Thursday, 11 August 2011

[DSDN 171] Blog Assignment #5

How has the experience and experimentation of artists influenced our understanding of colour and the development of a theory of colour vision?

Issac Newton, mathematically & scientifically driven, was credited in the 1600’s for his discovery that white light could be broken down through a prism into a spectrum of ranging colours (essentially, ROYGBIV). This great discovery highly impacted artists in regards to their work as well our own understanding of colour.

Artists that came about after Newton’s realization of colour, came in attempt to further understand the essential idea of colour. Artist Phillip Otto Runge (1777 - 1810), further investigated the understanding of colour and came to develop a colour sphere (3-dimensional) in comparison to Newton's 2-dimensional colour wheel. Runge's colour sphere concentrated on the effect of light and shadow on colour. Scientist and poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1949 – 1832), believed that the eye was a “sufficient tool for the study of colour” Goethe was interested in Newton’s discovery but opposed his stance wherein "Newton's error... was trusting maths over the sensations of the eye"The 19th century is where the impressionist movement was identified; impressionist painters highly regarded time and movement into their paintings as well as the representation of light. Post-impressionist (20th century) painters such as Vincent Van Gogh had a similar style but used his own perception of light and colour and departed from the supposed reality and focused on the psychological/emotional perception of it. Artist JWM Turner (1775 – 1851) perceived colour as revealing the emotion and feeling when in a specific environment, he painted the feeling of being in a place, not its literal surroundings; that colour gave recognition into how it felt being there, not it's essential view. We have come to understand the psychological events that can happen in ones mind instead of purely the 'literal' view of colour. In the 1800's, French psychologist Charles Fere, tested and treated mental patients with various coloured lights in a programme called Chromotherapy. It was found that red light had a sort of excitment, whereas blue light had a calming effect (Gage, p. 206).

Ones perspective on colour may be in great contrast to anothers. One cannot directly say that colour is purely science or human perception/emotion. The development in regards to understanding colour has greatly developed, although, through these artists and scientists, we can see that there is not one definite or particular way to approach colour as it is always evolving in many forms of understanding in regards to our knowledge to this day and age.  




------------------------------

Reference list:


Gage, J. (1993). Colours of the Mind in Colour and Culture: Practice and Meaning from Antiquity to Abstraction (pp.191-212). New York: Thames and Hudson.

Thursday, 4 August 2011

[DSDN 171] Blog Assignment #4

“The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from objects of daily use.” - Adolf Loos, 1908.




Do you agree or disagree? 
Why?


Adolf Loos (1870 - 1933) was an Austrian architect who firmly believed that ornamentation was simply a crime. Throughout his essay, Ornament and Crime, he stated that ornamentation held back the cultural development of civilization, that it was a waste of manpower, which lead to a waste of health.

As with Loos I do believe that nowadays, everyday objects have simplistic aesthetics to them in comparison to previous eras i.e the 18th century [Rococo movement]. However, human beings always have and will always have, a want of what we call our own 'individuality' as our form of self-expression; I do not believe removal of ornamentation is what our culture has become of, if that was the case, it would have caused us to lose our individuality and identity, and nor do i see society as ever being 'plain and simple'. Designer Owen Jones stated that ornamentation is instinctive and I myself agree with this particular statement. I believe that ornamentation reveals individuality, culture and society. I do not believe that ornamentation is a 'waste' of health; people like to express. How can our culture reveal itself if our daily lives were shown bare and without personality? 

Apple i-phone 4

The world-renown i-phone has vastly become one of the worlds top technologic devices. Here we see that the physical design is simplistic and clean; I believe that Loos would have agreed with this phones physical design. To a point, we can say that it looks as though it has almost no highly time-consumed aesthetic value because of its cleanliness, but in accordance to Loos' statement with evolution of culture being synonymous with the removal of ornament, I disagree. To strip away ornamentation would mean stripping away us a people; analyzing the i-phones design, ornamentation comes from the individual: what he or she chooses to decorate his/her phone with; the Apple company has designed a smart phone such as this where they have allowed you as a consumer, to personalize it and make it your own.

Loos was strict concerning the waste of materials; Loos’ architecture was very much stripped down to its bare minimum in regards to ornamentation.  Thus saying, Loos' designs would be appropriately in line with one of our very main goals today: Sustainability. In our present day, I believe our 'Zeitgeist' is focused on technology, humanity & sustainability: the development on keeping our designs environmentally-friendly in order to allow our world to survive.



------------------------------

Reference list:


Loos, Adolf, Ornament and Crime, The Industrial Reader (1910). Sourced from: http://dev.schoolofdesign.ac.nz/mod/folder/view.php?id=135

Lupton, E. (2008) The Modern Curve: Form, Structure, and Image in the Twentieth Century and Beyond, in Rococo: the continuing curve, 1730-2008 (pp. 218-245). New York: Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum. Sourced from:

Jones, Owen The Grammar of Ornament, 1856

Image sourced from: