Project Two:
Form and Composition
Context:
In this project, we are required to present different word pairs abstractly and visually with simple black squares, employing Gestalt’s principles. These words pairs include:
Rigid & Fluid
Clumsy & Graceful
Rhythmic & Erratic
And an additional theme applying a reversible figure & ground composition.
Initial Sketches:
Initial Sketches intend to explore the possibilities of squares, trying to make every composition different in the variable aspects such as:
Rotation
Size
Overlaps
Instead of focusing too much on the word itself, since some pieces might turn out to be a better fit with another word.
Digital Iterations:
Then, selecting some of the pieces I liked, I transformed them into digital versions.
The first row is a draft for “fluid”. I intend to imitate the fluidity of tap water when bursting out of the tap. With tiny sprinkles splashed out of the main flow, which has a tendency of flowing downwards in light of the increasing sizes, the piece later remained as my final draft.
Another constructive piece is the pair at the third row. According to advices from the instructor, in the final version, the composition is more rich and informative, to convey the “rhythm”, which should be a repeat of patterns. It’s inspired by the digital visualization of audio seen in audio editors.
The rest, however, are later completely revised, owing to how I intended to tackle it from the minimalist perspective, which is present the word in the simplest way, or present a huge concept by showing only part of it. Thus, without subtitles, it’s hard really see the whole thing, and thus the less detailed, the less the depth and information is. What’s more, giving more context, more details, and more depth may contribute to the aesthetics of the composition.
For the figure & ground piece, according to the instructor’s adivce, more context should be given to convey that they are squares.
Final Illustration:
The fluid piece is basically the same as that of the initial drafts, but the rigid one is a bit different. While other’s tend discard uneven rotations in the word “rigid”, I decided to make the macro environment “rigid”, which is achieved by employing a grid of squares, but also giving some of them slight rotations. This might be hard to understand, but I try to convey how that the whole piece is so rigid that even those squares strive to rotate and endeavored to differentiate themselves from others, the rigid environment disallows them to do so.
These two pieces are less abstract, as they are more inclined to tangibly represent what those two words mean. The “rhythmic” piece was discussed before, but it is enriched with 2 iterations of the same pattern, and lively dynamic red squares jumping out of the repetitive black squares to create richness. The second piece is inspired by a sky full of stars, which is aesthetically appeasing but random. This is derived from the instructor’s critique that the pieces before and not “erratic” enough, since I tried to generate randomness via minimalist glens, which in some way it is conflicting.
The last one is the figure & ground composition. Although I thought it a perfect evolution from before, as I have given sufficient context that they are squares, not only individually, but also reversibly. However, the feedback wasn’t so good, then I recalled how I changed my first draft to my final draft, and how my rhythmic & erratic ones are more preferred.
so:
Reflection:
The hardest part of approaching these words is representing it with only simple squares. The same applies to composition: the more simple it is, the less likely it is to really show what it is conveying. Thus, for the last piece, when I iterate it, giving it a more panoramic view:
I believe in this way, the message that “they are squares individually and macroscopically” is more evident.
