#articlereview

I have always wondered if what I consider good design would be seen the same way by somebody else. I used to think good design is something that is simply visually pleasing to the observer, so it made more sense to think that good design is completely subjective as we all see things differently. After 2 weeks of starting to get to know the UX/UI Design world, I can confidently say that good design is so much more than being pretty. 

As the “Learning to see” article very accurately says “visual and functional beauty are not completely independent”. On the contrary, they go hand in hand. Even if you had the visually most beautiful design, as long as it didn’t work, it wouldn’t be possible to consider it “good design”. The design concept involves, most importantly, functionality. Why? You just don’t design to make something pretty, you design to make something work. It is only once you make it work that you can start thinking of its aesthetic. Dieter Rams’ “Ten principles for good design” are quite accurate as well when defining what good design means. Only 1 of these 10 principles mentions the “pretty” aspect: “Good design is aesthetic”. Nevertheless, this same principle can’t help mentioning functionality as well “But only well-executed objects can be beautiful.”

The following quote is included in the previously mentioned article and it clearly defines how important was functionality considered by one of the most influential people in the tech world:   “[Design] is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works”. —Steve Jobs

Interesting right? Moreover, I think this is where empathy gets involved in the designer’s path.  The design has to primarily work for the customer you are designing for, not only for yourself. Can this design “eye” be trained? Definitely. “Learning to see” has a very interesting point:

“With practice your intuition evolves, and the better you understand what you do, the deeper your intuition.”

The Body Bank I came across this story today on Outlander Magazine, and wow I was hooked! The first thing that seized my attention was the picture. It was…interesting. It looked like something I would see at a museum—a painting that an artist made to communicate their desire to commit suicide, but everyone thought it was a marvelous work of art until it was too late. Now, it is world-renowned as…

With women being the primary spender in a household over the years, it comes without surprise that recent findings show that nearly 85% of purchasing power of goods is held by females. As a result, companies have innovated their marketing strategies in order to cater to the needs of women. The rise of social media usage shows great hope for the success of a brands penetration into the peripheral view of these ever changing and engaged women that make up such a majority of the workplace and market. This post, published by Mashable highlights three major lessons that companies should keep in mind when marketing to their female audience.

Firstly, “Women are more likely to purchase brands they follow” presumes that, as a result of more female engagement on sites such as Facebook in comparison to their male counterparts, they would be more likely to purchase products that is advertised there. Understanding your customer, who she is and what she does she want to buy are key points to hone in on in order to know where to focus your energies upon.

Secondly, women utilize “social media to connect different aspects of their lives”. Nearly 37% of women claim there is great benefit to prompts of coupons and deals featured on their social media sites. Therefore, considering the amount of social media usage a female might engage in for the sake of keeping in touch with others in their lives, it inevitably produces a stronger advantage by utilizing sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Tumbler in order to advertise products or services.

Lastly, one of the most significant aspects of marketing would be the fact that mass communication and mass advertising is, more or less, on the verge of extinction. Due to the expansion of media over the years, markets have become increasingly stratified therefore there is no universal type of marketing that would attain the same results as niche marketing. Therefore, the third and most important lesson that should fuel a company’s strategy is “Different Women, Different Outreach”. It would be so convenient to assume that all women accept and appreciate the same type of marketing however, it is not the case. As a company, after investing in research, it is imperative that you cater your advertisements to your consumer’s lives. Majority of women turn to their smartphone while others turn to their computers. This simply advocates the campaign of understanding your audience in order to advance and penetrate the market.

Women make up a great deal of the growing markets in today’s economy and it will only continue from here. As a corporation, it is your duty to put forth the investments to better understand your consumer. 

View the full article on Mashable by visiting this link: http://mashable.com/2012/08/01/social-media-marketing-women/

Movies Should Go For Modest Titles

In this article, the idea that movies should opt for modest titles is evaluated. The main reason this was posted was in response to the new Wizard of Oz movie entitled: Oz the Great and Powerful.

The boasting of movies in titles puts the movie up for criticism using the title if the movie doesn't live up to its exaggerated title. Google mentioned that the new Oz movie was "Oz: Neither Great Nor Powerful". 

The article reflects on past hollywood movies that did the same thing with their movie titles. 

To be fair to Oz, it isn't the first film to try to get away with a boastful title. It's the trend that refuses to die. Last year, we had The Amazing Spider-Man. Before that, we had The Incredible Hulk. Later this year, we'll have The Great Gatsby. All of them brave enough to poke their heads above the parapet. All of them desperate to sing their own praises before anyone else can.

The article then refers to how the movie titles often aren't meant to reflect the quality but the characters. Seen in the examples above, spider-man being amazing is one thing, while Gatsby and Oz are meant to be ironic. But its clearly gotten to a point where its not appreciated anymore.

Whats an interesting point the article makes is a reference to the history and how this idea of glorified titles was brought up, seemingly by old comic book ideals.

Well, historically this seems to be a throwback to the world of comic books, where every cover had to be bigger and bolder and more colourful than the last, just to get the attention of the customer. Writing "Amazing" or "Incredible" or "Mighty" or "Fantastic" in huge letters across the comics was just another sales ploy. And it worked, because the customers tended to be children.

The problems with this nowadays in big hollywood films is that the movies tend to now raise our expectations for the film. Which makes when the movies aren't good even worse, because its more of a let down to the viewer.

Something I thought was pretty amusing and I think we all can relate to is the metaphor for how these movies are to the viewer

'Music's starring role in films' by Richard Nilsen

Due date: March 21, 2013

This article makes people aware of how important music is in films. Music serves film, just like Jon Burlingame said:

"The music's most important job is to evoke an emotional response, whether it is joy, romance, terror or adventure"

The article mentions that a film's plot and a film's dialogue could be though of as it's 'brain' - basically what your mind is focusing on through out the film, while the music is a 'subconscious heart: its soul and emotions'. This is important because most of the time we don't really pay attention to the music of a film but it really does affect our reactions.

 "Most composers would say if you notice the music, something is wrong"

Film music serves its films, it helps the audience understand the emotions, feelings and actions that are happening. It mostly relates to whatever the imagery is/the character is doing. 

"It's reached a point today that songs in fils are as much a marketing tool as an aid to a director in making dramatic points"

The journey of music in films: 

It all started in the 19th century, when music was used with silent films. If you think about it silent films wouldn't even make sense without the music. - the use of the piano is what made the Lumiere brothers look like comedy. 

Before, filmmakers were scared of adding music in their films besides the fact that technology back then wasn't advanced enough, they still thought that it would convey a sense of confusion for the audience. They thought that it made no sense adding the music due to the music just randomly appearing - people might not understand where the music is coming from...

"But where is the music so posed to come from out in the middle of the ocean?" 

But then after King Kong came ou, music was permeated every film put out. 

But nowadays, everything is different, things have changed quite a lot. Because of technology being more advanced some directors tend to Mickey Mouse all the action. 

James Bond, Sex and Masculinity: What the 007 reveals about our culture's views on gender and heroism

This article specifically outlines the cultural impact of the Bond movies on our lives today. Which is interesting because the Bond movies have been around for 50 years; the article describes that the bond movies have outlasted cold wars, government betrayals, terrorist threats and even video game consoles.

The article outlines that James Bond challenges our American Superhero Ideal. Despite the fact that classics like John Wayne, Bruce Willis or Jason Bourne have been middle class, Bond is an extremely high class, gadget using, fancy man, yet he still is categorically mentioned as a "strictly for men" group. I think what most puts Bond in this grouping, and is mentioned in this article, would be his unnatural perfect man qualities. That he kills without guilt, drinks but is never drunk, smokes but never had cancer, all that and he has kept his health and no woman says no to him. He is essentially the ideal man, which is why its so appealing to men.

One thing I think is particularly interesting about this article is that it suggests that Bond has one fault. That fault being that despite the lesser known On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, since Bond sleeps around so much he is unable to feel the true love of a woman and to fully open his heart up to another.

Bond may be naked, but he’s never truly naked before anyone, and in this way he can never be truly loved. What the Bond women (and we) love is the façade.

However, this separation of Bond from normal men plays along in this every man's fantasy man image that makes the films so irresistible.