of visual communication relies on many things, from the self-determination of the designer to the concept in itself, which should be well-explained and developed before actual designing begins. Trollback did well to reinforce some older points that I've read while bringing some new ones to my attention.
Journal 10:
Good.is:
What I found most interesting about GOOD is its ability to condense information to its simplest form while still retaining valuable information. The infographics carry a great deal of information, but through use of strong, simple icons and repeated imagery, a reader/viewer is still able to soak in the basic idea conveyed. For example, two infographics I looked at were one that depicted worldwide oil usage through size contrast of oil barrel icons, and an infographic depicting heart disease myths using symbols as the dominant imagery. I thought both were well-designed and they let the information flow in an extremely successful manner. I also watched two motion graphics videos, one depicting the cost of war and another reviewing the year of 2008. I found with both that the narration, type, and imagery were well connected and the pacing just right. It was cool to see how well the dialogue synced accordingly with quirky illustrations and well organized type. The transitions were unique, and each subject within the videos had a natural change without becoming disconnected.
As far as the style goes, I love GOOD's aesthetic. The illustrations are well drawn but still grounded in a way that doesn't leave me overpowered when I'm trying to look at all the little factoids. The color usage tends to be limited, but this only strengthens the overall design. The type isn't necessarily dynamic, but the standard usage of two or three typefaces just made me understand that GOOD only does so to let one know that whatever you're looking at is clearly something GOOD did.
Simplicity and concision seem to be a large part of GOOD's representation. You can learn a lot through very little.
No comments:
Post a Comment