Gestalt

source: http://graphicdesign.spokanefalls.edu/tutorials/process/gestaltprinciples/gestaltprinc.htm

Composition

Value in Art

Value is an intrinsic factor of life -- everything is automatically given a value, whether we think about it not. As we relate things one to the next, we place them on a hierarchy of likes and dislikes, which shows what we value and how we value that more than other things. In terms of art, value is not necessarily essential, but it serves to make things better in many different ways. Value in an image can make it appear more true to life -- tints and shades make colors more interesting and numerous and value brings depth to artistic works. As well, the value that is placed on a piece of art can make it seem "better." Many people think of the Mona Lisa as the best painting in the world simply because of the value placed upon it in today's society; however, where did that value come from? Is it valued because of the mystery? Is it valued because of the artistic merit? Assigning value is a very arbitrary thing, even in art. Despite the fact that the Mona Lisa is an amazing technical work -- it's pretty boring on all other accounts. So why is it so highly valued? That value that people have placed and built up over the years has made the work "better" than it originally was -- the same as with value in a piece of art.

And since value plays a part in all aspects of our lives, of course it plays a part in art. With that, it brings in the economic system. Art has become a sort of commodity -- it's everywhere and evident in all fields. Fine arts are lesser in demand because the cost of works is higher. People don't think of buying work by renown fine artists because it's simply too expensive and the normal person probably wouldn't understand the pretentious point of view that much of modern art has. So why is it so valuable? Supply and demand? There's a lesser demand for art like that because the clientele that it's available to is so small... and at that, you have to build a reputation in order to be able to charge such exorbitant amounts. So what is valued then? The art, or the reputation of the artist?

The idea of supply and demand only really works in fields like graphic design or more commercial means of art. High demand for a certain photographer’s style can lead him to become exclusive and expensive, as he's only one and would not have time to take on all of the jobs that would be thrown at him.

I don't really care too much about value or economics in art though, so I'm gonna stop now.

Strung Out

Today in class we were told to string up the room. My initial reaction was "what the hell is this about?" However, it turned out to be really interesting. Everyone set forth tying their strings to different anchor points and moving around the room. I started with a chair on top of a table and moved around the room, walking on tables, crawling under them, all the while trying not to get tangled up myself within the insane string web. It was fun, but once everyone got around the room, movement became a huge problem. In the end I got trapped by string -- I couldn't leave the hole that I'd dug myself into.

The end result came out to be really interesting though. Most of the string was white, but there were a few spools that were hot pink. The contrast of the hot pink against the white string made certain areas of the room really interesting, and wherever the hot pink is, it seems like people gravitated towards that spot to wrap things up. Laure made an interesting series of lines from a stool on the table to a monitor and it ended up looking as though the lines were radiating out from the computer.

I would never compare this to a spider web though -- it's far too unorganized. If I were to do this again, I'd probably contain myself a bit more and try to work on a specific design, simply because I think that would have created an even more interesting environment. Emilia created a Picasso-looking man on the floor out of her string -- the possibilities really were endless. As well, I would have anchored things to more stationary objects, like the tables. When the I was moving away from my first anchor point, since the stool really had no considerable mass to it, it gave my string considerable slack. Instead, I really wanted something with a lot of tension so that I could create straight lines instead of ones that looked like limp droopy noodles.

Shapes and Lines

All of these examples could be seen as both lines and shapes. The definition between line and shape is a blurry one, and as we can see, lines can create shapes, and shapes can create lines. What makes a line in my eyes, is a form moving from one point to the other. Direction, size, movement... all are inconsequential when thinking about lines because lines can be anything. It doesn't even need to be a solid line -- dots placed in a sequence can create lines, despite the fact that they don't touch. Shapes can also create the same effect. One might look at a shape and identify it as such because it's made of component lines and has a sense of organization to it, but you might also say that it is one continuous line that just happens to be in the shape of something; does that mean it's a shape, or a line?

Example A could be seen as both a line and a shape. From the line standpoint, it seems to be a gradually thickening (or maybe thinning) line moving in one direction or the other. However, this effect is what forms the shape standpoint as well; as the line gets thicker moving from left to right, its edges stay straight and the end is stopped with a solid line thus creating a triangle.

Example B might also be seen as both a shape and a line. It took has the effect of weight added to it, getting heavier in the middle and thinning out on both ends. It doesn't form a shape that we have a name for like "triangle" or "square", but it has mass to it undoubtedly.

Example C is definitely both a line and a shape. Immediatly you can identify it as a rectangle -- an obvious shape. However, it might also be a line. It is a solid form and moving from one end to the other, can be seen as a very thick line. As well, as a rectangle it is made up of four line segments that touch at the corners -- is it one continuous line, or do they count as segments? Or does it even matter? Regardless, example C is irrefutably a shape as well as a line.

Example D flows around organically. It's form is rounded and it is an enclosed shape. However, the shape's movement gives it the quality of a line -- it moves from one point to another.

Thus, I believe that all of these are both shapes and lines. Lines and shapes are interdependent -- one could not necessarily exist without the other.

Critique No. 1

Upon first glance, the image "Dervish" seems to be a cluttered mess of black and white that has been accented with occasional and seemingly arbitrarily placed lines of thick black and red; however, upon closer inspection, one can see that the artist's use of line is not as capricious as it may seem. The piece is developed on layers of lines -- the "background" looks like the blueprint to a building or a technical drawing from a set of instructions. Depth and form are also implied with the use of lines: grids move into the background on both sides of the piece and details get more condensed and darker as they recede. As well, emphasis is placed on the center where the highest concentration of lines is present. From this darker contrasting center, the lines move outward in sinuous billowing fashion -- not taking any real corporal form, but implying the movement of waves, wind, and giving the downy appearance of clouds.

From this wild use of line, the piece seems to bring the viewer a chaotic and explosive feeling. On top of the sterile and flat technical lines, the artist has created this whirling cluster of movement that controls the feeling of the work. It brings excitement and interest to the piece. The huge mass of indecipherable lines exists overtop or inside of the technical space that the artist has created and is moving out of the confines of the technical blueprints. This may allude to some idea the artist might have regarding confinement and breaking free from constraints put upon us by society or some other force.

Overall I feel that the work is compelling and interesting. It's not necessarily a piece that catches one's fancy upon immediate inspection because the abstractness makes it a bit austere, but I think the detail and movement of it really draw the viewer in and make it an intriguing piece.