I was watching a webinar ... perhaps part of a commercial art course? Certainly it was something that I would not normally venture into, having no artistic ability at all. The invisible lecturer provided a commentary to moving illustrations on my screen. His main topic seemed to be page design, perhaps for an article in a magazine or professional journal. He was talking about 'mediums', which I eventually understood to mean separate elements that could be brought together to produce the finished article.
He began by asking how many mediums to use, to provide interest without being too 'busy'. He quickly drew out the conclusion that the ideal would be three. The first medium would be something bold and expansive, a broad colour wash, or perhaps a picture ... something to form a background. The second medium would essentially be a contrast to the first. If the first medium was like sky - something solid and flat - introduce a row of hedges or trees; if it was a picture, add some people or a building, and so on.
The third medium was the text itself. Here he went on to consider what fonts to use to match the subject, and the way certain fonts were appropriate e.g. for art deco themes, antiquities, etc., while it was important not to use others that were alien to what was being written about. Above all was the need for balance between variety, suitability and being easy to read.
Having defined all these mediums and how they could be built on each other to make a worthy end-product, he suggested introducing variety. Why not let your second medium take some of the text? Maybe adapt the title of the piece or, leaving the title to stand prominently, pull out a few key words to act as a 'strap line' to explain what was being written about. He suggested it was rather like a sub-editor would pick out a phrase from the next paragraph to act as a sub-heading, simply to break up an otherwise solid page of text and make the page visually attractive.
'Let the letters themselves play with each other,' he said. And he brought out one example after another of how this could be done, making the uprights of p's, l's and d's form part of the picture, using an o as a ball, and so on. He also spoke of lost opportunities, where an element of humour or sauciness could have been introduced, if appropriate, to add to the reader's enjoyment or, perhaps, to spark initial interest.
Hence his final example was a piece promoting a range of professional clothing for ladies. The skirts of these garments were sufficiently generous to drape naturally, curtain-like, between knees accidentally spread apart when seated, to avoid inadvertent exposure of lingerie. The picture he produced was of the House of Commons, where ladies seated behind the front bench were wearing the product. He moved the words 'professional clothing', so that one of the o's was placed neatly between a lady's knees and then replaced the letter with an archery target indicating that, with this garment, nothing untoward was visible.
At this point I awoke, with the detail clear in my mind and wondered what I could do with it. My skills are definitely with words rather than pictures! The best I could do was to lay it before you, dear reader, to amuse, confuse or simply be disregarded with a sympathetic smile, to await the next post. Meanwhile, if you are of the persuasion for handwritten letters - I believe they still exist - why not let your letters play with each other and surprise your friends!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Following a spate of spam comments, all comments on this blog are moderated. Only genuine comments on the content will be published or responded to.