Reflection for Part 1:

I think the first thing I really understood and never thought of before was that designs are often created for timelessness and long lasting relevance and not for trends. This sounds almost impossible to me because how exactly does one know it will be long-lasting? Is it based off of previous things, because if so, is it really unique? Then I read that a design might need an explanation but should be figured out by the onlooker. This stood out to me because this is how I feel about most of my own photos and it makes this class so challenging. What gets me really excited about all the readings and resources so far is the fact that Gestalt psychology has an influence in art! As a psych major, I find this extremely relevant to my life and also exciting because I found I came into this class knowing something (even if small). Personally, I found it really confusing that discipline is a thing when it comes to design. For me, design is a form of art and when I think art I typically think about all the really abstract and chaotic just random art pieces I have seen in museums. To me art is abstract! Of course this isn’t truth and there are many forms of art but this just really threw me for a loop. Also the whole ambiguous part threw me off. You would think art is supposed to contradict sometimes and that “loss of control” is all part of the experience! I mean I understand that this could just be an opinion or just about design, but personally my favorite pieces are abstract and complicated. Also, to me the entire appropriateness section seemed vague and subjective. Like does every single piece in my design have to have meaning and “appropriate” font/text/style/etc.? And this in itself seems very vague and subjective because what is the standard? What is appropriate to a toddler may be different from an adult. Anyways, I also found it interesting that primary colors are heavily used because they are tied to timelessness! Now I won’t be able to stop seeing red, blue and yellow in logos! I was also pleased by the whole “if it’s not broke, don’t fix it” theme here with not changing logos for the sake of it! I always wondered why a company would change a logo every once in a while and then have the whole “throwback” soda labels or anniversary candy bags.

Part 2:

This section was VERY hard for me to comprehend and get through. The fact it was mostly about pages and their setups versus the art side really made the pages go by slow compared to part one. I even think my favorite sections had to do with art more than the paper layout: texture, color, and white space. I like that the author said that light helps to give artifacts expression. I also never would have considered to think about the texture, or even color, of the objects I was taking pictures of until this article. I wouldn’t have broken down the objects into “well this one shines nice while this one looks dull so let me do X to make X happen”. I like in color how the author brought up how the primary colors are mostly used but pastels and black/white have their times too. I wonder which times each is appropriate and what it would say about someone (psychologically) if they prefer one over the other two. I really enjoyed that the author thinks that white space is just as important as the type. This is a unique idea but makes complete sense when thinking about why spacing and fonts and type sizes are important features to begin wiht: they all have to do with white space and the layout’s look in general!