Archive for March, 2010


Gestalt theory is something with which all people are innately familiar, but are unaware of its rules and principles.  I, myself, have known about the theories and principles for several years, but have not explored them in depth until the last couple months.

Gestalt has many definitions depending on the context in which it is used.  Official definitions from sources such as the Merriam-Webster dictionary state that gestalt is “a structure, configuration, or pattern of physical, biological, or psychological phenomena so integrated as to constitute a functional unit with properties not derivable by summation of its parts”.  Though this definition is obviously wordy and a bit formal for my purposes, it does describe the general theory gestalt well.  The online Free Dictionary extracts gestalt from the Collins English Dictionary and describes it from a psychological standpoint as “a perceptual pattern or structure possessing qualities as a whole that cannot be described merely as a sum of its parts”.  The two above definitions work well for gestalt in general, but, because I am delving into a design-related field, I find that the design-related definition of gestalt from usask.com, “how we perceive objects in our environment… the difference between figure and ground and…how various principles help us to decide which is figure and which is ground” applies most closely to how I think of it.  No matter what source is though, they all essentially describe gestalt in the same way.  Combining the definitions into a more digestible form, my definition of gestalt is that, by our way of interpreting, the whole of anything is more than the sum of all it’s combined parts.

From how I understand gestalt, I have illustrated a simple example of a couple of the principles below.

Girl and trees

In my above illustration, the girl on the rock expresses the gestalt principle of figure and ground since she is not visible by any other means than the night sky behind her.  The constellation of Orion, seen in the sky, shows the gestalt principle of proximity because of the closeness of the stars in Orion’s belt and because the configuration of the overall constellation is easily recognized by most viewers.  The trees illustrate both the principles of proximity and similarity – proximity because the black trees are all spaced close together and, therefore, seen as more of a whole group than the white tree, and similarity because all the black trees are together, but the white tree is separate and, thus, more noticeable.

Sources:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gestalt

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gestalt

http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/skaalid/theory/theory.htm

My personal visual aesthetic is hard to pin down.  As a natural eclectic, I have explored many different genres of art, music, movies, books, and anything else that inspires me.

Over the years, though, I have found that few things have really inspired enough of a sense of awe in me to make me want to create personal visions of my own as the fantasy/science fiction art genres.  Although they are both still filled with art I find distasteful (no genre is perfect), I have found that I get most of my inspiration from pieces that depict dramatic landscapes and grandiose pieces of ornately detailed architecture.  I also find art that incorporates other-worldly elements (usually things that can’t be found or experienced on this world or plane of existence) as key to inspiring me to create like visions from my mind.

It is for these reasons that I eventually aim to have a business of my own where I can create my visions without the restrictions of a client and sell my art online.

Prince of Persia Official concept art - copyright 2008 by Ubisoft

Integral Trees - copyright 1983 by Michael Whelan

Overall, though, my eclectic personality tells me that my personal aesthetic is all about life.  Burgeoning, creative, wonderful, expressive, incredible life.

With that, I leave you with a statement I think applies, not just to creative artists and designers, but to everyone:

There is but one secret to the universe…

…Thought creates.

All people have their own way of seeing and interpreting the surrounding things, ideas, and events in their world.  Although this is and always will be true, there are general ways and categories in which we can place our perspectives to make sense of how we see it all.  Otherwise, art mediums and the distinctive genres that we created for them wouldn’t exist.

A book I read in the past few months (which, fortunately, was one of the more interesting reads in those few months), called “Ways of Seeing” by John Berger, explored some of the different avenues in which people view things.  It looked at ideas such as the mystification that paintings of the last several centuries have caused people to feel, the “real” perspectives photography gave people after it was introduced, and the intended meanings and influences early painters and later photographers suggested in their artwork.  Much of the book described John’s interpretations on how women are viewed and portrayed in artwork.  It explained how the artists of most of the paintings and photos in the chapters depicted women as mere objects to be looked at by the viewer for sexual appeal or for the viewer’s possession and ownership.  It explained that this intended perspective not only influenced the way the male viewers of the artwork saw women, but also how both the female subjects and viewers saw themselves.  The book later discussed that the main purpose of the oil painting movement, which was largely popular between 1500 and 1900, was to realistically illustrate objects the viewer could feel they could possess and own.  This idea of painting things for the sole purpose of making the viewer want to own them was a precursor to today’s commercial art, which the book detailed in the final chapter about publicity as the main reason art is created in the modern world.  The publicity present in all commercial art and design, now, combines the concepts of women as objects of sex and possession and of material wealth to sell the objects of desire they portray.

While I read all of this material, I was always inclined to take a different stance on the topics, but I also understood the ideas John was effervescently explaining.  I saw some truth in his interpretations of all the various topics.  When he mentioned the perspectives of possession, ownership, and sexual attraction of women in artwork, I already knew that those perspectives applied to most men and some women who fell into that unfortunate trap.  When he mentioned that oil paintings of the past and commercial art of the present influenced and manipulated viewers of said art into wanting to buy and possess the material things in them, I agreed that many people also fell into that trap.  However, like anything in life, I also thought that John’s interpretations of those topics didn’t apply to everybody.  I believed that there were (and still are) some men and many women who didn’t see the artwork in the ways he described.  There were always debates and heated arguments over the objectification of women in any art medium and the importance of material wealth.  I was on the side of the argument that was against these perspectives (and I still am).  I was able to see that, because many societies over the last several centuries (and even millenia) have been patriarchal, these perspectives were only purported by arrogant males who intended to influence other males and females to view the world the way they did.  As a male who has seen past these perspectives, I have followed the push for more artwork to portray women in more meaningful ways and for there to be more substance in today’s art than the ownership of superfluous material objects.  Although there have been small strides here and there for higher quality artwork, the majority of art out in the world today has still fallen into the trap of sexualizing women and supporting material wealth.

From what I’ve learned from the book, I have looked past oil paintings and today’s artwork in slightly different ways.  I can see how John has interpreted the meanings and intentions artists have put into their artwork and how they have affected many people’s ways of viewing the world.  I know there elements of truth in what he says and can plainly see them in past an present artwork, but I don’t see those truths applying to as many people as he claims.

Cultural awareness has been part of every facet of human society since old cultures began mingling with other old cultures.  In recent decades, with the advent of international media and the proliferation of worldwide communication and influences, cultural awareness has dramatically become a higher priority for nations, businesses, and people.  The field of Design has been especially impacted by different cultures because much of design is subjective and can take many different meanings.  Because design is huge (containing many different sub-branches), there is always a high chance that designs might be misinterpreted or be offensive to a culture with which the original designer is not aware.

Video game design is no exception to this common fact.  While I only intend to be a simple environment artist (creating props, land, buildings, etc. for video game levels), my art may have cultural undertones I am not aware of and may be taken more personally by someone or a group of people who have knowledge of the art’s influence and take offense at it.

Differences in the cultural meanings of the sun

For thousands of years, the sun has played an important role in many religions and cultures.  Because of it’s necessity for lots of the life on this planet, cultures have most often revered it to the point that it has represented life-giving gods that need to be worshiped.  Although the idea of worshiping a god is a purely human notion, the significance of the sun in every culture, past and present, cannot be denied.

Most often recognized as an open circle with a small dot in the middle (more ancient times) or a filled circle with spikes or tendrils emanating from the center (more modern times)- representing light coming from within – the sun is both an icon and a symbol.  As an icon, the sun means the sun in every context and has no different assigned meaning.  As a symbol, it has many different cultural meanings.

Old cultures such as the Roman, Greek, Hindu, and Egyptian cultures marked the sun as the father and leader of all gods that created the earth.  In Islam, the sun is seen as more of a symbol of events than a god (since it only have one god in the religion).  In American culture, the sun has become more of a symbol for sunny days, joy, and happiness and has not represented any serious figure or played any important cultural role besides the aforementioned meanings.

Differences in the cultural meanings of the color, blue

As with symbols, universal colors have taken on different meanings in different cultures.  Because blue is a popular color, it was interesting to see the variety of meanings different cultures have assigned to it.

English: sadness, depression, happiness and optimism (both- like on a clear day with blue skies), male gender

German: drunk (derived from the ancient use of urine (produced by drinking lots of alcohol) as a dyeing agent for blue cloth)

China: immortality

Iran: mourning

Cherokees: defeat, trouble

Western: royalty, conservative-ness, corporations, soothing,

Eastern: wealth

The Sony controversy

Colors also tie into how different cultures perceive advertisements.  In 2006, Sony released an ad for it’s new, white Playstation Portable (PSP) that unintentionally caused a racial stir among the population of Holland (where the ad was originally run) and the neighboring United States.

The ad, shown on the right, depicted a white woman violently holding a black woman’s face in a threatening manner.  Because the original PSP was black, Sony introduced the ad for its new “Ceramic White” PSP, only intending to contrast the new and white, purportedly better, PSP over the older black model.

Critics were quick to point out the bumbling mistake on Sony’s part and Sony quickly discontinued the ad and took it down, apologizing for its oversight.

Sources:

http://www.sibagraphics.com/colour.php

http://webdesign.about.com/od/color/a/bl_colorculture.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue

http://www.princetonol.com/groups/iad/lessons/middle/color2.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_in_human_culture

http://www.propertymanagementleasing.com/images/assets/clip%20art/sun_clipart_9.gif

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6153643.html

In today’s cultures all around the globe, signs are necessary for every person to function well within society.  Most signs are taken for granted because they are needed and are always assumed to be there.  If people actually took the time to study the different types of signs, they’d find out some interesting information about them.  Signs can be broken down into three categories: symbols, icons, and indexes.

Symbols are visual representations of, most often, abstract ideas or invisible concepts that don’t have any direct connection to the symbol that represents them.  Symbols’ meanings are often learned through cultures and are not immediately grasped by most individuals.  The meanings are assigned to the symbols by people or cultures where the symbols themselves do not often have those inherent meanings.

Icons are visual representations as well, but, unlike symbols, they represent ideas, physical processes, or physical objects directly.  Ranging from people being icons for a category to which they directly relate to small, simple visual pictures that represent a software program, icon meanings are found within their own visual display.

Indexes are visual representations of actions or complex messages that need to be expressed in a very simple way in order to be easily understood at a quick glance.  Like roadway signs and the cautionary signs seen in front of parks, indexes directly illustrate a message to the viewer to take some kind of action.

Examples of symbols:

Rolling Stones logo symbol (Kristi)
Russian Communist symbol (Duncan)
The “All-Seeing-eye” symbol (Nick)

Examples of icons:

Phone service icon (Kristi)
Coffee cup icon (Duncan)
Traffic light sign icon (Nick)

Examples of indexes:

Engrish sign index (Duncan)
Danger – shark-infested waters index (Nick)


Caution! Radioactive index (Kristi)

My examples:

Danger! Don’t swim with giant bees! index (Nick example)
Project Natal symbol (Nick-example)
Grass seed packet icon (Nick example)

Sources:

Icon: Traffic light sign: http://www.templeterrace.com/police/images/TrafficSignalSign.jpg

Icon: Coffee cup: http://www.clker.com/cliparts/d/4/d/9/1237562201214390563pitr_Coffee_cup_icon.svg.hi.png

Icon: Radioactive symbol: http://apps.co.marion.or.us/imagegallery/Recycling%20Images/photogallery/Radioactive%20Symbol_RGB.jpg

Symbol: The “All-seeing eye”: http://djkonservo.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/all_seeing_eye.jpg

Symbol: Russian Communist sign: http://www.freewebs.com/truesocialism/Communist%20Symbol.png

Symbol: Rolling Stones logo: John Pasche (Initial Designer)

Index: Shark-infested waters: http://lifesavingfoundation.com.au/inc/images/shark_sign.jpg

Index: Engrish sign: http://ares.chairmanlol.com/content/543/resized/engrish-funny-1221804809-16526.jpg

Index: Phone: http://www.clker.com/clipart-40845.html

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.