Magazine layout: focus on the number of columns
Discussion of magazine column
It is very hard to find a magazine that is for reading nowadays. The articles are long and do not get to the point; there are more and more advertisements placed all around the articles that destroy the appetite of the reader. The type becomes much more condense, so that more ads can be put in the magazine. When I look at these magazines, I don’t see why they exist. I feel so bad for the people who do the writing and artwork; their hard work is overwhelming by all these particle, economical factors. I want to be able to read comfortably, and I am sure that I am not the only one.
It would be very hard to talk about the present without discussing the past. What determines a good magazine layout that motivates people to read? In the reader’s point of view, all that matters is the content and a comfortable sense of the layout: the composition of type and image, the number of columns, the length of sentences, the point size, and the space between all these elements. I find that the number of columns is one of the crucial factors to providing that comfortable feeling for reader.
The earliest magazines do not differ much from books. The only difference is that magazines have thin covers. They used a single column or double columns; text occupies almost the whole page and the image is often on the other page or take up a big portion of a page. These characteristics are still present in most of the technical and literary journals. Even though it is pretty hard to find one-column layouts in magazines now, due to the mass production of the magazine industry.
The three-column system is the main form of layout in most magazines now. It carries the idea of asymmetry, and also enables for more text to be put on one page. However, there are problems with this system. First, it is against the people’s native reading habit, which is from left to right, not from the center and to the side. Second, the overly short lines create endless back and forth eye movement. Also, the narrow space between columns lead people across the white space to jump to the next column. The first and second problems seem hopeless. The most common way that a type designer deals with the third problem is to set thin lines to avoid the misread. These problems are clearly present in the page that is without images and has a lot of white space in between columns and around the text. When the point size is too small and the leading between lines is too narrow, the whole chunk of text looks like a monster. How can reading be more enjoyable? From the readers’ point of view, the one-column and two-column structure is much easier and more comfortable to read than the three-column layout. A nice portion of white space and proper line length have to apply to the system. Also, heading, introduction, body text, sub-heads and captions should line up to the left. It saves the readers’ time from jumping back and forth.
There are even four-column layouts used in main articles, which is totally unnecessary and unreasonable. I found some of them in art magazines. Some of them don’t even line up; the text and image are placed on the page without a clear structure. The art and design magazine sometimes is too stylish, and contradicts the basic rules of reading. The three- or four-column system should only be used for sub-information, such as the index or advertisements. In other situations, four columns should be avoided.
I am more impressed by the way that older magazines deal with sub-information than the modern magazines. I don’t know whether people in the past care more about the readers’ acceptance or there is too much information to convey in the modern day; magazines just keep forcing more information onto pages without considering the readers’ desire.
As an editor, you are trying to present the best quality of your magazine and to increase the number of readers. The way to achieve this goal is to choose succinct, high quality writings, well-suited images and simple layouts. Prolix articles occupy too much space and bore the audience. The truth is that the one- or two-column structure is much more cordial to readers, It is not possible for people to look at information without balanced white space and a clean layout; it’s a torture. All the text put on paper is meant to communicate, not decorate. There are more and more magazines that deal too much with images and advertisements, so it becomes hard to realize the purpose of the magazine. There is either no meaningful content, or it’s too hard for people to read the content. The text placed on the pages hurts people’s eyes and does not enrich the reading experience. Dear editors, please take out whatever is unnecessary in your magazines. Less is more, and leave space for readers to breathe and reflect; thought is a virtue. Have you become overwhelmed by the work you have and forgotten what your work actually is? Do you actually have time to read your magazine and feel what the reader feels? Do you miss the joy of reading? I really do.
16 December 2008
09 December 2008
Airbrushing and Unrealistic Ideals
Photography began from a desire to record things exactly as they were, and in a way that takes less time to do so than drawing or painting. Photography is now losing its immediacy and documentary qualities. A digital photograph now, rather than taking seconds, requires hours upon hours of extra work after the photograph is made to be considered print ready.
The altering of photographs has been happening since the 1860s, but are the photomanipulations currently used to sell products having a negative effect on the children in our society? Photomanupulation was not as common five years ago as it is now, because of the high cost. Now it is required on nearly every image put into print. In magazines and advertisements, models are airbrushed so intensely that photographers do not always recognize the model they are supposed to be photographing when they meet in the studio. In this digital age of photography, no public bound image is safe from the modern scalpel of Photoshop experts.
In the world of advertising and celebrities there is no such thing as a hair out of place, wrinkles, blemishes, or other skin problems, or imperfect teeth. No one is born without “flaws.” The removal of these such “flaws” requires heavy makeup, fashion experts, and many hours of digital manipulation. Real people are rarely seen in any form of media. The abundance of “fake” people we see every day gives many full grown people unrealistic expectations.
Parents have a responsibility to realize how the media affects their children and to respond to the issues it creates. The media images have a greater effect on children because kids are strongly influenced by the world they live in. Because of perfect body obsessions in our current culture, children as young as six, perhaps even younger, are feeling the pressure to be thin and “perfect.” While it could be an unsetteling idea for young children, they must be made aware that the photographs in magazines and advertisements most likely have been manipulated to make the model look the way he or she does. Children need to be taught to no longer view photographs as facts, but rather more as paintings that show an idealized version of the person. If this idea is continually raised with children throughout their most vulnerable years they may stop trying to live up to the images our society creates and be more aware of the real people in the world.
While adults are free to choose to diet, children should not be forced into a strict diet, or allowed to place themselves on one. Healthy eating and living should be promoted, but weight loss should not be encouraged at a young age. Team sports and other forms of exercise should be encouraged for entertainment options, and a limit placed on television viewing. A limit on television intake will create more active time and less time to be influenced by societal ideals.
As an interview from diet.com said: “Have we created unattainable image of perfection that is widely accepted as the standard of beauty?” I believe that question is answered with the fact that thirty percent of ten to fourteen year old girls in this country are dieting (webmd), and three percent of prepubescent girls are anorexic (http://www.healthyplace.com/Communities/eating_Disorders/children_1.asp). If girls are influenced enough by the media to begin feeling fat and dieting at ten (some with serious eating disorders), their views of the media must be changed before this point. Media messages can be used as a srpingboard for discussing healthy versus unhealthy lifestyles. Models who look too thin can help parents begin conversations about the dangers of anorexia and other eating disorders. When the ill health (eating disorders, drug addiction) of models or celebrities is publicized, discuss this with your child. It can be discussed that the eating disorders and addictions of models are their response to pressures of society. Discuss how airbrushing can create an unrealistic goal for how much a person should weigh, even for models, and what a healthy person looks like, and that everyone has a different body type.
While talking to parents of various aged children, I was surprised to learn that many parents noticed their children being unhappy with their weight as early as six years if age. If kindergartners and first graders already feel they need to exercise and lose weight because they feel fat, what happens when their bodies really start to change and they begin dealing with the pressures of middle school? Parents must take this issue seriously, and deal with it early on. Parents need to be aware that teasing a child about their weight is unacceptable, and can be harmful to the child’s self image. If a parent suspects a serious issue with their child, it should not be assumed that they are too young for a specific problem. Many specialists, including psychologist and nutritionists, can be called on for expert advice.
The altering of photographs has been happening since the 1860s, but are the photomanipulations currently used to sell products having a negative effect on the children in our society? Photomanupulation was not as common five years ago as it is now, because of the high cost. Now it is required on nearly every image put into print. In magazines and advertisements, models are airbrushed so intensely that photographers do not always recognize the model they are supposed to be photographing when they meet in the studio. In this digital age of photography, no public bound image is safe from the modern scalpel of Photoshop experts.
In the world of advertising and celebrities there is no such thing as a hair out of place, wrinkles, blemishes, or other skin problems, or imperfect teeth. No one is born without “flaws.” The removal of these such “flaws” requires heavy makeup, fashion experts, and many hours of digital manipulation. Real people are rarely seen in any form of media. The abundance of “fake” people we see every day gives many full grown people unrealistic expectations.
Parents have a responsibility to realize how the media affects their children and to respond to the issues it creates. The media images have a greater effect on children because kids are strongly influenced by the world they live in. Because of perfect body obsessions in our current culture, children as young as six, perhaps even younger, are feeling the pressure to be thin and “perfect.” While it could be an unsetteling idea for young children, they must be made aware that the photographs in magazines and advertisements most likely have been manipulated to make the model look the way he or she does. Children need to be taught to no longer view photographs as facts, but rather more as paintings that show an idealized version of the person. If this idea is continually raised with children throughout their most vulnerable years they may stop trying to live up to the images our society creates and be more aware of the real people in the world.
While adults are free to choose to diet, children should not be forced into a strict diet, or allowed to place themselves on one. Healthy eating and living should be promoted, but weight loss should not be encouraged at a young age. Team sports and other forms of exercise should be encouraged for entertainment options, and a limit placed on television viewing. A limit on television intake will create more active time and less time to be influenced by societal ideals.
As an interview from diet.com said: “Have we created unattainable image of perfection that is widely accepted as the standard of beauty?” I believe that question is answered with the fact that thirty percent of ten to fourteen year old girls in this country are dieting (webmd), and three percent of prepubescent girls are anorexic (http://www.healthyplace.com/Communities/eating_Disorders/children_1.asp). If girls are influenced enough by the media to begin feeling fat and dieting at ten (some with serious eating disorders), their views of the media must be changed before this point. Media messages can be used as a srpingboard for discussing healthy versus unhealthy lifestyles. Models who look too thin can help parents begin conversations about the dangers of anorexia and other eating disorders. When the ill health (eating disorders, drug addiction) of models or celebrities is publicized, discuss this with your child. It can be discussed that the eating disorders and addictions of models are their response to pressures of society. Discuss how airbrushing can create an unrealistic goal for how much a person should weigh, even for models, and what a healthy person looks like, and that everyone has a different body type.
While talking to parents of various aged children, I was surprised to learn that many parents noticed their children being unhappy with their weight as early as six years if age. If kindergartners and first graders already feel they need to exercise and lose weight because they feel fat, what happens when their bodies really start to change and they begin dealing with the pressures of middle school? Parents must take this issue seriously, and deal with it early on. Parents need to be aware that teasing a child about their weight is unacceptable, and can be harmful to the child’s self image. If a parent suspects a serious issue with their child, it should not be assumed that they are too young for a specific problem. Many specialists, including psychologist and nutritionists, can be called on for expert advice.
05 December 2008
To Stock Art or Not to Stock Art, That is the Question
When I began studying graphic design, criticism wasn’t something that I’d considered part of it. Once we started doing projects we would have a final critique to constructively criticize the work. These sessions helped us to find what we did “right” (what’s really “right” though, is design a matter of perception, and is beauty found in the eye of the designer?) and what we 
could have done differently. Every crit helped us to gain more knowledge for the next project. By criticizing work it helped us to build up our knowledge and understanding of what is right and wrong in the world of design including our individual project but not limited to anything less than the whole world of design. With so many people designing so many different things designers are bound to run into a whole array of challenges. Many of these problems will be faced continuously. After all, the job of the designer is to solve problems, so why not come up with a solution or alternative to the problems being faced in design? My major gripe within the world of design is the issue of stock art. For a student studying design, a new designer in the field or an old pro, stock art is something that may not have even posed as a threat on the creativity radar. Here I mean to inform the unaware of the many dangers as well as joys that
may be faced when using stock art and encourage these individuals to make their own decisions on how they will use it.
I’m positive that everyone out there has encountered stock art at one time or another. Most people probably come into contact with it multiple times a day without ever realizing it. It can be found anywhere from images in a newspaper or magazine to accompany a story, to cheesy backgrounds on Myspace to heart, star, skull and gun icons, even stretching to flash tattoo’s you pick right from the book. A lot of people are probably wearing stock art around on t-shirts too, again without even realizing this possibly (horrible, lazy) unoriginal trend that they’re buying into.
Stock is easy. That’s what its there for, to save the designer a little time and make one less step in an otherwise tedious job. This kind of ready-made art can help give you ideas or play up what you’ve already created. Being a time saver when you can’t draw something from scratch is a no brainer. How often do any of us have time to create a piece of work from the ground up? Herein lays the problem. Making everything so easy and readily available takes the problem-solving element out of the designer’s job. Instead of starting with a blank canvas and deciding how to put work together to create the final layout, designers are now faced with the problems of what stock photos, fonts or themes to use and how to use them. Stock art allows and possibly forces designers, creative, problem solving people, to simply combine elements together in a seemingly visual solution. Much like the creation of design programs like Photoshop and Indesign, stock art makes everything a little more computerized and almost robotic and a little less human and personal.
This raises the question of what the true job of the designer is. Is it our responsibility to create every visual element of the project? At one point in time, people were specialized in different fields. One person would be an illustrator while one would be the photographer and finally the designer would use those people’s elements to create a final product. Now designers are facing pressures to take on all 3 jobs, face the time constraints of doing so and still above all struggling to maintain a certain originality.
One positive way that stock art is being viewed is as a tool, much like a font is a tool. If we had to take the time to create every single character in a font before we used it we would never get anything accomplished. Time is a major factor in why designers are choosing to use stock art as much as they do. As designers it is quite rare that one would get the luxury of working on one project for a long period of time with no other distractions. In this case the designer would be able to immerse themselves completely in every aspect of the project from start to finish. But realistically we are facing a hundred things at once and working on multiple projects at a time. With time constraints like this we can see why it’s often easier for a designer to pull an image, brush, symbol or even idea from an archive of “stock” and put it to use in the most creative way possible.
The use of stock art has been compared to such professions if you will as a DJ or Chef. In terms of a DJ, of course you’re using other peoples work but it’s your job to create something different and unique from it; a mosaic of sorts. For a Chef it can be compared to something as simple as making a pizza. It’s your job to put together the different ingredients to come up with the final product. This seems to put things in perspective. The issue with using such standards elements in work is almost questionable as to whether or not people should be mad. In most cases all “artists” are using something that someone else has created at one point or another in their creative process.
There are many ways in which stock art can be used tastefully to portray meaning and still look good appearance wise. Overuse of elements is what leads people to just not care because its meaning is lost after the first 100 times that image or idea is seen. To use one element of stock and build on it to create your own idea from that is usually more acceptable than designing something with the most overused photo, brush and concept out there as the focal point of the project. The trick is to using a stock element in such a way that it becomes unique and people won’t question the originality of it. The choice is really in the hands of the designer. A few cautious people can be quick to eliminate this “problem” with the use of stock art. If it starts to be used in a less obnoxious way, people might forget about it all together. Still there will be that designer who doesn’t have enough time and instead of getting an extension on their project they’ll be the one to throw in the most overused element available and remind people of just how bad it can be. Just remember as designers of all skill level it is our job to make the world look good and keep things in order in one way or another.
could have done differently. Every crit helped us to gain more knowledge for the next project. By criticizing work it helped us to build up our knowledge and understanding of what is right and wrong in the world of design including our individual project but not limited to anything less than the whole world of design. With so many people designing so many different things designers are bound to run into a whole array of challenges. Many of these problems will be faced continuously. After all, the job of the designer is to solve problems, so why not come up with a solution or alternative to the problems being faced in design? My major gripe within the world of design is the issue of stock art. For a student studying design, a new designer in the field or an old pro, stock art is something that may not have even posed as a threat on the creativity radar. Here I mean to inform the unaware of the many dangers as well as joys thatmay be faced when using stock art and encourage these individuals to make their own decisions on how they will use it.
I’m positive that everyone out there has encountered stock art at one time or another. Most people probably come into contact with it multiple times a day without ever realizing it. It can be found anywhere from images in a newspaper or magazine to accompany a story, to cheesy backgrounds on Myspace to heart, star, skull and gun icons, even stretching to flash tattoo’s you pick right from the book. A lot of people are probably wearing stock art around on t-shirts too, again without even realizing this possibly (horrible, lazy) unoriginal trend that they’re buying into.
Stock is easy. That’s what its there for, to save the designer a little time and make one less step in an otherwise tedious job. This kind of ready-made art can help give you ideas or play up what you’ve already created. Being a time saver when you can’t draw something from scratch is a no brainer. How often do any of us have time to create a piece of work from the ground up? Herein lays the problem. Making everything so easy and readily available takes the problem-solving element out of the designer’s job. Instead of starting with a blank canvas and deciding how to put work together to create the final layout, designers are now faced with the problems of what stock photos, fonts or themes to use and how to use them. Stock art allows and possibly forces designers, creative, problem solving people, to simply combine elements together in a seemingly visual solution. Much like the creation of design programs like Photoshop and Indesign, stock art makes everything a little more computerized and almost robotic and a little less human and personal.
This raises the question of what the true job of the designer is. Is it our responsibility to create every visual element of the project? At one point in time, people were specialized in different fields. One person would be an illustrator while one would be the photographer and finally the designer would use those people’s elements to create a final product. Now designers are facing pressures to take on all 3 jobs, face the time constraints of doing so and still above all struggling to maintain a certain originality.
One positive way that stock art is being viewed is as a tool, much like a font is a tool. If we had to take the time to create every single character in a font before we used it we would never get anything accomplished. Time is a major factor in why designers are choosing to use stock art as much as they do. As designers it is quite rare that one would get the luxury of working on one project for a long period of time with no other distractions. In this case the designer would be able to immerse themselves completely in every aspect of the project from start to finish. But realistically we are facing a hundred things at once and working on multiple projects at a time. With time constraints like this we can see why it’s often easier for a designer to pull an image, brush, symbol or even idea from an archive of “stock” and put it to use in the most creative way possible.
The use of stock art has been compared to such professions if you will as a DJ or Chef. In terms of a DJ, of course you’re using other peoples work but it’s your job to create something different and unique from it; a mosaic of sorts. For a Chef it can be compared to something as simple as making a pizza. It’s your job to put together the different ingredients to come up with the final product. This seems to put things in perspective. The issue with using such standards elements in work is almost questionable as to whether or not people should be mad. In most cases all “artists” are using something that someone else has created at one point or another in their creative process.
There are many ways in which stock art can be used tastefully to portray meaning and still look good appearance wise. Overuse of elements is what leads people to just not care because its meaning is lost after the first 100 times that image or idea is seen. To use one element of stock and build on it to create your own idea from that is usually more acceptable than designing something with the most overused photo, brush and concept out there as the focal point of the project. The trick is to using a stock element in such a way that it becomes unique and people won’t question the originality of it. The choice is really in the hands of the designer. A few cautious people can be quick to eliminate this “problem” with the use of stock art. If it starts to be used in a less obnoxious way, people might forget about it all together. Still there will be that designer who doesn’t have enough time and instead of getting an extension on their project they’ll be the one to throw in the most overused element available and remind people of just how bad it can be. Just remember as designers of all skill level it is our job to make the world look good and keep things in order in one way or another.
foundation education for graphic designers
Pitfalls in the Status of Comprehensive Foundations Design Education at SUNY New Paltz
Art as design, design as art, or design as differentiated from art. As the world of graphic design expands, the question arises as to whether the two are one and the same, or if a distinction between them can be made. Design is the process of “carefully creating this thing” (Elimeliah, 2006), a clearly thought-out, researched, and developed manifestation of an idea or concept in order to convey a message. The aesthetics of design are a visual communication carefully crafted by the designer based upon concepts. Frank Baseman (2005) explains that design is about “embracing conceptual thinking, idea generation and communication.” Art seems to be of a separate nature. Although it is visual, the messages conveyed are far from conceptual or communicatory, but really an expression of personal emotion, void of standard rules. Artists create from emotion; they are driven by their own feelings. The difference between the two disciplines must lie in what dictates or motivates designers versus artists. Commerce is the driving force behind design; therefore it is the differentiating factor. If this separation can be made between art and design, the question becomes: How is graphic design taught in post-secondary level in a valuable and conceptually supported way?
Post-secondary graphic design education in universities has become a huge draw for students interested in art, but who desire a path far from the highly esteemed yet small niche of fine arts. The career choice of graphic design takes dedication, passion, endurance, and basic talent. It also takes a strong education deeply rooted in creative problem-solving skills, organization, research, communication skills, and much more. Because of changing social, economic, and technical forces, there is a need for different design education approaches. As Meredith Davis (2005) stated in her essay on graphic design education, these new practices and needs for design are no longer supported by art-based education. Art-based design education began with the Bauhaus movement in Switzerland and has been an idea supported by the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD), an association in charge of accreditation for art and design programs. Davis states that fine arts-based criteria has prevented efforts to improve graphic design education because current design education bears little resemblance to the professional practice of design.
At SUNY New Paltz, the foundations program taken during students’ freshman year, and a requirement for all declared art majors, does not support graphic design problem-solving skills, nor does it teach design students in a useful manner. The next course available in the foundations program is Graphic Design, and this is a prerequisite for all other graphic design classes. After completing this course, design students enter the second semester of their sophomore year. This leaves students only two-and-a-half years to cram in all required courses as well as enough projects for a strong portfolio. It leaves little room for extra classes specific to individual interests or real professional experience. Students are not offered the option of taking critical interdisciplinary classes involving design, problem-solving skills, or any other useful foundations classes in the beginning of their graphic education. The foundations program is based on aesthetics and means nothing for design if not taught alongside design values. Students are not offered alternatives to Introduction to Design I and II or Drawing I and II. These programs are purely art-based and are not valuable for design student’s conceptual development, yet they are the only options currently available for all declared art majors. These classes are taught in an elementary manner, and the lack of challenge within the program does not eliminate students who lack passion, skill, or competition to succeed in graphic design. Although design students may graduate from this program, it does not necessarily give them an advantage post-college in the job market. No visual communications principles are taught. The projects are static and are not based upon real design issues or problems. Design students must be prepared for the fast-paced world of graphic design when they graduate. The foundations program teaches classes that produce individuals who can create beautiful work, but the survival of graphic design as a profession depends on designers who not only produce aesthetically pleasing pieces, but can understand principles, which are strategy in business, marketing and communications, as well as insight into political, economic, and social issues. Currently, design students at SUNY New Paltz cannot even begin to learn or create projects using design principles and visual communication skills until they have completed the art foundations courses.
So where does this leave design students when they leave the university to make their way into the world as graphic designers? It leaves them at a disadvantage in the sense that almost half of a graphic design major’s time is spent drawing figures and perspective, building mobiles, and learning about fine artists from years past. What about learning about contemporary design and designers? This is packed into a twice-weekly, one-hour class for a semester. What about learning how to research and develop concepts in order to design a real-life project? What about understanding the marketing process and how designers are involved? Aesthetics, drawing, and painting skills are taught in these foundations programs, but logical design concepts or societal sensitivity are not addressed or taught alongside these other skills. Marketing, psychology, sociology, and communication concepts may not be important for fine arts, metals, or ceramics majors, but they are critical in the development of concept-driven designers and should be essential in specific graphic design foundations classes.
The advantages to the current foundations program include the development of drawing skills, which is important to graphic design. Sketches and thumbnails are pertinent for brainstorming ideas and layouts, despite the increasing use of computers. Color theory is taught in Design I and is a great tool for designers; but color theory can be taught alongside psychology of color and the motivations for the use of color, which would be much more useful to a budding designer. Foundations courses do support sketchbooks, although the sketchbook assignments are static and usually do not comply with the project or concept being taught.
Disadvantages for design students in the current foundations program include the “dumbing down” of courses to allow for students who have little art experience or an inadequate high-school art education. Because concepts or design principles are not taught in conjunction with aesthetics, it does not encourage thinking, require research and documentation, primary and secondary sources, nor principles of creativity. It forces static projects and encourages students to rush into finished projects without actually thinking conceptually about them. As Kerry Polite says in her essay “Thinking About Design Education” (2004), these final projects then communicate nothing and appear derivative of past art works. The majority of these classes do not even utilize a computer, so students are not introduced to basic graphic design programs or computer skills. This leaves many design students at a disadvantage when they actually get to a design class because they experience so much time and frustration figuring out what tools to use and the basics of the Macintosh; their final products and learning suffer. Graphic design majors should have the availability of design-specific programs at the very outset of their college education in order to fully and appropriately develop their design skills.
Because design has evolved into a commercially-based discipline, a design education should be based upon commercial needs. Persuasion is integral to the field, requiring good designers to be effective persuaders, as suggested in “Cramming Conceptual Abilities into Design Education” by Dan Warner (2005). He states that persuasion is about understanding intellect, logic, and emotion alongside aesthetics. He asks what can be done to teach design students how to think “clearly, critically, as well as creatively.” Although he is not saying design programs should be liberal arts programs, he proposes the idea that design students should have broad exposure to history, literature, rhetoric, debate, social sciences, and communications. This information can then allow students to be more knowledgeable in general, thereby avoiding illogical thinking or gaps in education. Davis also touches upon the subjects she believes would develop better designers: linguistics, psychology, anthropology, and sociology. Baseman asks, “When did the notion of thinking and making as separate acts” come about?
In terms of where the program at SUNY New Paltz currently stands, it is exactly what Gunner Swanson (2005) says: “Design is preceded by core classes common to all other arts specialized to skills.” Only later are students introduced to history and theory. The foundations program at New Paltz must evolve to parallel the changing needs of design. Ken Garland (2005) calls for the redefinition of design as a conceptual practice involving a variety of problem-solving skills, language, and theory and for it to be taught at the outset of a designer’s education. New Paltz must find a way to create a separate program specifically targeted at entry-level graphic design majors. It must be a rigorous, well-rounded group of core classes that push clear, conceptual thought, and basic knowledge and theory. It should be taught with projects and papers pertaining to the skills being mastered. A targeted graphic design program would ultimately provide design students with much stronger portfolios for the competitive job market and better prepare them for the real world of graphic design.
Art as design, design as art, or design as differentiated from art. As the world of graphic design expands, the question arises as to whether the two are one and the same, or if a distinction between them can be made. Design is the process of “carefully creating this thing” (Elimeliah, 2006), a clearly thought-out, researched, and developed manifestation of an idea or concept in order to convey a message. The aesthetics of design are a visual communication carefully crafted by the designer based upon concepts. Frank Baseman (2005) explains that design is about “embracing conceptual thinking, idea generation and communication.” Art seems to be of a separate nature. Although it is visual, the messages conveyed are far from conceptual or communicatory, but really an expression of personal emotion, void of standard rules. Artists create from emotion; they are driven by their own feelings. The difference between the two disciplines must lie in what dictates or motivates designers versus artists. Commerce is the driving force behind design; therefore it is the differentiating factor. If this separation can be made between art and design, the question becomes: How is graphic design taught in post-secondary level in a valuable and conceptually supported way?
Post-secondary graphic design education in universities has become a huge draw for students interested in art, but who desire a path far from the highly esteemed yet small niche of fine arts. The career choice of graphic design takes dedication, passion, endurance, and basic talent. It also takes a strong education deeply rooted in creative problem-solving skills, organization, research, communication skills, and much more. Because of changing social, economic, and technical forces, there is a need for different design education approaches. As Meredith Davis (2005) stated in her essay on graphic design education, these new practices and needs for design are no longer supported by art-based education. Art-based design education began with the Bauhaus movement in Switzerland and has been an idea supported by the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD), an association in charge of accreditation for art and design programs. Davis states that fine arts-based criteria has prevented efforts to improve graphic design education because current design education bears little resemblance to the professional practice of design.
At SUNY New Paltz, the foundations program taken during students’ freshman year, and a requirement for all declared art majors, does not support graphic design problem-solving skills, nor does it teach design students in a useful manner. The next course available in the foundations program is Graphic Design, and this is a prerequisite for all other graphic design classes. After completing this course, design students enter the second semester of their sophomore year. This leaves students only two-and-a-half years to cram in all required courses as well as enough projects for a strong portfolio. It leaves little room for extra classes specific to individual interests or real professional experience. Students are not offered the option of taking critical interdisciplinary classes involving design, problem-solving skills, or any other useful foundations classes in the beginning of their graphic education. The foundations program is based on aesthetics and means nothing for design if not taught alongside design values. Students are not offered alternatives to Introduction to Design I and II or Drawing I and II. These programs are purely art-based and are not valuable for design student’s conceptual development, yet they are the only options currently available for all declared art majors. These classes are taught in an elementary manner, and the lack of challenge within the program does not eliminate students who lack passion, skill, or competition to succeed in graphic design. Although design students may graduate from this program, it does not necessarily give them an advantage post-college in the job market. No visual communications principles are taught. The projects are static and are not based upon real design issues or problems. Design students must be prepared for the fast-paced world of graphic design when they graduate. The foundations program teaches classes that produce individuals who can create beautiful work, but the survival of graphic design as a profession depends on designers who not only produce aesthetically pleasing pieces, but can understand principles, which are strategy in business, marketing and communications, as well as insight into political, economic, and social issues. Currently, design students at SUNY New Paltz cannot even begin to learn or create projects using design principles and visual communication skills until they have completed the art foundations courses.
So where does this leave design students when they leave the university to make their way into the world as graphic designers? It leaves them at a disadvantage in the sense that almost half of a graphic design major’s time is spent drawing figures and perspective, building mobiles, and learning about fine artists from years past. What about learning about contemporary design and designers? This is packed into a twice-weekly, one-hour class for a semester. What about learning how to research and develop concepts in order to design a real-life project? What about understanding the marketing process and how designers are involved? Aesthetics, drawing, and painting skills are taught in these foundations programs, but logical design concepts or societal sensitivity are not addressed or taught alongside these other skills. Marketing, psychology, sociology, and communication concepts may not be important for fine arts, metals, or ceramics majors, but they are critical in the development of concept-driven designers and should be essential in specific graphic design foundations classes.
The advantages to the current foundations program include the development of drawing skills, which is important to graphic design. Sketches and thumbnails are pertinent for brainstorming ideas and layouts, despite the increasing use of computers. Color theory is taught in Design I and is a great tool for designers; but color theory can be taught alongside psychology of color and the motivations for the use of color, which would be much more useful to a budding designer. Foundations courses do support sketchbooks, although the sketchbook assignments are static and usually do not comply with the project or concept being taught.
Disadvantages for design students in the current foundations program include the “dumbing down” of courses to allow for students who have little art experience or an inadequate high-school art education. Because concepts or design principles are not taught in conjunction with aesthetics, it does not encourage thinking, require research and documentation, primary and secondary sources, nor principles of creativity. It forces static projects and encourages students to rush into finished projects without actually thinking conceptually about them. As Kerry Polite says in her essay “Thinking About Design Education” (2004), these final projects then communicate nothing and appear derivative of past art works. The majority of these classes do not even utilize a computer, so students are not introduced to basic graphic design programs or computer skills. This leaves many design students at a disadvantage when they actually get to a design class because they experience so much time and frustration figuring out what tools to use and the basics of the Macintosh; their final products and learning suffer. Graphic design majors should have the availability of design-specific programs at the very outset of their college education in order to fully and appropriately develop their design skills.
Because design has evolved into a commercially-based discipline, a design education should be based upon commercial needs. Persuasion is integral to the field, requiring good designers to be effective persuaders, as suggested in “Cramming Conceptual Abilities into Design Education” by Dan Warner (2005). He states that persuasion is about understanding intellect, logic, and emotion alongside aesthetics. He asks what can be done to teach design students how to think “clearly, critically, as well as creatively.” Although he is not saying design programs should be liberal arts programs, he proposes the idea that design students should have broad exposure to history, literature, rhetoric, debate, social sciences, and communications. This information can then allow students to be more knowledgeable in general, thereby avoiding illogical thinking or gaps in education. Davis also touches upon the subjects she believes would develop better designers: linguistics, psychology, anthropology, and sociology. Baseman asks, “When did the notion of thinking and making as separate acts” come about?
In terms of where the program at SUNY New Paltz currently stands, it is exactly what Gunner Swanson (2005) says: “Design is preceded by core classes common to all other arts specialized to skills.” Only later are students introduced to history and theory. The foundations program at New Paltz must evolve to parallel the changing needs of design. Ken Garland (2005) calls for the redefinition of design as a conceptual practice involving a variety of problem-solving skills, language, and theory and for it to be taught at the outset of a designer’s education. New Paltz must find a way to create a separate program specifically targeted at entry-level graphic design majors. It must be a rigorous, well-rounded group of core classes that push clear, conceptual thought, and basic knowledge and theory. It should be taught with projects and papers pertaining to the skills being mastered. A targeted graphic design program would ultimately provide design students with much stronger portfolios for the competitive job market and better prepare them for the real world of graphic design.
Become a Graphic Designer: No Talent Needed!
We’ve all seen them. Those obnoxious, cheap, made-on-an-exceptionally-low budget-with-a-deadline-in-twelve-minutes kinds of commercials. The ones that reflect the design prowess of an individual completely devoid of any sense of composition, color, or creativity. They are usually trademarked by clashing hues, Microsoft Word-made typography, and an overly enthusiastic narrator. But the most offensive aspect of these commercials is not how they are rendered, but what they are all too frequently known to promote – a career in graphic design. In a cruel twist of irony, this very method of advertising is known to be used as a means of attracting potential candidates to our profession. Usually airing on the local channels of daytime television, these ads are intended to recruit flocks of people to various vocational schools, offering training in the area of “graphic design”. Yet even more disturbing than this trend is the idea communicated through these commercials – that our particular profession is nothing more than a get-rich-quick scheme; so easy, anyone can do it!
This is clearly a flagrant misrepresentation of our occupation. Regardless of the extent of an institution’s facilities, one cannot train an individual to suddenly have an eye for what our profession entails. He or she must bring something to the table. There must be some spark – be it an eye for color, a good sense of space for layouts, good concept ideas and critical thinking skills, or a mind tinged with innovation. Yet these very vocational schools targeting potential design students seem to think that this is not necessary. In fact, one particular commercial even went so far as to boast, much to my extreme shock and horror, “No talent needed!” as their facility’s phone number flashed across the screen. It was this very commercial that sent me over the edge, causing the cereal I was eating that morning to lodge itself in my throat as I nearly dropped the bowl. The audacity of such an institution to claim that one does not need talent to be a graphic designer! The utter temerity of any school to even suggest that our working career is of a level that just about anyone can easily pick up!
Of all the possible professions out there, why do all these commercials target graphic design? What is it about being a graphic designer that makes this occupation so attractive? Is it that the very name of the profession sounds glamorous? Could it be that the ideas of designing CD covers and movie posters like those shown in the commercials is so appealing because of our country’s obsession with the media and pop culture? Maybe it’s the lifestyle that being a graphic designer entails, spending countless hours seated in front of a computer – something not so far removed from what many of these potential students are already doing in their free time. Why not put this squandered time to good use, and have it generate money? I’ve barely ever seen such an ad promoting a career in anything else, save for the occasional mechanic or the rare medical office assistant. Although the vocational schools are advertising these blasphemous ads on local channels, every geographical area seems to have more than their fair share of such commercials. This indicates that it is not just a local phenomenon, but one that has roots in every urban and suburban area of the United States.
And just what exactly is the demographic that these vocational schools are targeting in their television ads? By examining the timeslots in which the institutions choose to air their commercials, perhaps we may gain a better insight. It has been noted that these particular advertisements have only ever been seen during the late-morning on local channels. Often they air during the breaks of shows like Jerry Springer or Judge Judy, alongside ads for attorneys specializing in personal injury, and power chairs for senior citizens. Based on the programming and commercials with which the ads to partake in our profession are associated, we can infer the kind of crowd to whom they are catering – primarily Americans who are unemployed, injured, or aged to the point of immobility. Thus we find the demographics which these institutions have deduced will yield the best possible candidates for a career in graphic design. But why would such a career appeal to individuals from these walks of life – or of any other position that would enable them to sit around soaking up late-morning television? Perhaps because of the very attitude in which these messages for education are conveyed – that graphic design is just so easy that anyone can take it up.
Are we to believe that anyone off the street can just hop on the design bandwagon and achieve success in this field? That the commercials are indeed true, and members of society who are seeking employment will be able to attain work as a designer, having attended one of these vocational schools and received the training necessary to operate Adobe programs? That possession of a certificate that indicates a grasp of technology is the only thing standing between one and a successful job as a graphic designer? There is a key component missing from this equation, and that is the amount of talent – however small – that is necessary to make logos, web pages, posters and more actually work. Without even a small degree of skill in perception, critical thinking, or innovation, one cannot realistically hope to turn out successful pieces as a means of making a living. There must be something in the way of talent or passion to be brought to the table. This is something that no school can teach – it must come from the individual him or herself – a sort of design intuition; that which is not just visual, but also is intuitive in terms of generating compelling and innovative concepts. It is this characteristic that makes an individual a candidate for a successful career as a graphic designer.
One may wonder about those students who sign up for art classes of any kind, going in with absolutely no experience at doing anything creative, and expecting to produce something exactly as they see it either in a photograph or in life. They have an expectation, yet no sense of how to reach it. Having had no experience nor any perception of shape, space, form, color, or concept development, they find themselves frustrated at not being able to produce something close to what they have imagined. Even when handed the appropriate tools and colors to use, they still cannot create something on par with what they are attempting to reproduce. While this is especially true of the Fine Arts, it also holds water in graphic design. Unfortunately, these students of design may not always be able to tell when a graphic they have made is not of particularly high quality or is far-removed from being refined, or when an idea they have devised lacks substantial conceptual weight. Although they have been handed the same tools used by professionals and taught how to handle them, it is how they themselves apply the tools that determines their success.
Having been an assistant art teacher at a private art school for many years, I have observed this first-hand. I have worked with students coming in with good perception of shape, space, form, and color, as well as those who are lacking in these qualities (usually it is the parents’ idea to enrolled these children in the school for the sake of having another extra-curricular activity). While it can be challenging, I have found that it is easier to help those children with varying degrees of some form of perception to grow and develop as artists. It is easy to teach them new skills when they have some pre-existing knowledge to base these teachings on. We take what they have instinctively and show them how to push it further, and gradually the child’s skills increase and their development is often noticeable even from class to class.
The few others who enter our program with no particular concepts of the aforementioned attributes are not as easy to guide. It is difficult to teach them to grasp concepts to which they are oblivious in the first place. There is less to work with when teaching these students, as the things shown to them are usually aspects that they have never before considered. While in some cases these students can master what they have been taught to some degree, they often become stuck in a rut, or remain in their comfort zone, and do not take it upon themselves to try to develop their skills further. This is not usually out of fear of failure, but out of inability to envision different approaches. Such is often the fate of those enrolled in the educational institutions advertising on late-morning local television. Students of these schools have been harvested from the masses watching TV and longing for an employment opportunity to present itself that can quickly remedy their situations– and the way the graphic design commercials are set up, what better way than to enter our profession?
If given the tools and the instructions on how to operate them, can America’s, late-morning television-watching populaces realistically produce pieces that can stand and survive in the competitive world of graphic design? Would they find themselves employed long enough to establish a decent (by society’s standards) lifestyle for themselves? It is highly unlikely that anything relatively long-term could come out of entering a field that is in itself an art form – a hybrid of art and commerce – when the creator does not have an eye for basic formal principles nor a mind geared for devising innovative or compelling concepts. These are for the most part intuitive, and can be helped and furthered but not created out of nothing. Sadly, the likelihood of this being a rude shock is exceedingly high to those entering the design workforce who come from such a background. It is especially ironic as they jumped on board with what seemed to be a career that is a fast track to success and fortune.
Graphic design is by no means to be taken as a potential get-rich-quick scheme. There are so many facets to our line of work that most people never perceive. From research on demographics to the psychology of anticipating clients’ immediate and long-term needs, there is a wealth of behind-the-scenes work that must always be undertaken. There exist so many subtle nuances in such a multitude of areas that a mere training program could not possibly make an individual wise to – from scratch, no less. Our practice requires more than just being computer-savvy. It is a practice founded on critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities, both of which go hand-in-hand with the visual skills involving color theory, space relationships and composition, and most often thinking outside the box. Couple this with a strong sense of passion for the field, and only then can one see what it requires to become a true graphic designer, not one of the rabble of “professionals” churned out by the schools advertising their low-quality graphics on the local channels during the day.
This is clearly a flagrant misrepresentation of our occupation. Regardless of the extent of an institution’s facilities, one cannot train an individual to suddenly have an eye for what our profession entails. He or she must bring something to the table. There must be some spark – be it an eye for color, a good sense of space for layouts, good concept ideas and critical thinking skills, or a mind tinged with innovation. Yet these very vocational schools targeting potential design students seem to think that this is not necessary. In fact, one particular commercial even went so far as to boast, much to my extreme shock and horror, “No talent needed!” as their facility’s phone number flashed across the screen. It was this very commercial that sent me over the edge, causing the cereal I was eating that morning to lodge itself in my throat as I nearly dropped the bowl. The audacity of such an institution to claim that one does not need talent to be a graphic designer! The utter temerity of any school to even suggest that our working career is of a level that just about anyone can easily pick up!
Of all the possible professions out there, why do all these commercials target graphic design? What is it about being a graphic designer that makes this occupation so attractive? Is it that the very name of the profession sounds glamorous? Could it be that the ideas of designing CD covers and movie posters like those shown in the commercials is so appealing because of our country’s obsession with the media and pop culture? Maybe it’s the lifestyle that being a graphic designer entails, spending countless hours seated in front of a computer – something not so far removed from what many of these potential students are already doing in their free time. Why not put this squandered time to good use, and have it generate money? I’ve barely ever seen such an ad promoting a career in anything else, save for the occasional mechanic or the rare medical office assistant. Although the vocational schools are advertising these blasphemous ads on local channels, every geographical area seems to have more than their fair share of such commercials. This indicates that it is not just a local phenomenon, but one that has roots in every urban and suburban area of the United States.
And just what exactly is the demographic that these vocational schools are targeting in their television ads? By examining the timeslots in which the institutions choose to air their commercials, perhaps we may gain a better insight. It has been noted that these particular advertisements have only ever been seen during the late-morning on local channels. Often they air during the breaks of shows like Jerry Springer or Judge Judy, alongside ads for attorneys specializing in personal injury, and power chairs for senior citizens. Based on the programming and commercials with which the ads to partake in our profession are associated, we can infer the kind of crowd to whom they are catering – primarily Americans who are unemployed, injured, or aged to the point of immobility. Thus we find the demographics which these institutions have deduced will yield the best possible candidates for a career in graphic design. But why would such a career appeal to individuals from these walks of life – or of any other position that would enable them to sit around soaking up late-morning television? Perhaps because of the very attitude in which these messages for education are conveyed – that graphic design is just so easy that anyone can take it up.
Are we to believe that anyone off the street can just hop on the design bandwagon and achieve success in this field? That the commercials are indeed true, and members of society who are seeking employment will be able to attain work as a designer, having attended one of these vocational schools and received the training necessary to operate Adobe programs? That possession of a certificate that indicates a grasp of technology is the only thing standing between one and a successful job as a graphic designer? There is a key component missing from this equation, and that is the amount of talent – however small – that is necessary to make logos, web pages, posters and more actually work. Without even a small degree of skill in perception, critical thinking, or innovation, one cannot realistically hope to turn out successful pieces as a means of making a living. There must be something in the way of talent or passion to be brought to the table. This is something that no school can teach – it must come from the individual him or herself – a sort of design intuition; that which is not just visual, but also is intuitive in terms of generating compelling and innovative concepts. It is this characteristic that makes an individual a candidate for a successful career as a graphic designer.
One may wonder about those students who sign up for art classes of any kind, going in with absolutely no experience at doing anything creative, and expecting to produce something exactly as they see it either in a photograph or in life. They have an expectation, yet no sense of how to reach it. Having had no experience nor any perception of shape, space, form, color, or concept development, they find themselves frustrated at not being able to produce something close to what they have imagined. Even when handed the appropriate tools and colors to use, they still cannot create something on par with what they are attempting to reproduce. While this is especially true of the Fine Arts, it also holds water in graphic design. Unfortunately, these students of design may not always be able to tell when a graphic they have made is not of particularly high quality or is far-removed from being refined, or when an idea they have devised lacks substantial conceptual weight. Although they have been handed the same tools used by professionals and taught how to handle them, it is how they themselves apply the tools that determines their success.
Having been an assistant art teacher at a private art school for many years, I have observed this first-hand. I have worked with students coming in with good perception of shape, space, form, and color, as well as those who are lacking in these qualities (usually it is the parents’ idea to enrolled these children in the school for the sake of having another extra-curricular activity). While it can be challenging, I have found that it is easier to help those children with varying degrees of some form of perception to grow and develop as artists. It is easy to teach them new skills when they have some pre-existing knowledge to base these teachings on. We take what they have instinctively and show them how to push it further, and gradually the child’s skills increase and their development is often noticeable even from class to class.
The few others who enter our program with no particular concepts of the aforementioned attributes are not as easy to guide. It is difficult to teach them to grasp concepts to which they are oblivious in the first place. There is less to work with when teaching these students, as the things shown to them are usually aspects that they have never before considered. While in some cases these students can master what they have been taught to some degree, they often become stuck in a rut, or remain in their comfort zone, and do not take it upon themselves to try to develop their skills further. This is not usually out of fear of failure, but out of inability to envision different approaches. Such is often the fate of those enrolled in the educational institutions advertising on late-morning local television. Students of these schools have been harvested from the masses watching TV and longing for an employment opportunity to present itself that can quickly remedy their situations– and the way the graphic design commercials are set up, what better way than to enter our profession?
If given the tools and the instructions on how to operate them, can America’s, late-morning television-watching populaces realistically produce pieces that can stand and survive in the competitive world of graphic design? Would they find themselves employed long enough to establish a decent (by society’s standards) lifestyle for themselves? It is highly unlikely that anything relatively long-term could come out of entering a field that is in itself an art form – a hybrid of art and commerce – when the creator does not have an eye for basic formal principles nor a mind geared for devising innovative or compelling concepts. These are for the most part intuitive, and can be helped and furthered but not created out of nothing. Sadly, the likelihood of this being a rude shock is exceedingly high to those entering the design workforce who come from such a background. It is especially ironic as they jumped on board with what seemed to be a career that is a fast track to success and fortune.
Graphic design is by no means to be taken as a potential get-rich-quick scheme. There are so many facets to our line of work that most people never perceive. From research on demographics to the psychology of anticipating clients’ immediate and long-term needs, there is a wealth of behind-the-scenes work that must always be undertaken. There exist so many subtle nuances in such a multitude of areas that a mere training program could not possibly make an individual wise to – from scratch, no less. Our practice requires more than just being computer-savvy. It is a practice founded on critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities, both of which go hand-in-hand with the visual skills involving color theory, space relationships and composition, and most often thinking outside the box. Couple this with a strong sense of passion for the field, and only then can one see what it requires to become a true graphic designer, not one of the rabble of “professionals” churned out by the schools advertising their low-quality graphics on the local channels during the day.
Level Start
Sony's Playstation, released in 1994, was one of the fifth generation consoles; a generation that harbored the capacity for a fully rendered third dimension. At the time, Sony wasn't looking to produce two-dimensional games, instead focusing on its 3-D competition with Nintendo and Sega. However, Sony would eventually integrate them into their releases when they realized how 3-D could work for 2-D. The graphics power of the console itself allowed two-dimensional games far greater depth with more colors on the screen at once, plus three-dimensional effects to render more stylish and realistic art, designs and also more fluid animations. The Megaman X series was three games strong at this point, and the series aimed to continue, with X4, onto the Playstation. The series continued all the way to X6, before it took another leap into the sixth generation. This generation built on three-dimensional design, rendering it even more realistically. Now the question you've no doubt heard concerning this series is, "How many games were there again?" With nine games, the series attempted to conclude several times. So it was that with the second conclusion, released on December 6, 2001, the series began to show its age. It is with Megaman X6 that our criticism lies.
The next question you may then ask is, "Where did the X games go wrong?" Video game customers are arguably the toughest customers you'll find in any market. If customers' high standards are not met, bad reviews will travel fast. Video games are a form of entertainment, one that the customer directly interacts with through sight, sound, touch, and thought. With these instantaneous senses, the customer demands a product as responsive as they are. This includes many standards presumed before even playing the game, some which may go unnoticed, and others which must stand out as masterpieces, if only for a second. By the fifth game, X was just getting by without facelifts, new features, and fresh themes. How did the series survive so long? A supporting fan base. Even more basic than this answer is the reason Megaman games have such a timeless following: the gameplay.
Within a video game, the key element is gameplay. Basically, this is how the customer, (which going forward will be named the player) controls themselves within the game. If the avatar of the player is not a fluid extension of their reactions, the game is seldom tolerated, let alone recommended. The environment in which gameplay takes place in is the level, and therefore "level design" is an element which directly affects gameplay. Not too metaphorically, the level is a playground, with the player being a child. Playgrounds have certain concrete standards pertaining to safety in order to assure that children are playing in a safe environment. Secondary to these are the aesthetic standards of the playground, such as color and shape. After these elements, the playground designers then continue to explore how to creatively entertain and engage children. The same is true for level design. This kind of design is consistent with aspects of graphic design; it's merely applied to game level format. Like graphic design, the environment must have purpose, style, color, and innovation, among other dimensions.
Again, the game we are examining is Megaman X6, an installment of a certain series renowned for its success in just such categories as level design and gameplay. However, X6 was made outside of the series finale, Megaman X5, and was not backed by the series creator, Keiji Inafune. It was also rushed for the Christmas season of 2001, to quickly cash in on the series' popularity. These simple facts explain the reality behind every pixel: X6 is a cheap exploitation of overused programming and franchise popularity. The game was perceived as just the middleman to an easy profit. Within the parameters of level design, its first flaw is in the layout, that is, the locations of platforms and pathways through the level. The relationship each level's general layout has with the placement of obstacles and enemies is a dual example of impossible maneuverability and what seems a deliberate attempt to frustrate the player. Another crucial flaw is an overabundance of instant death traps that terminate the player on contact. The placement of these in some cases contradicts the structure or theme of the level, or stretches the theme as an excuse to include traps. Many levels must be played several times, regardless of the adaptability of a player, because there are things present that simply cannot be foreseen, leaving it up to trial-and-error. It is in this observation that another crucial clue lies. The games in this series were all about developing skills with the character and adapting to the challenge as you proceeded. This always revealed a purposeful, rhythmic flow through levels, which gradually became an all too simple realization yet still difficult to execute. X6 lacks this subtle harmony, and the proof is in the very way one plays the game: frustrated, memorized, and overly cautious.
The next flaw plays into level design, but is somewhat separate, and that is difficulty level. The player's ability to terminate enemies, and their durability, are significantly spiked compared to other games in this series. This makes areas harder to maneuver when timing and speed are the issue. Also, the importance of enemies' placement soon becomes evident because it simply is ignored. Progression through a level is thus reduced to memorization of the mind and fingers. When video games first emerged in the late 60's, this need for memorization was the very definition of the era. However, as technology has allowed games to develop into an art form, the intention for the game to attack the player from all sides has fallen out with the public. This aspect also relates to graphic design and may have evolved with it. Graphic designers are always trying to challenge their audiences, be it the public or their contemporaries. They may not have as much justifiable space for challenge as video games, but it is a dimension of their work. As graphic design has evolved with constant study and changing times, so difficulty in the level has too; an over excruciating challenge will always have the potential to frustrate and drive existing and potential customers away.
Much like movies, video games have a thematic genre; that is, one pertaining to the kind of atmosphere set with design and plot line. There then exist genres pertaining to the style of gameplay. The category our game falls into is action, which then functions under the subcategory platformer. In this genre, the player's character moves on a 2-dimensional plane, across various suspended and grounded platforms. The manner in which they accomplish this is up to the mechanics and design of the game. For a game to successfully entertain the player, it must achieve certain standards in visual and structural layout, both noticed and unnoticed, before it can deal with extra aesthetics that take it outside average appeal. Other factors affect overall success of the levels in a game, namely the musical score, and of course the game mechanics themselves, but these are separate dimensions entirely; for our purposes we will address the art and design of the level itself.
The next big design flaw with Megaman X6 is its palette. The color scheme for each level seems poor, overly vibrant and almost neon. In one level set in the Amazon, the background forest is dark green set against a bizarrely middle tone of purple with some gradation. The environment contains muddy grayish greens in the foreground. The setting then shifts to the inside of a cave. The cave is a bright, grayish turquoise. A strange metallic structure is barely visible in the background, and does not blend well given its relative distance. The biggest offenders are the final levels, which also possess by far the worst level design, laden with unnecessary spikes and poor platform placement. The background of these final stages of the game does invoke a sense of mystery, yet it is so packed with content that any attempt to make sense of it is quickly abandoned. It contains many layers of translucent and intersecting green squares and lines; again these colors are practically glowing. Nailed against wall floating in black space are two giant mythological animal composites. the foreground directly contrasts this with bright yellows and reds. The result is a visually confusing level.
Probably the strangest aspect of the game branches off the game's lackluster story. The story introduces a force called the Nightmare, which does not come in the form of just enemies, but affects the level itself. The effect can obstruct pathways with large damaging metal blocks, rain fire or acid, limit visibility, or bombard the player with floating rocks. This added game element is no doubt an attempt to provide greater challenge and variety to completed levels, which can be revisited (replay value picking up the slack of poor design). It ends up creating an even harsher path through the levels, should they be affected by the randomized Nightmare.
To be fair, the challenge of the game has been viewed as a rare and defining trait by unconditionally devoted fans (those popularly titled as 'hardcore'). The widely accepted view that the game holds the most difficulty of every installment in the series also attracts a certain audience. However, the question of difficulty is hardly an excuse, as it is mostly due to poor level design, and not something that stands on its own. If there is a redeeming aspect to the design flaws and difficulty it is most certainly the challenge to complete a game placed into such a standalone category. In this way, while its flaws cause it both a reduced audience and recognition in the industry, it more intensely attracts and is praised by the limited category of fans it appeals to.
It is unfortunate that the game fails in such a crucial category. The game has been universally praised for both its soundtrack and increased control in gameplay (only due to its lifeless adoption from its predecessors). If it had not been so rushed, and had been proposed to the series creator, the art and design of the game would have received more attention.
Inadequate Design on Campus
Design plays an extremely important role in a person’s everyday life. Whether or not it is realized good design improves the quality of life for all who come into contact with it. When the inanimate objects that people interact with have reason and purpose information travels quickly and easily. The problem is that for whatever reason bad design goes unnoticed and is not a priority for those who are making decisions. People assume that if they are paying well for a service they are getting their monies worth by hiring “professionals”. In my opinion one of the last places that bad design should exist is on a college campus. A place where good ideas should be nurtured and encouraged, in reality is a place where good ideas are ignored. I believe that if an institution such as SUNY New Paltz is truly confident in the ability of its professors and in the quality of the education it is providing for its students, their ears should be wide open to new ideas. Unfortunately, I’m not completely convinced that this is the case.
These days when people need information there’s no hesitation to sit down at a computer and type in a question at popular search engine. When it comes to choosing a college most people would sooner visit the school’s website before visiting the campus. Many schools spend an exorbitant amount of money on a site that captures the overall atmosphere it would like to portray. When considering whether or not to enroll into a college one would expect to view a site both appealing to the eye combined with easily accessible information. When trying to find answers to questions about a school it would be a great disappointment to stumble upon an error page or an unpleasant mess of unorganized material. Unfortunately, www.newpaltz.edu boasts an array of inadequate mistakes. For example, when first coming to http://lib.newpaltz.edu/ there is some confusion on what the users options are. There are links moving from left to right and top to bottom. The links texts appear in white on a blue box, while the rest of the sites background is rendered in white. The major problem with this site is the hierarchy of the text. The user has no way of separating important information from insignificant information. Another example would have to be the school’s bookstore site. If you go to http://www.newpaltz.edu/academics/ you’ll see a link that says bookstore. After hitting the link you’ll find an error page, http://www.newpaltz.edu/cas/books.html. If the user types in http://www.newpaltz.edu/cas/bookstore.html it will bring them to an extremely unattractive site with little information. The user then needs to find one more link to finally get to where they want to go. The problem here is that this site is not easily accessible. Tim Brown is a former professor at SUNY New Paltz and also teaches at Vassar College. He taught Vis Lang 2 and had also contributed to the Vassar College site. The final project that he assigned for his class involved redesigning either SUNY New Paltz’s CAS website or Vassar College’s English Department website and to provide a detailed document outlining and justifying the design and development decisions made during the redesign. When asked if New Paltz had approached him at any time concerning the schools site he replied no. When asked if he had any interest in improving the schools site he replied yes. Why Tim Brown was given the opportunity to contribute to Vassar’s site and not New Paltz is undetermined.
The New Paltz website isn’t the only tool that the school uses to bring information to the public. There are a number of brochures and pamphlets available for both potential students and those who are already enrolled. Unfortunately, many of these brochures are riddled with bad text, horrible composition, and pixilated imagery. New Paltz’s “Guide to On-Campus Living” is a perfect example. The cover of the pamphlet consists of centered type on an orange background. Three different typefaces are used and a collage of condensed, low quality images run from left to right with no margin. When we open the brochure we see a composition comparable to a text book. The main problem with this booklet is the quality of the images. The majority of them have been stretched so far past their capacity that they appear blurry and difficult to process. Others are so small that they don’t even grab the viewer’s attention. It’s disturbing to think that this problem could be solved by just using a decent digital camera. What’s more disturbing is that both those who provided the images and those who used them realized that there was a problem. The type and image course offered at SUNY New Paltz gives design students an opportunity to educate themselves on how these two subjects relate to each other. Students are also given a chance to create their own brochure comprised of their own type and imagery. Many of these brochures are connected with New Paltz in one way or another and are rendered in an extremely professional way. Instead of outsources these projects New Paltz could easily look to a handful of their most gifted students to complete these projects. This would not only give New Paltz the opportunity to show pride in their school but also to show pride in the work of its students.
In conclusion, there is a number of design problems associated with this campus. It seems senseless for an institution to hire and train professionals just to show no interest in how they can benefit from them. There is no way to tell how beneficial it would be for both parties if the choice to commit ion design students to work on school projects became a reality.
Custom Designed Mailboxes: Good or Bad
Mailboxes are typically these rounded corner metal rectangle shaped objects that sit on the edge of your property and are there to receive and hold your mail. One end of the box opens so that mail is easily placed in the box. The mailbox sits atop a pole that usually is the height of your car window. Only mailboxes for homes that are located in areas where mail is delivered by car.
A red flag on one side of the mailbox signals mail that needs to be picked up for delivery elsewhere. If you rotate the red flag straight up in the air, the postman will know there is something in the box that needs to go to another location. The mail will go through the post office and be distributed accordingly. If you don’t rotate the flag up, the mail will just sit in your mailbox until you realize that you need to do something else about it.
Mailboxes are a convience we take for granted. Mail gets placed right in your mailbox saving you a trip to the post office. All you have to do is walk across your property to get your mail.
The interior and exterior of a house is supposed to be what gets decorated. Not your mailbox. As if people don’t have enough things to waste time and money on, they are wasting time and money on their mailboxes. It seems that people have taken it upon themselves to revamp the simple mailbox. Nothing is allowed to be basic and simple. Instead of simple basic little rectangle shaped objects on poles, we see dragons and airplanes and crazy things of the sort.
Another thing about mailboxes that is irritating is the size and location of house numbers and resident’s names. The way in which the text is placed or not, often leads to some sort of confusion. When I was younger, I used to deliver newspapers for the Daily Freeman. When I first started, I went through a lot of hassle trying to figure out which house was what number and who lived there. I had about 25 houses to deliver to; about half had only names or numbers. About a quarter of the houses had both.
Even if a mailbox has both the name and the house number, the typeface and size usually don’t match. They don’t match each other let alone any other house nearby. Nothing ever matches! The typeface, the size, and the location are never the same. Visually, it doesn’t cause any problems however some fonts are difficult to read. The same typeface would create a uniformity that is currently lacking.
I enjoy looking at some custom made mailboxes. Some are really interesting in design as well as the way they are constructed. Some mailboxes however are too intense and so extreme that it makes the viewer not want to look at it. Seeing one of these mailboxes, I have to ask: Is this a mailbox or is it a lawn ornament? A friend of mine said that custom designed mailboxes are uglifing their property. If people are going to have custom-made mailboxes, there should be restrictions or limitations in their design. Some mailboxes are plastic, pre-made structures that look like a mailbox. I believe that all mailboxes should look like the original design for a mailbox.
Any kind of mailbox: new, old or custom should most certainly be standing up on its own! If a mailbox has duck tape or a latter holding it up, something needs to be done about this. It is not acceptable for the box to be taped to the pole it rests on. A very large base under the mailbox doesn't look very appealing. As sturdy as it might be, it is not acceptable. A rusted mailbox is easy to cover up. I certainly don’t agree with your mailbox matching the exact car that you have parked in your driveway. I understand that people really enjoy their vehicles but matching your mailbox to your car is a little over the top. Large mailboxes that look like animals or plants could be acceptable however they would have to be small.
I would like to see a set of regulations and restrictions set in place for the designers or manufactures to follow to minimize any confusion or arguments that might be taking place. Criteria could include the overall size and how much space required. It is not appropriate nor does it look nice if you place bricks between your mailbox and the pole to make the mailbox taller. It is not a pleasant task to bend down at the knees to place mail in the box. Hand painted numbers or letters that are so large that you can read them from a mile away do not qualify as taking care of the problem. The typeface for both the numbers and the letters should match each other.
Your mailbox should not reflect your job title, whether you are a marine or a fisherman, it is not appropriate for your mailbox. The walls inside of your home are for displaying objects that apply to your job. It should be easy to spot where exactly the mail goes in. If you have to study a mailbox for ten minutes to try and figure out where the door is, the mailbox is not according to code. Your mailbox should not be a smaller replica of your home or any other building. Your mailbox should not resemble a United States Postal Service vehicle. People shouldn't be afraid to walk up to your mailbox.
The door on the front of the mailbox must be able to swing freely. The flag must stand up on its own. If neither of these are true, then the mailbox must be corrected. Loose hinges on the door are not acceptable either. The postman would take on another responsibility: if a mailbox isn’t to code, then he or she would be responsible for reporting this information back to the post office. If a mailbox is reported, that residence will not receive any more mail until their box is up to code. No punishments dealing with the law will be issued but the resident will have to go to the post office to get their mail.
If a universal set of guidelines for the design of mailboxes were put in place, I believe that would make things easier on everybody as well as the postman. The postman wouldn’t have to worry about leaning over to reach a short standing mailbox or reach up to try and reach in to a mailbox.
If people insisted on having custom made mailboxes, they could. There would be limitations on those as well. Things protruding off of the mailbox would be ok but they would not be allowed to stick out past the actual size of the box itself. Any colors could be as long as the numbers and letters are clearly visible.
It is the responsibility of the owner of the property to supply the home with a mailbox that is to code. If someone is renting a home or an apartment, it is still the owner’s responsibility to take care of the mailbox. The manufacturers would have to change the way they design mailboxes so that homeowners can use the designs they produce. If a faulty design were produced on accident, then the manufacturer would have to completely reimburse the person who purchased the mailbox.
Bad Kerning
I hate bad kerning. Bad kerning is distracting to the eye, ugly, and can form undesirable and sometimes offensive words. Incorrectly kerned words can also make it difficult to read an article, sign, poster or anything else for that matter because of the distractions they create. Secondly, letters can be spaced so closely words are hard to distinguish, some letter combinations appear to form another letter altogether.
Kerning is the space between two individual letters. Unless you are a professional designer and trained in typography, or have a degree in design, kerning may be a word you have never heard of before because it's not a word commonly used at the dinner table. If you are not a designer you probably don't care about what kerning is in the first place and wouldn't recognize it until you saw bad kerning, for example, in a movie poster or in a store front. Even when you do come across bad kerning, because undoubtedly you do come across it fairly often, you probably don't even know that what you're seeing is kerning. However, by just looking at the piece of work you know that something is wrong with the design. This is because bad kerning is something that doesn't go unnoticed.
Kerning is everywhere that you see type - in books, movie posters, road signs, products and even in your text messages - so its no wonder that bad kerning is so common. If you have so much of something there's bound to be mistakes. For the most part if you are not told that kerning exists you won't notice it at all and you wouldn't really care if you saw good kerning. Before I was educated as a designer, before my first typography class, I never noticed these defects in books that I read or the homework assignments that I typed. Now, however, I see kerning clearly and am distracted by poorly produced typesetting.
I didn't notice how irritated the eye could get when the "t" and the "h" were too close together on a page and how the letters "w" and "a" are never quite close enough in words like "war" and "want." Now, out of habit, every time I read a book I look at the kerning, and occasionally I will circle these mistakes, looking for someone to blame for the poorly designed layouts. It is argued that kerning is only looked at and meticulously worked upon in larger projects and not in books because of the time it takes. But no matter what the project someone must be held responsible for kerning because otherwise these mistakes will continue to happen and continue to agitate the eye. Placing blame however can be difficult: should we blame the designer or the company that commissions the work? Or do we blame the software the designer uses? Kerning is already preprogramed in software to judge the correct distance between each letter; this is called auto-kerning. Kerning pairs are already preprogramed in software. Each font has its own kerning table which can consist of fifty or a hundred or more combinations. These tables are set to allow for specific degrees of spacing between each letter which allows for the many letter combinations that form our words.
Common letter combinations that produce a too wide of an inter letter are W, Y, V. T. L. The larger the font size, the more you notice the gap. A most commonly criticized word is "WAR," as you can notice the angle of the "W" and the angle in the "A" seem to repel each other making it appear as if the "AR" is falling off of the "W." This example is found in "WATER" also. However here you see two things: not only are the "W" and the "A" repelling each other but the "A" and "T" are also fighting against each other. The letter "O" is also a nuisance; because of its width the letter is always seen as being a singular letter separated from the rest of the letters near it, even when it is placed in the center of a word.
Bad kerning doesn't just interrupt words but it also interrupts the spacing between each word and before and after a punctuation. These failures to kern between punctuation can cause what designers call rivers. Rivers are empty spaces or gaps that draw your eye down a page and distract you. Some times these rivers can become so bad that they create optical illusions.
Reading through this paper you probably have noticed several kerning mishaps, how could you not? I purposely allowed for this to provoke you to pick out the bad kerning and see how apparent it is. Though it is irritating the degree is not sufficient to prevent you from being bale to read the words correctly. Secondly, since I have already explained what kerning is you will probably notice it more often, whether you want to or not. Since a lot of mundane inconsistencies go unnoticed it is only when something is acknowledged that you start noticing it everywhere. See how many bad kerning incidents you can locate through the reset of this article. Also, next time you read a book notice the kerning in the title page and the text and analyze your reaction to seeing bad kerning. Books are a common place to find bad kerning because the text is so extensive that kerning each individual letter would take perhaps days or weeks to carefully weed through and that is just time most business will not pay for.
It is irritating when I open a design book about typography and find that the kerning has gone unchecked. Reading through my textbook for a typography course I found it hypocritical that the author had criticized the misuse of kerning when that very book had poor kerning. Here was a book, meant to teach about these aesthetics, failing to follow its own rule. This was a time when I wanted to circle each "th" and every "wa" and go to someone and point out the irony of these mistakes.
Terrible consequences arise from bad kerning mishaps including offensive material. Offending someone is something a designer does not want to do especially in the case of promoting something or advertising a product or store. For a store in New Port Ritchie, Florida, a designer neglected to kern the letters in the store name carefully which resulted in something undesirable. The store front was supposed to read "Megaflicks" because it is a video store. Unfortunately for the store owner that is not what they got. Instead the sign reads as "Megafucks" - hinting at a different type of store. A mistake like this can be only looked at in disbelief because of the time it takes to design a store front. You would assume that this typo would have been seen by someone somewhere along the line of production.
A movie poster discussed in many forums on kerning is the I Am Legend movie poster. In this poster the "L" and the "D" are separated from the "egend" not only because of its size but through kerning. This makes it difficult to read as "legend." The "egend" looks like its own word hanging in its own space unconnected to the "L" and the "D." The beginning and ending letters seem to be acting as a support for the "egend" and not as a part of the actual word. This was an intentional kerning choice so claiming it as a bad kerning situation is debatable. It was a bad choice because of the reading of the word but at the same time it makes an interesting design.
Designers work painstakingly and endlessly on their work, which begs the question: Why does bad kerning exist? Could it just be carelessness? Carelessness is hard to believe because designers are fairly meticulous, and bad kerning, beyond a doubt, is noticeable. Looking at a project as much and for as long as a designer does it can't be pure carelessness. Then it must be laziness; but this is also hard to fathom because again a designer considers each work their "baby." Why would a designer carefully place every element just right and then decide to be lazy with regards to something that can be so vital to the finished design? It bothers me that a designer can leave out kerning corrections when doing so can harmonize the final product and make it more appealing to the eye. Perhaps it is because good kerning goes unnoticed so designers say "why bother?" Or maybe it's because people are not well educated regarding its benefits.
Skull Trauma by Rose Dovi | Oct. 28, 2008
Designers of the modern world have utilized the skull in an abusive manner. Skulls are now seen everywhere, whether in fashion, graphic design, or type. Not only is it overused, but there skull is turning into an ambiguous form. Is it sexy, deadly, cute, cuddly, hardcore, rock, or hellish? Without an understanding of appropriate use, the skull is causing distaste and discomfort for both producers and consumers.
According to AIGA, the American Institute of Graphic Arts, the skull is "overused, overexposed, overdone - and yet evergreen, everlasting, ever in play." Therefore, it can be assumed that even those with professional knowledge disagree with the constant use of the skull. It is so commonly referred to hat it has been likened to a penny. AIGA refers to the skull as the "designer's coin, so cheap you half expect to turn it over to find... a smiley face." Save that for another rant.
Unfortunately the history of the skull has been neglected in many design ideas. There is no research in the pictures of display that have been adorning people, their homes, workplaces, and even their pets. Yes, now there are even skulls on apparel for dogs, cats, and any other animal you might be dressing. Skulls adorn pink hooded sweatshirts found at "sassypup.net." The site displays a small pink hooded track jacket replete with an Air Force patch, pin, and a bright white skull decorated with a chain and fake diamonds.
Not only are skulls decorating clothing for dogs, but also for people as well. Outerwear is not the only lucky article of clothing to be embellished by such a deserving motif. Now you can even find skulls on panties.
And then there are the accessories. Skulls can be found around people's necks, in their piercings, in their hair, and over their shoulders. Purses everywhere display skulls, whether they are frilly, rocker, punk, or preppy. The skull has completely lost it's identity in the world of fashion.
Bodily accessories are no longer the only items to make a flashy statement. Household items also have the opportunity to feel as deadly and rocker and any other item on the market. A company in Hamburg, Germany, produces and imports toasters that not only have the skulls motif, but brands your toast with a skull to designate your toast as poison. And along with poison toast, you can feed your toddlers toxic juice out of a sippy cup marked with a skull and crossbones, found at "troubletots.com"
The logic behind many of these designs is questionable. Why, other than for the sake of pleasing a customer would someone think to make so many items with such an image? It seems as though designers aren't doing their research. In this case, the skull is going to lose all meaning, unless a completely disturbed person actually wished to poison their toddler and eat toxic toast.
The skull has always been visually represented. It is a part of the human skeletal system and always will be. When used literally, the skull stands symbolic of death and harm. The skull and crossbones was used on pirate flags. Why then is the skull so appealing to the human eye?
David Barringer, writer of "Forever Skull," believes it is because human beings are obsessed with what they cannot see. He explains we have a "desperate desire [that] drives us to derivatives, the skull, overuse of the skull, slapped across our cultural walls like plastic stars glowing in the dark. We're inured to them. It;s too bright for our skulls to glow, these faded blobs drifting farther and farther from the things they represent."
What then constitutes proper use of the skull? I believe if there is historical reference in a design, the designer has done his or her job properly. The skull is one object that happens to have various symbolic meanings. Because it is part of the human body, every culture has had experience and different understandings of what the skull represents.
In some cultures the skull represents death, in other a romantic notion of immortality. In early artwork by Shakespeare, he has depicted the skull in reference to pleasure and vanity. The skull also has been a representative of reason, intellectual vision, and different stages of human knowledge. If used with the crossbones, the skull can mean re-birth or, quite differently, danger. In Spanish culture, the skull is symbolic of El Dia De Los Muertos, or The Day of The Dead. On this occasion, people pay respect to their dead relatives by leaving treats, such as candy skulls and other items most precious to whomever passed away, on a small alter to be received by the deceased's spirit.
Because the history of symbolism is vast for the skull, there are many ways in which it could be utilized. However, that is not an excuse for improper use, such as a motif on a toaster. It is understandable that the skull is also used in some culture as a mean to represent machismo or a gothic style. This makes design a bit confusing though when the skull is slapped on any item to please the taste of someone who wants to be tough or grim.
The skull has been considered a sacred object for many years. Design should no destroy such a reputation, but embrace it. When designed, objects should proudly and properly display the items they are representing. In doing so, confusion is lost and tribute is paid, and I do believe the skull is due some respect.
As a consumer, do not give in to bad design. You should not be taken for granted or as an ignorant fool. Be prideful when you buy goods. Know what you are buying and what it represents. You wouldn't buy a book if you could not read it, so why buy something that does not make sense?
Designers, do your research. Should you really be using the skull on your next project? Does it hold any meaning, or are you simply trying to find the easy way out of making your design like in pop culture? It's up to you.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)