Which is more appropriate for your idea:
a flat design or a spatial design?
I think that a spatial design is going to work better since the taboo subject I am addressing is somewhat complex and perplexing instead of straight forward. With my previous project, I was using a three-point perspective and it created an unusual, interesting angle. I would like to utilize this again as a way to engage the viewer and present things in an atypical light. In terms of the text elements, I think I will go for a flat design inspired by the strikingly simple, industrial style of the Soviet War Propaganda posters that my group looked at.
What happens when static (unmoving) and dynamic
(moving) shapes are used together in a design?
Kinesthetics - the science of movement is used to suggest dynamic elements or events. Contrasting dynamic (moving) subjects/parts relative to static (unmoving) parts, artist can imply mobility and fluidity. By choosing to use both moving and unmoving things, the design can gain certain sequence or development of events. Thomas Eakins' 'Double Jump' achieves this by repetition and portrayal of kinetics through the conversion of the apparently moving human figure and the ground level that is static.
Choose one artist in the reading who you feel was most successful in their use of motion and space and write your comments on him/her.
I think that Salvador Dali's use of perspective was the most original and suiting for the subject. The viewer is basically looking at the scene from Jesus's point of view and this emphatizes his vulnerability, humaness and defeat. His head is tilted forward as a sign of annihilation and from the artist's point of view, it resolves the issue of depicting Jesus Christs' facial features. The scenery above which the levitating cross lays, is dramatic and vast implying the far-reaching impact of the event. The atmospheric perspective has an apocalyptic dimension to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment