TRIGGS RESPONSES PP 12-17
what do you think about technology's role in enabling typographic experimentation? what technology is the present-day equivalent to the desktop computer, and how might that be utilized in type design or typography?
what potential exists for continuing to explore the "second order of denotation" as mentioned in the cranbrook/mccoy sections?
further, what potential might your area of interest have to "promote multiple rather than fixed meanings" as jeffery keedy mentions? and what role might the reader play in the construction of your typographic messages?
thoughts? does this spur any ideas for your own work? respond in the comments here.
16 comments:
While being a typographer today is still challenging, and in the wrong hand done horrifically wrong, takes no where near the determination and technical craft as it did from those who came before us. Back in the day typographers didnt have the option to edit undo or select all or even having thousands of pre-made typefaces readily available to them. They had to not only plan out their ideas but then create by hand every element they deemed necessary for their designs. This made analog work very common practice. However, they we challenged to just make things that were good, cause if you are going to spend so much time doing something it better be valid and useful. Experimentation could equal complete failure and all the typographers work goes down the drain. With the use of the computer or even the laptop allow modern designers endless possibilities. You can make drastic changes with a click of a mouse and you also have all of type history about what has been done before at your finger tips. However now we are creating devices to get us back to the analog and back to the doing things by hand such as the drawing/ pencil tablets. If as a typographer you always work inside of your computer you are limited to what you and you alone see in a 15 inch rectangle. While the computer can do alot a humans hands are the best tool on earth. Computers crash, hard drives freeze, and in the end it is still a machine.
It is important to not just design the words around and focused on what it says, but to make the viewer interact and have to think. Image is just important as the type both work together to form a message and in the end that is what you are trying to get across. This message needs to be universal to be successful.
With my plan for making packages that deal with customization and personalization due to the product and consumer will require alot of viewer participation. Hopefully my packages with force its viewers to make the item there own or they can have multiple uses or purposes. This could also make the average person more aware or in control of the typography around them and maybe make them more aware of its purpose and change. They will have to deal/ interact with it recognizing its change.
what do you think about technology's role in enabling typographic experimentation? what technology is the present-day equivalent to the desktop computer, and how might that be utilized in type design or typography?
Computers make it faster to do certain things, especially if you're looking for repetition or a mirroring of something. When we went to the Kauffman center today, Moshe said something to the effect of "the computer makes it much less possible for someone to be loose or soft." Everything the computer does is controlled to a certain extent and you often get wrapped up in one idea instead of doing quick little playful sketches.
what potential exists for continuing to explore the "second order of denotation" as mentioned in the cranbrook/mccoy sections?
"enhance the meaning without totally abandoning the framework that unites the whole." It's interesting to think of experimenting as being this boundless expanse of nothingness but it's also interesting to think of it as being discovered by a set of rules.
further, what potential might your area of interest have to "promote multiple rather than fixed meanings" as jeffery keedy mentions? and what role might the reader play in the construction of your typographic messages?
Experiment without purpose allows for many outcomes. Art itself is subjective. If I do something, just to see what happens, ten different people can take that idea and either be inspired by it or shoot it down but it's still something that has been seen at that point and you either know what you want to try to duplicate or what you never want to have your work look like in a million years.
thoughts? does this spur any ideas for your own work?
Weingart did a "5 year experiment with the letter M." Gotta hand it to the man for dedication.
Packing the printed page so fully that the page itself becomes invisible was another interesting concept. Negative space would be all that remains, possibly taking the letterforms and making them secondary to the sheet itself. The last point that I stumbled upon was the idea that any experiment that occurs now is only done on the basis of continuing someone else's thoughts or processes. Experimentation can still be done. I don't know nearly enough about the world that everything I do is based off of something I've already seen. I could cut letters out of leaves and make them recyclable type without ever having seen that done before. There is always a possibility to experiment, maybe that's why art-for-arts-sake is a good idea instead of judging and researching every flipping thing there is about a subject.
I think technology is a huge part of enabling typographic experimentation. I think with every advancement, there is a new opportunity or a new way of experimenting with type. For example, when the concept of scanning was new, April Greiman used it to further her explorations into type and image. So are we, as designers, obligated to keep in mind new technology that would further our designs. One contemporary example is the iPhone apps. Whatever new technology might come out in the future, it is important to utilize it to our advantage.
As far as the "second order of denotation" goes, I think it is a great step in the evolution of design. I think that Swiss Modernist type is great and it looks nice, but it seems almost superficial. The postmodern approach of looking at the deeper meaning as the basis of the design seems to be the better solution. That is not to say the form needs to suffer, but I feel that it needs to comply with the message, rather than look pretty and empty. Looking for that deeper meaning will bring about a better design solution.
The multiple meanings is an interesting idea. I feel that something which has multiple meaning asks the viewer/reader to participate in the design. I think that it becomes interactive, because it is also up to the reader to determine the meanings of the design.
Interesting read, gave me some good thoughts about meaning vs. form. I know you guys do this on purpose but that's excatly what we're talking about in Eppleheimer's class right now.
Cheers.
Sorry... Totally posted this in the wrong spot the other day. It's been up for a while, though!
_____________________________________
Response to TRIGGS' reading p.12-17
_____________________________________
It's funny, at least in Michael's class, we literally just do straight-up Weingart studies. (see: Wolfgang Weingart's experiments with the letter 'M' (1965-68).
Anyway, to respond to the second half of the Triggs reading, SPOT ON–our education, is highlighted in pages 12-17.
for instance:
"Experimental typography has reached a point where it is accepted an an integral part of the design process. Many educational institutions now offer classes dedicated exclusively to experimental typography and encourage students to engage with design research as a process of 'thinking' and of 'making"
It goes on to say:
"Designers and typographers have become more aware of the link between craftsmanship and historical understanding, cultural and technological issues, the aesthetics and function of type and the importance of language and meaning. At the same time, the broader audience has become more sophisticated in its 'ways of reading' and more accepting of the way designers and typographers present alternative models of visual communication."
I think a couple of (corporate) examples of that are the modern re-branding of companies like Pepsi, Walmart, etc... Those companies who want to refresh their look to appeal to the younger, hipper crowd.
...As well as the smooth arrivals of new products like the well-designed 'Truvia' sugar substitute. (Which is nasty, by the way.) Or, even the Shatto milk bottles from the local farm.
Also, the question is asked in the essay about the validity of our experimental processes now:
"Yet, has the typographic experiment played itself out? It has become evident that the typographic experiment had ceased to be experimental by the start of the new millennium. Rather, much of what is currently produced reflects a continuation of earlier experimental strategies and processes. Almost in recognition of this."
HOW CAN WE GO ABOVE AND BEYOND? I personally am going to approach my experimental type project with both a scientific, and visual communications outlook and objectives.
what do you think about technology's role in enabling typographic experimentation? what technology is the present-day equivalent to the desktop computer, and how might that be utilized in type design or typography?
The technology's role in enabling typographic experimentation has of course changed through out the years. I still hear the stories of there not being an undo short key, which makes me feel like we have to work harder to be more persistent. We may have the key to undo things, but sometimes I feel like we need to experience what some designers have gone through. If we didn't have the capability of having a computer, then maybe we would be looser in expressing the piece. One thing I'm happy I try to do is to sketch out my ideas more before getting glued to the screen, I feel as it keeps my mind open to many different possibilities instead get stuck one idea. And my brother and I always talk about how computers are not humans in the fact they don't compare to the human hand for the sensibility purpose. I feel the closest we can get to a desktop computer is to keep learning different methods they we can only do by hand, in which experimenting comes handy.
what potential exists for continuing to explore the "second order of denotation" as mentioned in the cranbrook/mccoy sections?
On page 14 it was explained that "to enhance the meaning while not abandoning the framework that unites the whole" would be another way to look at formats and conventions, but to me what does this all mean. Well to answer that I feel like it meant to think of different ways of explaining ideas, so having one word represent more ideas or feelings. I also think it means interactivity of viewers to a piece to get them to think and see if they understand. I also feel like McCoy's way of word play has given the spark of secondary levels of meaning.
further, what potential might your area of interest have to "promote multiple rather than fixed meanings" as jeffery keedy mentions? and what role might the reader play in the construction of your typographic messages?
I feel that the way I take my messages will have either an underling of meaning and the ability to make the viewer think of what the message is. I really want to figure out multiple ways of representing a grid based type and the grid. I think the role of the viewer would be a variable on whether it is understandable, but I'm hoping in one way to figure out how to make this project interactive, so the viewer themselves learn what I learned.
what do you think about technology's role in enabling typographic experimentation? I think technology has a lot to do with what you can and cannot create. If you are not advanced in technology there may be a barrier there that keeps you from creating and coming up with the ideas you have. There are certain tools you may need and if you do not know how to use them then it may be hard to do something to the best of its ability.
what technology is the present-day equivalent to the desktop computer, and how might that be utilized in type design or typography?
The laptop has helped us for the reason that it can be anywhere the designer is. This means that if an idea sparks your creativity then you have the access right there with you to create and or get it out.
what potential exists for continuing to explore the "second order of denotation" as mentioned in the cranbrook/mccoy sections?
Experimenting can lead us to create a variety of new ideas. People can look at past experiments and feed off of them and from that transform what already exists and make them into their own thing. I feel it is good to experiment so it can grow from one small idea into a larger category of things.
further, what potential might your area of interest have to "promote multiple rather than fixed meanings" as jeffery keedy mentions? and what role might the reader play in the construction of your typographic messages?
I have expressed this in my own writing in the blog post before this.
thoughts? does this spur any ideas for your own work?
This has just inspired me to create and create something that has meaning. I want to make something that will have an impact on someone and possibly inspire them to do something similar to what I have already created.
I think that technology had just expanded how we can experiment and also allows us to do both hand and computer generated experiments to see how they will react. I think that working by hand and laying out sketches is a way to get close to the computer. We have both options today, something that has only been around for a little while to help push us into the realm of experimentation.
There is still lots of potential from the eyes of them. One of Kathy's famous posters is where is says that you can read image and see text as images. That leaves a whole new alley to explore type as image rather than legibility. It leaves experiments open. Also they said that experiments involved knowing history, and we have come so far today and are still moving ahead, and with the new technology coming out, who knows what will be next for type.
The reader plays into everything in mine. Mine is focused on the reader and the environment, placement and legibility. One word can mean so much just depending on where it is placed on the body, is it permenant, marker, glow-in-the-dark? All involve both the reader and the environment to tell.
Through the course of this reading it was very inspiring and eye-opening to see what several great designers have done in the realm of experimental typography. From Wolfgang Weingart and Daniel Friedman to April Greiman and Phil Baines I was able to see the wide spectrum of experimentation that took place with all of them as well as the subtle commonalities they share.
Weingart took approaches of 'making by doing' and really worked towards revealing the 'dynamic aspects of the letter form' through manipulation and hand construction. In this respect I feel that you may get a real sense of the letter form due to working with it in such a tactile way.
In very diverse fashions, Daniel Friedman and April Greiman took approaches with interest in the photography realm using type and Greiman also introduced the photographic elements of image. They both took very expressive approaches fracturing the message and stretching legibility.
The work of Katherine McCoy, while at Cranbrook, was also very enlightening as her and her students approached typography with the idea of establishing meaning through relationships with text and image, as well as a focus on symbolic code, and interpretation by the viewer. McCoy also felt that 'type is to be seen as well as read,' defining that experimental typography develops secondary levels of meaning.
In the reading, I found the most personal interest came from experimentation during the 1990's, specifically from a type designer by the name of Phil Baines. He developed a very subtractive typeface modeled after Clarendon that was reduced to it's bare minimum for recognition. This is also similar, in a way, to McCoy's approach in the sense that at first glance the typeface is seen as abstract and purely formal, however as you examine it you begin to realize they are key recognizable elements of each letter in the alphabet.
As the introduction to the book concludes it brings to light that contemporary type experimentation is not confined to 2 dimensions much like experiments prior, but it can range from the 'implementation of sound and choreography to architectural and virtual space. This idea is proving to be very relevant as I develop my experimental focus; working to combine subtractive form, dimensionality, and interactivity.
Technology has proven to be a large part of experimentation as a driver in adding dimensionality and interactivity. In our day and age technology has opened several avenues including motion and screen-based animation and interaction.
I though we were suppose to read and respond to this in week 1? Oh well, my response for it is coupled with the Bil'ak and Triggs reading on the week 1 post responses.
Technology has been able to bring typographic exploration to a whole new level. Once the next new thing is out designers jump on it and use to create something totally new and never done before. It makes things interesting and exciting. Technology has given us alternate realities in which we can create. The computer for examples provides us with the internet in which we can communicate to people all around the world. The ways in which we communicate to those people can change due to culture, environment, and even the brand of desktop they are using. The present day equivalent to the desktop computer is the iphone. A portable desktop computer that is an eighth of the size. We are constantly designing applications for it, and it is an attention demanding device. The iphone can capture typography anywhere with the use of camera or even a video-camera. It can watch youtube videos and can enable the user to look up anything about anything on google. The iphone can be utilized in type design by creating awareness. Not just for good type design, but for any world issue.
Katherine McCoy states "Images are to be read and interpreted, as well as seen; typography is to seen as well as read". The second order of denotation is an interest in breaking the formal attributes of modernist theory. The idea is that text is just as important as image and that are both processed in the same ways. The potential that exists for this theory is a better understanding and enjoyment for viewers and designers alike in deconstructing messages.
The Jeffery Keedy typeface is interesting. He has taken a very popular contour of a letter form and has dissected it to its fullest potential while still keeping it legible. My area of interest is motion and within that are I could create a plethora of multiple meanings with the message and with the content of the typeface. For example if the typeface moves quickly and the understanding of the letterforms happens fast then the purpose of the 'quickness' could refer to the idea of a company that works quickly.
The idea of type and image being in the same realm is interesting to me. It makes me think that a letterform can be any object, but still be a letterform. Whether the letterform is make out of leaves or if the letterform is typed in a digital document using an already existing font. However, those two different methods mean completely different things. Is it more powerful to use the leaf letterform in an environmental ad or an organic typeface picked from a list?
I hate to be the bad guy but doesn't it seem like it's all been done already? It seems like Triggs is asking the same question. I look around and all I see is type. It's on everything from screens to car license plates, to buildings and menus in cafes. Is there any more originality left?
At the same time, each time technology advances, new ideas about how type appears will have to evolve and maybe those will include new letter forms that haven't been done yet.
If I am creating fonts out of found objects, those found objects will add meaning to the words. For example, if I create words using old car parts, the meaning the viewer will gain from the text will not just be the words, they'll get a mechanical feeling, or maybe the words will feel robust and strong. This could be what Katherine McCoy is talking about in enhancing the meaning of text while not totally abandoning the framework. We're still putting text in structures, but we're manipulating the letters themselves beyond the structures too.
The readers part in all of this is to 'feel'. If I can get the viewer to feel something then I've succeeded. There is so much type out there, what I'm attempting to do in my area is create type as art. It's not just words on a page, it's words on a page that have life and communicate messages beyond just the words themselves. Words become art and draw the viewer in to new depths of captivity.
the computer and the software that has come about as of late has allowed typography to seep deeper into the public. you don't need a printing press or to know someone who does. almost everyone has access to a means of typographic production. anyone can create a typographic experiment and anyone can view these through the Internets. the computer however does include the language of the software to be respected while experimenting. this creates a slightly smaller sandbox for the experiment to be executed in.
This idea of the type being seen and the image being read is one to think of deeply when thinking of the progression of typography. this new level of viewing brought up allowed designers to think of the letter form and the words produced as the work instead of the addition to the art. I believe that the typographic form, being so hardwired into the brains of humans, has an extraordinary impact on the viewer when used in a way that challenges the message that is being pushed. This push to having the typography on the same level and the image itself is quite important. you don't have to see image then read text.their works made you read the whole and see the whole on the same level. an integration on a level that was more than just getting text into the work without disrupting it . this was the act of making the work need the text as part of the image and need the image to get everything out of it. total symbiosis was achieved.
everything that the viewer sees while they are interacting with the message becomes part of the experience. A black letter on a white background is much different than a white letter on a black background. connotations come with everything we do or create. There is no getting around someone reading into the message and retrieving what thy want out of it. The designer must take this into account when creating messages and do their best to isolate the noise and allow their creation to say what it means not what it means to the viewer. experimentation is a way to better understand the interaction of humans and the working message.
I will be producing interactions with people and messages. these will be small unexpected interactions with typography that I will produce for the public to have and do with what they want. however the messages will not be expected or of the normal typography. being so habituated to typography coming at them all the time, what will happen if they encounter it in a place completely unexpected on in a way that in new.
In the same way that the printing press democratized knowledge to a very hungry populace, the internet takes it significantly further. The printing press lowered the cost of a book from a herd of sheep, to a few bushels of grain. More people could afford it, and therefore the literacy rate skyrocketed. The internet has brought the cost down to free. With the new freedom, I believe that a new hunger for how to communicate with be unearthed. The new desktop computer of our age is the hand held device. Now knowledge is not only free, it is immediate. With smaller screens and the thirst for information now, type becomes more important. The small screens will not allow the viewer much information other than the most expressive marks possible; the text, and therefor the typeface. The immeadiacy of the message and the size of the screen forces the designer to entrench their message within the typeface. The denotation becomes more important because the messages are all contained within the same media. Through the new found interest in communication and the democratization of the tools for creating typefacesa a lot of very very bad type will be created. No way around it, but the most creative explanations in evolution have been created because of a large genetically diverse population, all fighting for the same food source; the three inch screen attached to every person in the first world. and ten seconds of their time.
p.s. I still want to explore the delicacy of the type as image. Something possibly hand held, but not electronic. In the first reading, the highlight I found was someone that forced the viewer to read aloud to understand what the words were. This brought the audience back to the role of congregation, when someone reading aloud from an glowing illuminated manuscript almost appeared magical. I was thinking of doing something with transparencies the the veiwer would have to look at from a certain way to descern the information given.
Post a Comment