Logos

1. My favorite logo at the moment (because my favorites change a lot) is that of NASA. I like the design because while it is relatively simple, it is also able to incorporate some elements about the organization. For instance, the blue background speckled with white dots evokes a night sky or constellations. This reflects the countless missions that NASA has arranged and organized in order to explore the solar system that lies beyond our night sky. I also like that the design is not confined to the circle- the red slashes escape the borders of the blue circle, sort of like how NASA escapes the borders of our planet and is able to travel into the far reaches of the heavens. It's a kind of cheesy analysis, but I like the fact that the logo is (at least in my mind) is able to demonstrate what the organization does/stands for. Overall, I find it to be nicely designed. 

The NASA logo :)

2. Five logos that I was not familiar with... 

What I like about this logo is that the 

more you look at it, the more you find. 

Initially, I noticed it because of the 

intricate design- the first thing that caught

my eye was the sword. But then when I 

took a closer look at it, I noticed that there

was also a book, some flames, and a bird

incorporated into it as well. Even now, 

examining it again, I noticed that the borders

of the logo are what look like stalks of 

wheat. It not only attracts the eye of the 

viewer, but also engages it, compelling it to

find all the hidden elements within it, almost

like a game of "I spy." It also reminds me of 

a medieval crest. 

This was the first logo that I saw when I opened up the first 

website, and it actually immediately struck my fancy. I guess

I was surprised by the simplicity of it. Although logos are 

usually quite simple, something about this one seemed even

more minimalistic than some of the others I've seen, 

especially with the large, white background. I like the fact 

that the yarn, the product that is presumably being sold by this

company, is incorporated into the logo in a subtle way. I also 

like the fact that you can discern a lot about this company just 

from their logo- just by looking at it, you know the location 

(Norway), and the product that is being sold (yarn).                

What can I say? I love the owl. The thing about this logo is 

that I can tell that it would attract the attention of a lot of viewers

because people tend to like things that are cute- such as this owl.

Although you don't really know what is being sold by this 

company, or whether it is a company at all, there is something

about the innocent demeanor of this owl that makes it very 

pleasant and calming to look at. Or maybe I just tend to 

gravitate towards animals. 

The first word that comes to mind when

I look at this logo is "raw". I don't know

why, but it seems much more grounded 

and rougher than the others, which goes 

along with what the logo is for- "for the 

refined wanderer." I think that the logo

is really able to capture a wandering 

essence. It reminds me of camping, or

outdoor activities. Overall, it strikes me

as being ingrained in nature, or trying to

evoke a feeling of being ingrained in 

nature yourself. I also think it looks cool!

I scrolled past this one initially, but then after a pause, went back to it. 

What I like about this one is the way the designers have utilized a kind 

of 3-D to make the bicycle feel more real. It gives it a certain textured

look, that makes it seem like it's actually a piece of red/orange metal 

that has been twisted in the shape of a bike. I also think the color scheme

is very nice. Somehow, the red and orange works here. 

What's your stance? Blog reflection

1. Do you believe your stance clear within your poster? Defend your answer- image, fonts, color, composition, etc.
2. From your initial thumbnail sketches to your hand drawn draft- Do you feel you were successful in re-creating your poster idea digitally? If not, do you like the new visual outcome?
3. What were the changes you made from your first version to the last version of the poster? Explain why you made those changes?
4. Looking over your rubric, which category do you think your project is strongest? Explain why. Which category do you feel the least confident? Explain why.
5. What was the most challenging aspect of the project, conceptually?
6. What was most challenging about the project, technically?

1. I believe that my stance is clear within my poster. I was mainly trying to convey the destruction and devastation that results from constant violence and war. I think that the images that I chose was effectively able to demonstrate this- the crumbled building coupled with the red, fiery sky was my attempt at showing the aftermath of a battle or a bombing that seems to happen on a daily basis somewhere in the world. I also tried to use a text that would evoke destruction, or at the very least, some kind of decay. The harshness of the font "Stencil" seemed to appropriately fulfill this idea. I also tried to utilize a dark, sinister color scheme, trying to avoid bright colors like blue or green. Instead, I turned to a color palette consisting of reds, oranges, blacks, grays, and darker yellows, which are colors that are usually associated with violence and/or death.  
2. I don't think I was successful in recreating my thumbnail sketches, mainly because when I was drawing out my sketches, my idea was still in the prime stages of development. It wasn't until later on, when I started on my half-page sketches that I actually decided on my finalized idea. The second half page sketch that I did was the first one that actually resembles my final project in some way. In that case, I was successful in recreating my poster digitally, and am ultimately happy with the results. 
3. My poster idea underwent a lot of renovation and reconstruction. Initially, I wanted to focus on Islamophobia, and indeed that is what I wrote about in my "what's your stance?" blog post. But when I started my thumbnail sketches, I found that trying to convey how despicable Islamophobia is was a lot harder than I had originally thought. A lot of my ideas seemed repetitive or shallow, and I didn't feel as though I was accurately getting my point across. Eventually, my idea evolved into world peace, and eventually, anti-war. My train of thought went from- acceptance to we-are-all-human to fighting-is-pointless to war-is-pointless to hatred-will-just-lead-to-us-all-destroying-one-another. The latter idea was the one I finally settled on because I think that an overarching problem with Islamophobia and discrimination in general is that, we have become so focused on ostracizing one another and beating the other side that we have lost sight of what is important. Something that I wrote in one of my first brainstorms about the project was: "Our unwillingness to accept each other is what is preventing a lot of problems from being solved. The solution is not to turn to hatred and fear. Instead, the world population needs to band together, trying to solve other issues that exist in this world." I think this is one of the ideas that influenced a lot of my thinking, and is ultimately the one that shone through in my final product. 
4. Looking over the rubric, I find myself feeling most confident about the design. Photoshopping the main images of the building and the sky did not actually take me too long, but I did spend a while afterwards experimenting with different filters and "image trace" settings after I had placed the completed file in Illustrator. What consumed more of my time was, surprisingly, the text. It took me a very long time to decide on the font, placement, size, color, and orientation of the text. I had to make sure that the colors didn't clash, but looked similar enough that it blended in with the color spectrum of the poster as a whole. But I digress. Overall, I think I did a decent job in designing the poster and making sure that the layout made sense. I think the color and fonts were utilized in a meaningful way, and I certainly hope that my "Layout of components are arranged in the most effective way to create a hierarchy of information." On the other side of the spectrum, I am least confident about the concept. As I mentioned in my answer to question one, I do believe that my stance is clear, but I just hope that the way I conveyed it makes sense and is powerful enough that it makes an impact on those who see it. 
5. I talked a little bit about this is question three, but conceptually, I found it very challenging to translate my stance from words to visuals. I found that I couldn't think how I wanted to convey my stance or idea, resulting in my thumbnail sketches being text-heavy or only text. I actually considered changing my entire idea at one point because I simply did not see how I could make a poster from my concept. In short, my biggest challenge conceptually was figuring out how to effectively share my message visually. 
6. Even after completing this project, I cannot say that I really understand illustrator. Technically, figuring out how to edit pictures in Illustrator was definitely challenging. I didn't feel like I utilized all of the tools to their maximum capacity because I wasn't entirely sure what their function was. Navigating the program initially, and while completing the project, proved to be the most difficult aspect of this poster project. 

A very early draft of my poster

A color study of my poster

The final result

What's Your Stance!

It may surprise some who read this that I am not in possession of any kind of social media- I do not have a Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or SnapChat. While this does not trouble me in any way, it does mean that I am not necessarily in the loop when new trends or debates surface among my peers. My main "feed" is usually the New York Times, when I have a chance to look it up. I also learn a lot about what is going on in the world from my parents, who are much better at keeping up with current news than I am. However, one event that exploded in the news, both in newspapers and on social media (I presume) was the slew of attacks on Paris. I realize this isn't exactly a current issue- it occurred on November 13th, after all. However, it still remains in my memory for two reasons: Firstly, because of the completely unexpected nature of the attacks (and the brutality of the party that instigated them) and secondly, because of the massive amount of press coverage that it received. 

Now, as I said, I don't have any social media, so I was unable to see or share any "posts" about the event. However, I read numerous news stories about the topic in the days that followed, which probably doesn't count, but I thought I might mention anyway.  

My first reaction to the news was a feeling like someone had sucked all the air out of me and left my shell behind. I felt sad not just for the people of Paris, but also for humanity. There were so many people at the time who instinctively reacted to the event by calling for blood: In essence responding to violence with violence. It seemed like as a species, we have descended into a circle of death. We justify it by calling our radical responses justice. What we forget is that this mindset does not solve anything. EVER. 

I was drawn to this story because it was heartbreaking. However, as I continued to research the event, and kept reading the endless stream of articles about it, I also started to ask questions. Why was it that an attack on Paris that yielded 129 casualties got more news coverage than almost daily ISIS attacks in Islamic states and resulting in just as many deaths? Stories of that nature had been flooding out of the Middle East for years prior to this event. For instance, a double suicide attack occurred on November 12 in Beirut, which caused 43 civilian deaths, and the only news I heard about that was in a short side article in the New York Times. Hearing about this baffled me, because it made me question why that story wasn’t making headlines. In addition, ISIS has been launching attacks in places like Algeria, Egypt, and Pakistan, yet these attacks are apparently not considered important enough for the press. 

This didn't stem my sympathy and horror at hearing about the attacks on Paris. Quite the contrary. However, the story overall also made me conscious of how little the Western press seems to value Islamic countries. ISIS hasn’t just affected Paris. It has affected Middle Eastern and African countries for years. More importantly, it has affected people, and that’s what I feel we should take away from this. 

Much later in the month, I saw a Youtube video that was heart-wrenchingly beautiful. It was of a Muslim man standing in the Place de la Republique in Paris wearing a blindfold. At his feet was a handmade sign that said (in French) "I'm a Muslim and I'm told that I'm a terrorist. I trust you. Do you trust me? If yes, hug me!" Many mourning Parisians in fact did hug him. Even re-watching it two months later, it still brings tears to my eyes, because it so perfectly encapsulates what our mindsets should be about events of terror like this. The answer is not as simple as eradicating everyone who is of the same race as the instigators (as Donald Trump advocates at every turn). It is instead to unite as one people against an evil that we should all be concerned about. It doesn't matter if we are different genders, ethnicities or ages. We are all the same, as cheesy as that sounds, and inciting violence at every turn is not going to make anyone safer. 

The Youtube video I referenced can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRbbEQkraYg