Thoughts on Digital Pictionary

I liked how this project worked out. It was thought provoking and interactive and just fun in general. I really enjoyed it for several reasons, the first being that it was done pretty much all in photoshop. I'm am not even close to knowing the ins and outs of photoshop, but I do have a lot of experience using it and other imaging software for many projects, so this was cool to use it in another way. I've always enjoyed doing photo-manipulations, but they have almost always been more for fun rather than a specific purpose. Where my original intention usually gets warped and twisted to come out completely different in it's meaning, this project forced me to stick to a definite plan: express my word.

When I first got my word, I was a little overwhelmed. I wasn't sure how I was going to be able to communicate "bold" effectively to the class. I thought about it and started getting ideas. As I did, I became a little more comfortable and realized that I didn't need to make everybody absolutely "get it," but rather express it somehow. I think that I did this effectively. I wanted to put in a few literal examples of the word bold, but more so I wanted to communicate the feeling. I think I did both of these effectively.

I thought it was interesting that Adam interpreted my word as "danger" or something similar. I didn't really have that in mind at all when creating the images, but now that I think about it, I can see a possible "danger" theme running through all my images. What I like about that assertion is that even though the images could be interpreted as danger, the way that the message is communicated is through use of "boldness." The hand communicates danger or "stop" because it is bold. Mozart's expression looks scary or intense possibly because of the bold contrast in his face. The meteorite stands out and is glowing red. Obviously it is potentially dangerous, but what really accentuates it's level of intensity is how it stands out against the black-and-white (and mostly boring) town in the background. Also he said at the beginning that there wasn't much going, at least initially; I'm glad he mentioned this, because I knew from the start I didn't want my images to be too busy. If there were too many things going on at once, it would be more difficult to make a single image really stand out.

I was also happy when somebody commented that all of images fit together really well and worked as scenes. That was a big thing I wanted to go for. It wasn't absolutely crucial for the meaning of the work, but I did want my images to have at least a somewhat polished look to them. I feel proud of how all my images turned out.

As for everyone else's projects, I enjoyed picking apart and analyzing their work just about as much as I enjoyed working on mine. I made sure to look at each picture and maybe take a few stabs at what the word could be, but I didn't really delve too deep into analyzing any of the images except for mine. I wish I had looked more closely at each one before the discussion, because I feel like finding out things about an image for yourself is a lot more enjoyable than having them described to you.

My favorite sets were Mike Virga's and Jackson's. I think that they communicated their meaning very well without blatantly expressing their literal meanings. It might be that the nature of the word dictates somewhat how it could be presented- some words of the words are inherently literal while others are inherently abstract- but I think that they had a clear vision of what they wanted to do when they started instead of just making it up along the way. If they didn't know exactly what they wanted to put into the collages, then I think that they at least had a clear sense of their words and their meanings and connotations.

What I like about Mike's pictures, especially the first one, is the sense of a story. Even in the last one, where a lot of the images are unrelated in their content, everything was coherent; The images flow and fit together nicely.

Jackson's collages are great because, like Pat mentioned, they convey a clear sense of a message. Although the actual meaning may be hidden somewhat, there is without a doubt something being said. The fact that the viewer has to dig into the work is not a bad thing- in fact I think it ultimately makes te message more effective. If he had just put up the declaration of independence or something kind of obvious like that, then, sure, the viewer would "get" it more quickly, but probably wouldn't care about it a whole lot. With these images, the time spent analyzing and picking apart the work builds more of an emotional connection to the content, thus making the image, ultimately, more effective. I also really liked, in the third collage, how the figures holding hands and Che's face were used as a mask for the background image.

Looking at some of the other works, I prefer the ones that aren't so literal and obvious. A lot of people just took a bunch of images that define, or are definitions, of their word and kind of threw them together. Some of them, like inorganic, are kind of forced to do this, but I think some of the other one's could have done more to really convey a meaning. One of the sets that shows a lot of literal images, yet manages to use the word in it's overall composition and form is Michelle's. In the top one, all of the images are pretty much obtuse shapes, but I like how they mostly all interact with each other and form a bit of a bigger picture. I also thought it was really cool how in the second one, she used a different meaning of "obtuse," as in something that is unclear. I didn't know of the meaning for obtuse, but when I first saw the picture, one of my first thoughts was something along the lines of "most of this one is really unclear."

I am interested how Sam's collages get analyzed. I know her word, so I can see how all of her images work well, but to someone who doesn't know the word, a lot of different things could be being communicated.
I am also excited to see Koko's work get presented. I used to know her word, but I forgot it and can't figure it out. I read Allison's analysis and she takes a guess that the word might be "uniqueness," which I think is a good guess. They seem very expressive of something, like Jackson's collages, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Either way, I really like them.

Overall, this was a really fun project. I hope that we have more projects similar to this. Not similar really in what we actually make, but similar in the process. I really liked being able to get inside my classmate's heads and see how they interpret things similarly yet also in a unique way.