Each of these pictures represents politics in some form or another. Sometimes with pictures and learning objects, less is more (as discussed when critiquing our brochures). However, sometimes a lack of information, a poor display of colors, and little word usage can be very confusing. What is your opinion on the "less is more" concept, particularly when concerning use of color within an informational poster? In terms of visual literacy, what aspects of each picture speak to you about politics? What do the pictures tell you, and what DON'T they tell you? In your opinion, what could one do to improve or clarify the messages being portrayed, from a visual literacy standpoint?
I like the "less is more" concept for informational posters. Mainly, I draw this preference in contrast to the internet. I am on the internet nearly all hours of the day, and the internet is full of adds and information of all fonts, colors, sizes, and media types. My eyes like to rest on quiet images once in a while. The less I have to decipher in order to read and be done with the webpage, the better. This ideal carries over into my physical life as well. Really I never saw Rosie the Riveter as a political figure. I see it now. But I had never thought of that before. I understand FDR's pictures being cropped for his political image, it's clear cut and dry that political marketing would attempt such measures. I'm afraid the pictures tell me that our society is steeped in superficiality. The fact that the media expects an image of the president to linger in the minds of the nation's citizens, longer than a full-length Television image? Well, it may be true, but it's still disconcerting.
ReplyDeleteI think "less is more" can be very powerful, depending on your audience. As we have been learning, visuals are processed faster and we take in most information visually. That being said, often with "less is more" there is a expectation that the audience can interpret the symbolism. Maybe it is because I am older, but I knew Rosie was political and sending a strong message. If you were not looking for the message in this, it could easily be missed when taken out of context. If interpretations cannot be made outside of the given context, then one must consider if they are meant to be long lasting or for the moment/time period.
ReplyDeleteAs for FDR, I imagine the crop was meant to block out the background noise and put the focus on the man. I am not sure this works as well for me. Unless it is a portrait shot I want to see my public figures doing something and not a pose that could be used for countless story lines. I want to know what is going on here and feel like I am missing the context.
I am a proponent of the less is more concept to a certain degree. Too many visuals can confuse the audience because the poster is too busy and there is too much infromation to process. Not enough visuals do not give the audience enough visual cues to interpret the message the artist is tryin gto get across. I really like the way the artist if the Rosie the Riveter incorporated lines and positioning into the work. The first thing I see when I look at it is the you can do it" text because the white stands really well in the dark blue speech bubble that covers the entire top of the page. From there, my eyes take me to the middle of page where is see a very defined hand that is pointing to her flexed bicep muscle. From these two things alone in can interpret the artist's intentions. The FDR photo is even simpler and as a result, not as clear to me. The cropped photo of just FDR taken in black and white gives me the impression that FDR and America is determined to achieve their mission. The author really left it up to the audiences imagination more so than the in the Rosie photo. I would have preferred a couple more visual cues to help me figure out the artists message.
ReplyDeleteI view posters as a marketing tool to gain attention. I do not feel that all of the information needs to be portrayed on a poster in some cases, like our AHRD posters. It is impossible to get all of the information about the program onto a poster without overwhelming the reader. When I create a poster, I think about a bulletin board that is full of posters. What will make my poster stand out and make people want to read more? The poster must be created in a way that it is easy for the reader to gain a lot of information in a short amount of time and include a website or contact information if the reader would like to learn more. For me, the poster is often like a preview or teaser. For events, the poster should include the main information about what's happening, when and where it's happening, and if there is a cost to participate. There should always be a catchy heading that tells the reader what is going on or why it is important to them. In any case, I want my poster to stand out from the rest. I don't want the same layout that everyone else seems to use. The difficult part can be trying to determine what should be included and what doesn't need to be included. I have made some posters that included smaller text information at the bottom because the client wanted to include information that was a disclosure or information that may pertain to some people but not to everyone. I do not like doing this but it's a way to communicate some information without it becoming part of the main message.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Shannon's opening sentences about posters. In today's world of marketing, I like having something catch my eye, draw me in, and the give me the option to explore further if I want to. Simple + engaging + website listed = success for me. I don't need to know everything at once and I can always look up more later.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of "less is more" with color, I think the first poster is cohesive. In general, though, I prefer simple and clear. I've known that this particular poster had political connections and served as a call to women. I dressed up like this for Halloween in 3rd grade…and again two years ago, haha :)
I agree with everyone else's comments that the second photo lacks context for us. I wonder, though, if we would have the same criticism if we were talking about it back then and in-the-moment. The picture could have said more then. If we lived then, we wouldn't have had the visual access to the White House we have today. Maybe this picture DID communicate strength, hope, prosperity, achievement, etc.. to the people of the time.
I think it really depends on what point you're trying to get across. Sometimes "less is more" is good, but not always. Sometimes lack of context is good...if you want it to be vague or open to interpretation. As in art and poetry, we all have our own views and interpretations. The more information/color/etc provided, the less we can use our own imagination. With less provided, the imagination can go wild!
ReplyDelete