Friday, August 23, 2013

Next Few Days: The Arts

                  

1.  Read/annotate the arts chapter in the TOK textbook (by 8/27)

2.  Library Media Center: August 23, 27, & 29th: Infographics
     Research on theme:  HHP by Subgroup

Articles in G Drive: Post on Blog by Due 8/29/13
~What is color?  
~Translating Colors
~The Do's & Dont's of Infographics

By September 3rd, 2013
~Evaluate your summer essay using rubric
~ Visit e-Stack and look at tagged items on art 
     (report your findings via blog post)

3.  Article reading & post on advertising as art or science (by 8/27)
      ~Commentary
      ~Thoughts
      ~Connections to Arts Chapter
      ~Where do infographics fit?
      ~Connections to TOK activities & AOK Classes

4.  Framing of knowledge questions around this topic

5.  e-Reflection at the end of the arts unit



28 comments:

  1. George
    "Advertising is fundamentally persuasion and persuasion happens to be not a science, but an art," a quote by Bill Bernbach, and I believe that he is correct. Science is mainly trying to provide information to people, and their viewpoints are up to them. However, art is way of expressing yourself and that could contain persuasion, but science is not persuasion. I think that artists are persuading people, like Chris Jordan, using art to persuade people that pollution, inmates, and breast augmentation are a problem. When they both stated both science and art is needed to a good advertisement, I agree with the statement, as the science will help them get good information about the audience, while the artists will help them persuade the message. However, I think that science plays a bigger role, as good research of the target audience will help much more than a good artist, as you need to know what to put on the advertisement to make it eye catching to the audience. If you make a good advertisement, but if you don't know anything about psychologist, you won't be able to get the point across, if you don't use science. I do think that science does have the Achilles's Heel, as some things science cannot explain, or they don't know the answer to, like what or who created the universe. Some parts in advertisement cannot be explained, as some people just find it interesting, even though scientists can't figure out why, it may amuse people, but if the idea is repeated in a more "scientifically effective" it may not be as successful as the original way, even if it is not the most scientific way. I am not surprised that companies spend about $470 billion on ads yearly. Considering that many events like the super bowl, have large audiences they charge millions of dollars for a 30-second ad spot, but I don't understand why don't they spend the money somewhere else. They could spend that money solving the world's problem to increase their popularity, than spending money on ads. They can also spend it treating their employees better, instead of wasting it on ads, but why use it for making ads, that some people don't even watch ads, or try to block them on TV/Internet. I still do think advertisement is more of a science than art, as science plays such a large role in the advertisement market, using psychology, neuroscience, and data analysis to make their case, while good art work may not get the job done, as well as science and decent art. Understanding of how the brain works and what attracts the brain, helps advertisement tremendously by providing some inside information in order to get the reader's attention. Infographics are one of the main sections of advertisements, as science and arts play the main parts of designing them. Using science guide artists to create the most effective infographics, as the science shows that artist what they need to design to the attentions of the viewers. Putting specific colors and specific designs with psychology into infographics will make them more effective, than the average infographic, with the use of science.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are looking at science with the specificity under human sciences. Do you believe that psychology and neuroscience (such a budding field) are hard or soft sciences? Additionally, does the neuroscientist know how to put together the ad to making it appealing or can they just provide information to make a better ad for the artist? Where would science be without art to convey it to the laypeople?
      Swift

      Delete
    2. You also mention that science is NOT persuasion? Are you sure about that? Have you watched Dark Matters?

      Swift

      Delete
  2. Paola 3A Assignment
    Art or Science:

    Art would never be able to express itself without the artists' purpose of its presentation. I appreciate how both sides of the argument understand how each side needed both sides in order to be effective to the audience. I think the majority of the audience that have an objective view would be the scientists and the artists because they have to see the advertise to see whether or not it may catches the target audience and with factual context in order to prove their point instead of it being a portrait of beauty when the scientists were trying to prove their ideas as well. In order for something to be consider as an "art" it must have a purpose and I said earlier that it would be impossible if an artist do some kind of advertisement without putting in a meaningful information that in order for them to portray their news the art must present it that way. It is like if you were to be promoting soda then clothing should not be one of the main objects in the art itself, it must combine in order to demonstrate its purpose. Scientists have done all their research and all that they could in order to get facts or is plausible enough for the audience to be credible of the poster or advertisement. Although it is difficult because not everyone have similar likes, or that not everyone appreciate arts. Although in a way, artists always try to persuade their ideas or try to teach morality to others. Art does not only mean that it is just a photograph painting, drawing, or sketch but it can be as a graph, or a type of writing and also a dance. It is where the artist is able to feel what he feels towards a certain engenders them to do something and art could be one of the ways they express their feelings.

    Now with technology, infographics are ever better ways to present a certain project/topic because you can add what you may like to put (as long as it stays in topic) and can be design however you like but it must grab the targeted audience in order for it to be effective such as color, texture, and the way certain things are angled and with technology we have cameras and computers/laptops, smartphones where we can not only get the image right there and done instead of taking time to draw them because before things were done by just drawing them down with descriptions by using our senses. It is easier to alter the way things can be such as photoshop where you can completely change the body shape of a person within that photo (not the person itself) but that just tells you how much harder to find reliable photos because you may never know where everything comes from and it is harder to find the artist through online since most are just remakes or came from another source. It is sometimes harder to find the original author when using things from the internet.

    I think it was a good activity from class about the comparisons of both infographics and how it caught our attention. It was important to know that the artist to use sources cited on their poster when Ms. Swift showed us the two different projects, and although when we saw it we were more upon the one about Teen Suicide because it catches the audience, whether or not it was frightening but that was not the purpose of the activity, because if the artist, of the poster about Teen Suicide, were to put brighter colors the audience would had been deceived by the artist purpose and would be more distraught just of what they read but the artist was right on point, given quick facts and gave the mood and that's how they persuaded us to understand what it was meant to be. Unlike the other one, it did lack of getting the purpose and although it looked more peaceful but the text was more dense and in order to read that it would had been time wasted when it could had been explained in a shorter period to get the audience's attention, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting....you said that not everyone may appreciate the arts. What role does art play in history? culture? identity?

      Swift

      Delete
  3. Jose

    The article “Advertising: science or art?” was one of my favorite articles that I’ve read this year. As a fan of both science and art, it was interesting to read that they are in fact dependent on each other somewhere in the world and that people are taking the time to argue about which is more prevalent. I was very pleased to read that people are trying to push the opinion that art is important and necessary because advertisements are everywhere, but I personally believe that people miss the art and focus on the data or information advertised. In regards to the article, I believe that art is just as important as science in advertising, but to an extent, I do believe that art may just be a little bit more important. As a knower, it is important that I recognize my own biases, and I believe I am heavily biased in my opinion. I would consider myself much more involved in art than science; therefore I am very supportive of the arts and its lack of recognition in the present day. I would also consider myself more biased because I am most likely more knowledgeable about art than a few people in class, so the art of an advertisement may cause me to focus more on it that the regular person. For example, in the assignment we recent did with the two infographics, I focused more on the color and design than I did on the data at hand. I didn’t realize that it wasn’t what others were focusing on primarily until after I got a few questions as to why I was focusing on that. Regardless, I do agree with the claim that although science may be the basis of an effective advertisement, it can only go so far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What additional role does art play in conveying the science?
      swift

      Delete
  4. Jose

    (Part 2) What would be so appealing about a bunch of letters and numbers on an otherwise bland page? Art isn’t just about emotion; it can become an aid to learning, as well as simply serve to make something aesthetically appealing, which becomes the case for art in advertisements. The TOK textbook even establishes that art serves as a “teacher” to many, serving the purpose of helping to persuade and teach others. While advertisements do dwell into science (you cannot just present someone a pretty picture and hope they get something out of it), I strongly believe they fit more in art. In Mr. Greene’s class last year, we had a lesson about subliminal messaging in the media. One picture shown was of an ad for McDonalds on a bus stop. We learned, however, that the colors were strategically picked because red and yellow are associated with hunger. We also learned that the lights on the ad were angled awkwardly on purpose in order to put extra emphasis on the food. I will have to give much credit to scientists as they were responsible for the information behind the advertisement, including demographics and health information. However, this information would not have been effective had it not been for the art behind it. Creativity, such as the cake car stated in the article, is what fully conveys the message to people because it is not boring, but mass credit has to be given to science or else art would not be able to serve such a grand purpose.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Meng

    I agree with Burkitt, he said that "Scientists are good at the study of advertising, while artists are good at the creation of advertising" Science is the true information that the consumers receive from the seller, where art is what catches the consumer's attention to finding out the science behind it. Without the art, the science will just look like a short boring paragraph and no one will be willing to read it. But art created a opening for this product which made the science worth reading. However, without the science information, the art could only catches the attention but not the money. When the art and science both combine, thats when the infographic is, it contains the information that needed to be put out with the art that gets the consumers interest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How does this connect to our work in infographics? textbook chapter on art? prior activities?
      Swift

      Delete
  6. Hyon
    Based on the article, in order for advertisements to be successful, there needs to be a balance between art and science. Some believe that art is more important as persuasion can be an art itself. While others believe that creativity is not limited only to art, therefore emphasis on it is not needed. I believe both science and art play a significant role in advertisement. Science is needed in order to know what kind of information should be expressed while art would be needed to express it in a way that is appealing to an audience. However, I would say art is more important because I think it would have more of an impact on the audience. During the activity last class, I was drawn towards the infographic about teenage suicide because of the mood the "artistic side" created. I think infographics can be considered a type of advertisement and that other kinds of advertisements may also try and use the same technique to draw people in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You mention that infographics are a kind of advertisement? Would you consider an infographic art? yes/no/why?
      Swift

      Delete
  7. Sagen
    “Every single brief is different and works differently… The mystery of where ideas come from cannot be explained by science.” This quote seemed to be the most significant thing from the article, from my perspective. I took a lot from this quote about not only advertising, but about how the universe works. One of the many things that I’ve learned from my TOK class is that no two people think and perceive exactly the same way. Absolute terms and such do not exist in the Theory of Knowledge because we have no proof that suggests such a thing. I interpreted the word “brief” as people, because we all operate differently. The “mystery” in how this came to be still remains a mystery, just like the abundant theories that are being tested in this world. Some enigmas will always remain a mystery no matter how much science is put into looking for an answer, just like the art of advertising. I remember one class where all we did for most of the period was analyze subliminal messages in advertisements. At first I thought that the teacher was going insane but after really trying to understand the points he was making, I could almost see the same things he did. The appreciation of beauty is all in the eye of the beholder. Going back to my statement earlier, everyone thinks distinctively; so it would come as no surprise if someone people do not understand art, such as advertising, in the same or similar way that other do. Another instance to support this is the “Cow or Beef?” activity that we performed in my TOK class. We had one vegetarian in the class who thought that every picture was a cow, because she couldn’t bear the thought of people actually eating parts of a cow. The point is that our perception can differ from one another, based on the eye of the beholder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it just beauty? what about art? what is art? what is beauty? what factors contribute to the beholder perspective?
      swift

      Delete
  8. Mario Martinez
    8-27-13
    ToK Art or Science
    This article is quite interesting, I never really took into consideration the effect both science and art have on advertisement. I find it amazing how much of a role art plays in the business industry. In my view in the long run advertisements will rely more on an art foundational base rather than a scientific one. Just as Burkitt stated "Scientists are good at the study of advertising, while artists are good at the creation of advertising...Science can take you only so far." If you are too truly to improve effectiveness of advertisement, art within that piece must be emphasized. In relation to the art chapter it was stated in the chapter that art is like a teacher so to speak, where its social purpose is to teach and persuade. And the goal of an advertisement’s is to inform and persuade its readers. In the chapter it was discussed how beauty is in the eye of the beholder so if the advertisements does not appeal to that of the taste of its audience wouldn’t the advertisements be then a waste of money? When it comes down to info graphics it comes down to the main debate as discussed in the art or science article of whether we should focus more on a scientific stand point with facts or a creative stand point. With info graphics there should be a balanced mixture of both. We should be able to carry out the necessary information by attracting the reader but at the same time not cause the audience to be distracted by the creativity. Inforgraphics must be able to demonstrate its sole purpose and creativity especially ill enable it to do that. So in a way now that I think back about the advertisements discussed I the article there should be a mixture of both creativity and science. However creativity should be leaned on more due to the fact that creativity is what draws the audience in. This reminds me of the time where black and white illusion activity was done and how the class all had different perspectives because we all were attracted to either the black or white. Just as described in the art chapter where we either have a subjectivist view or objectivist view. Overall advertisements as debated in the article should rely more on the creative side rather than the science side.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So the figure-ground concept resurfaces again? In what way does the figure-ground concept have applicability with art and science? What role will the figure-ground concept play in your infographics?
      Swift

      Delete
  9. Art and science are two areas of knowing that complement each other. When I first looked at art I could not connect it to science, at first view they seem to have nothing in common, but they do. Science has helped to improve art. With the invention of computers and the advancement of technology, artists now have a greater range of colors that they could use to get their message across, something they didn't have back then. It is not surprising to me that both science and art are necessary for ads. They are just both critical in human's lives and they play a big role in how we would react to an add, because they appeal to both our logic (science) and to our senses (art). Although, we cannot negate that there is a connection between the two, is art really more important than science when it comes to advertisements? Art can give us knowledge, by gaining experiences from different authors or different paintings, but could that knowledge be available in an ad without science? Although art is a subjective interpretation, an ad has to be made, any art form has to be made, so that it can appeal to many audiences and they can appreciate it as well. With science backing up an ad, I think this could attract many people. Both science and art play a big role, because science decides what they wan through research and experiments and gives the audience what they want with creativity. It is sad that the marketing budget is the first to go when there is financial difficulties, but not at all surprising. A lot of money is put into ads and it's great to see what people come up with using science and art in a way that effectively gets their point across. Infographics are the perfect blend between art and science and they get their point across using facts and art to inform the reader of something.

    Blanca V.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should the science back up the art or should the art back up the science? Science used to be limited to the chosen few that could understand it in laymen's terms. Doesn't art provide the medium for everyone to understand the science?

      Swift

      Delete
  10. “ What a very similar debate the art versus science is to the nature versus nurture debate; how we've all come to realize that they both depend on each other In order for a child to develop a certain way. I believe the same for art versus science, the development of advertising needs both art and science to depend on each other in order for the best results to occur, but having to choose a single one to overshadow the other is extremely difficult to do when speaking of something that needs so much of both: Advertising. Advertising is absolutely a combination of both Art and Science, and by having one without the other it would only lose its purpose. Referring to the scientist in the video whom believed art was more of an important factor, I would have to counter the fact that anyone should believe one is more important than the other, because in advertising they absolutely complement each other. Just as art may have its important reasons for being the most important so does science. Info-graphics in the same way are very much like advertising, whereby the main purpose it serves is to get the attention of its consumers or readers of an event. I see how one may believe that art would be its official most important asset to it, but without science art isn't art and without art, science isn't science. Both are intertwined with each other, which is why they complement each other. As a knower this would be my statement, Persuasion is a science and Persuasion is an art, Hence the reason being that science is art and art is science, both of which are intertwined in each other.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I find it fundamentally important that opposing forces of the debated argument established a common ground in which both agreed that successful advertising is dependent on BOTH Art and Science. "Scientists are good at the study of advertising, while artists are good at the creation of advertising"-Hugh Burkitt. To a large extent I agree with Mr. Burkitt, since it basically shows how both are to an extent ineffective without the other. A good example of how art and science are equally important is in the creation of infographics, which depends on both to convey a strong and informational message. The reason why Art is losing the battle in advertising-in my perception is because art unlike science art varies by personal perception while science is pretty much straightforward, in addition to the fact that science studies whereas art is responsible for creating the advertisement. Which makes it easier in a way to blame the failures on art since art has a visible effect whereas science does not, thus allowing science to grow in power and seen as more effective. This article relates to the art chapter in the TOK textbook as it tries to judge art and deals with the subjectivist and objectivist views on art and shows the impact science has on art. This article connects to the activity we did in tok, in which the class had to choose between two infographics based on which was most appealing to the eye and conveyed its message.
    Edwin R.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is science accessible to everyone? You say that art is viewed through the lens of the knower. Doesn't this apply to science as well? Is science valued/perceived the same universally? Think back to the baloney detection kit. What about people that do not use traditional medicine...and see a shaman.

      Delete
  12. Maxwell KariKari
    “ What a very similar debate the art versus science is to the nature versus nurture debate; how we've all come to realize that they both depend on each other In order for a child to develop a certain way. I believe the same for art versus science, the development of advertising needs both art and science to depend on each other in order for the best results to occur, but having to choose a single one to overshadow the other is extremely difficult to do when speaking of something that needs so much of both: Advertising. Advertising is absolutely a combination of both Art and Science, and by having one without the other it would only lose its purpose. Referring to the scientist in the video whom believed art was more of an important factor, I would have to counter the fact that anyone should believe one is more important than the other, because in advertising they absolutely complement each other. Just as art may have its important reasons for being the most important so does science. Info-graphics in the same way are very much like advertising, whereby the main purpose it serves is to get the attention of its consumers or readers of an event. I see how one may believe that art would be its official most important asset to it, but without science art isn't art and without art, science isn't science. Both are intertwined with each other, which is why they complement each other. As a knower this would be my statement, Persuasion is a science and Persuasion is an art, Hence the reason being that science is art and art is science, both of which are intertwined in each other.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maxwell, I am going to counter your counter!

      The art is what draws people's interest to see the science and/or the math.

      Think about Chris Jordan's work and its impact with stats. Would that have had such a powerful effect with just a rifling off of numbers...or does the artwork make it more provocative?

      Delete
  13. The argument was whether advertisements should mover more towards the scientific aspects

    or the artistic aspects. In my opinion, both of these are very important and I don’t think they should

    move towards either side. As the viewer, all I see is the artistic aspect as well as whatever information

    is presented. I believe that the artistic part is very important. Hugh Burkitt says that “people should be

    more concerned to make their advertisements more creative.” This helps appeal to the viewer. The

    scientific aspect is also very important. How does the artist know what will be appealing to the viewer?

    The scientific team behind the advertisements must run statistical analysis on public opinion to get a

    good view on them. If I had to choose between them, I wouldn’t say that you should focus more on

    being creative; you should focus on what has appealed to the public in the past because this, in my

    opinion, would yield the best results. This connects to the section of the chapter that says that science

    improves art. This is true especially when the art is in an advertisement because the public’s view is very

    important. When we did the activity in class about the info graphics, more of the class was drawn to the

    graphic first because it appealed to them. They then decided whether to read the information on them.

    Odunayo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is where your "soft" sciences come in handy to identify what appeals to people. Several studies have been done....

      Psychology
      Neuroscience
      Sociology

      All of these support what people may or may not find attractive. So an ad in one place may look different from an ad in another place......same company...different target audiences

      Delete
  14. Yeni Munoz
    During the class we had a brief opening to look at two different advertisements and see which one attracted our eyes the most. Both were inside an info graphic which talked about a main topic but what determined the readers attention was the art. Life is full of art and without it we wont be able to see the true meaning of it. In this article it demonstrates how the debate was not won by those who thought that art was not a part of science but they finally decided that it is impossible to think that way. In the chapter of Art I was captured when talking about how the representation of art can have a significant meaning. Art offers any kind of Knowledge of the World. With this we can exemplify how art is in many different categories to show that it is part of the natural World we live in, in which it includes Science. By looking at the video of the Silk Worm in class, I was able to observe how the scientist used the art to demonstrate a scientific procedure in which they used art. This not only made people realize that art is inside sciences but opened other minds that art is life and without the creation of things or visualizations we won't be able to make thoughtful experiments to learn more about the world.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Nya
    Personally I am on the fence in the debate of art v.s. science. I beleive that they are intertwined and that you cant have one without the other. I found the comment "Persuasion is an art" to be interesting. As a verb, I would say persuasion could be an art but as a noun persuasion would be more associated with sciences and the brain. Info graphics could be used to please audiences on both sides of the debate but I think for our project the Arts would be more appealing. To tie everything back to TOK, the whole debate comes from personal perspective. Really all of this is about how the audience perceives the information that is put before them. ”

    ReplyDelete
  16. understand why the scientist lost the debate because they believed that advertising should be more about science and less about art which is clearly wrong but first of all it is good that both sides agreed that we need both science and art in order to be truly successful but the scientist were wrong because even though there was strong disagreement over which of the two should be given priority when creating an ad campaign, I believed that what Burkitt said about the art ultimately, getting the job done for marketers. He said "Scientists are good at the study of advertising, while artists are good at the creation of advertising," he told the audience. "Science can take you only so far." And for me this is the truth. This article on whether advertising is an art or science has some connection with the arts chapter in the theory of knowledge textbook because in the chapter there is a subtopic that states “What counts as art?” and under this chapter it is said that one way of deciding whether or not an object is a work of art is to ask if it has any practical purpose and also artists and philosophers have sometimes set out their own criteria with which to define what counts as a work of art. And this article also has a little connection with the Theory of Knowledge class activities because during class we had to pick between two info graphics, the one that catches our eye the most.Cynthia

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for posting!!

Swift