[Sigia-l] Visual Balance Question

[Donna M. Fritzsche]

At 2:56 AM +1300 12/6/03, Andrew McNaughton wrote:
>On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Brett-Luxaco wrote:
>
>>  Nicely put, people give way too much importance on the newest buzz words.
>
>'Hierarchy' is hardly a recent buzz-word.  It's meaning is unusually well
>defined, given it's connections to scientific formalisms.

I think that Brett's post points out something that happens on our 
list often- one person's well-established term appears as a buzz word 
to another person, because we all have different backgrounds!  In my 
opinion, the fact that we all have different backgrounds is a 
strength of this group, not a weakness.  As James attempts to do in 
his class, I think we should strive for communication and 
understanding of the underlying concepts.  Words are just words - its 
the meaning behind them that matters.   Because of our 
multi-discplinarian makeup, we will never agree on terms completely. 
I think we should work on successful communication beyond the words, 
and realize that the words you learned in your discipline might not 
be the words that someone else learned to use for the same concept. 
Thats not to say that one discipline does not have a significant body 
of knowledge to teach the other discipline - I think there is alot of 
sharing to be done multidirectionally.


>I'm not sure exactly what's being tought here,

I believe the topic was visual hierarchy - which I find fascinating - 
some overlap with, but different then classification hierarchy.   To 
repeat  James definition:

   "In reality, the visual plane is rich with ways to raise the 
importance or reduce the impact of any given element. Size is but one 
tool at the designer's disposal -- and sometimes it is more crucial 
to manage your imagery is than your type in regards to the the 
"visual hierarchy""

Given that that Brett (whose post implied that this term might be a 
buzz word) is any outstanding visual artist, I know that he 
intuitively knows what this word means - he just hasn't heard it in 
this context!  I think that speaks well to James original point.


Thanks!
Donna

>but if classification
>enters the picture, and hierarchy is not a well understood concept and
>equally well understood descriptive term, then something is seriously
>wrong.
>
>Andrew McNaughton
>
>
>--
>
>No added Sugar.  Not tested on animals.  May contain traces of Nuts.  If
>irritation occurs, discontinue use.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>Andrew McNaughton           Currently in Boomer Bay, Tasmania
>andrew at scoop.co.nz
>Mobile: +61 422 753 792     http://staff.scoop.co.nz/andrew/cv.doc
>
>
>
>------------
>When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
>*Plain text, please; NO Attachments
>
>Searchable list archive:   http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
>________________________________________
>Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
>Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l