Composition: It Means More Than You Think

When looking at an image, whether it be a photograph, a newspaper, a magazine, or a painting, composition may not be the first thing you are drawn to if you aren't a trained photographer or artist. You might first look at the image on a surface level, taking in the first instant of the visual. Next you might allow the emotional appeal to flood over you, deciding how it is you feel about the specific image. After reading the chapter The Meaning of Composition, I realize that how an image, article, or newspaper is laid out speaks volume for the meaning associated with what the author is trying to convey.

To explain the importance of composition, I will discuss the three interrelated systems, Information Value, Salience, and Framing, that give images meaning. It is these three things that allow us to be drawn to certain portions of the image and feel a certain way towards the image, which in turn gives them meaning.

Information Value, or how elements are placed in the space, tell us informational ideas based on the different "zones" of the visual. Whether it is right, left, top, bottom, or in the center, the placement of characters in the image means so much.

•      Left placement - represents the Given, or the information the audience already knows
•      Right placement - represents the New, or the unknown/fresh idea being portrayed to the audience
•      Top placement - the emotional/emotionally appealing portion of the image
•      Bottom placement - the factual/ or informative portion of the image 
•      Center - main ideal with support around

Because we are society that reads text from left to right, the placement of left to right mirrors the way we already digest information. Starting at the left, with info we already know, allows for the natural progression to the new info on the right side, much like the natural progression from the beginning to the end of the sentence. Similarly, we are very much a top-down society, placing the things we need to grasp the most at the top of our newspaper and magazine articles. In the same way, composition puts the emotional images at the top, grabbing the audience in and giving the factual information at the bottom. 

Although center composition is not used much in our society, center images represent a broad idea with supporting facts and information around. I believe the reason this does not work well in our society goes back to the way in which we digest our information, reading from left to right or top to bottom. 

Another of the three systems is Salience. Like information value, salience attracts us to different elements of the image based on placement, contrast in color, sharpness, and size. 

Finally, Framing, or the presence or absence of an image being framed a certain way, draws our attention, allows us to associate, or disassociate characters in an image. 

How does this image effectively use the elements of composition?

What forms of composition catch your eye the most? Can you think of some effective advertisements or images that help you to create meaning? Why do they work for you? 

The Meaning of a Viewer: A Personal Choice

Whenever my life gets overwhelming and I vent to my mom, she always tells me that only a small portion of life is the things that are placed before us, but what is truly important is how we react. Every time, I am reminded what wise words of wisdom these are (thanks, Mom!).  When reading the chapter Viewers Make Meaning, I couldn't help but remember these words. In a world were we are constantly hit with images and information from a number of sources, it isn't the items that are being sent to us but it is the way in which we respond, or take meaning, that is important.

The article begs the question of how images make meaning. Is it is the photographer who creates meaning? Is it the setting? Is it the producer or art director? I would agree with the article that while all these people or aspects play an important part and may want to create meaning, it is the audience or viewer who gives the image meaning. Let's consider the reasons why and how this happens.

While people respond to images on a daily basis, there are different types of images that should and will be decoded differently. Of course with most images coming from an advertising or product point of view, the image is meant for us to understand it in the way in which advertiser wish us to interpret it, but that doesn't always happen. People will respond in a multitude of ways considering such issues as social and cultural influence, socioeconomics, gender, and race. As the article states, you can feel happiness, fantasy, anger, or sadness depending on the moment, a familiarity for the product, or the way the product in portrayed. Take for instance the image below. You can feel the ad is too vulgar, to expressive, or very effective. If you are a "texter" while driving, you may feel guilty. If you know someone killed in a car accident where texting was involved, you may be filled with sadness and a sense of loss.

On the other hand, personal pictures of a family member or loved one also inspire people to react and create meaning differently than simple images we are unattached to, such as products defined by advertisers. As with the picture of my family below, I create a meaning very different from yours because the attachment I have to the people in the image. You may think that it is simply a pleasant picture of a family but I feel so much more. This two images clearly contrast the feeling of meaning in different images.

                                             Photo credit to Brittany Austin Photography

In these situations, the meaning given by the author or photographer is somewhat of a myth, because regardless the viewer will make their own judgements, whether the author likes it or not.
The ultimate point of this article, and I agree with its importance, is that in a world where images are thrown in our face all day, everyday, it is the job and privilege of the viewer to decode the meaning and make of it what they will. I love this aspect of the media world because it still places the choice in the hands of the viewer when we often don't have choices about media information.

Do you think the viewer is the main person responsible for the meaning of an image? Why or why not? What are some ads where you feel advertisers effectively get their message across and get people to feel the way they want? If this even possible?

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words... But the Words of Whom?

Snap. It's that easy. Grabbing a camera, focusing on a moment in time, and clicking. With three simple steps, you have succeeded in capturing a realistic, true instant in history, right? My answer to this question would be both yes and no. While I have always been one to put my full trust in images - to me pictures didn't lie - after reading the article Images, Power, and Politics, I'm not so quick to rely on the face value of a photo.

When you see an image, what is the first thing that comes to mind? To me, it is typically some emotional response followed by a feeling of concreteness, a sense that I am looking at a moment in time and discovering exactly what happened. I see now that I haven't always been an active viewer when it comes to digesting images. The article tied in many points we have been discussing in class on what gives a photograph meaning. In my eyes, a photo having a meaning and getting the meaning a certain way directly correlate with a photo having truth.

When considering how a photo gets it's truth, there are many answers to research. A few of them are listed below.

1. The photographer gives the image truth.
2. The camera gives the image truth. 
3. The viewer gives the image truth.
4. The situation gives the image truth. 
5. The objectivity accompanied with photography gives the image truth.

From studying the items listed above, it is easy to see that so much of an image's meaning and truth come from different perspectives. Is the photographer showing us all of the situation or only a small piece? Is the camera purely objective based on its nature of being a machine? Is the viewer culturally primed to decode the image in one way or another? Could the situation be taken in many different directions? 

Take for instance this image of a soldier in the Iraq War. When trying to decode the meaning behind this simple image of a soldier in a different pose than the rest of the men in the photo, many different interpretations can be formed. If you are a deeply spiritual person, you may immediately think this man is praying. If you are a soldier yourself, you may conclude that he is simply taking a moment of calm in the chaos that accompanies this role. If you are a protester of the war, you may be filled with anger that this man is in such a vulnerable state. Likewise, if you are a supporter of the war, you may be filled with great pride for you country and great respect for his man. 

With such opposing opinions that can be drawn from an image that is supposed to have such objectivity and truth, I can't help but question the amount of trust I should be putting in images. This point strengthens my thoughts that photos and writing should be paired together for the most effective source of truth. 

What was your first reaction when you saw the image of the soldier? Do you feel a solid truth can be found by viewing the image without a background story? What cultural, social, racial, or political factors do you think helped shape your interpretation of the image? 

Blowing the Whistle: Sports Photography

When I think about Sports Photography (which I will admit isn't too often), issues of gender, race, and sexuality never cross my mind. Typically what does come to mind is that, often impressively, a quick, epic, inspirational moment was captured in time. That thought is typically followed up by my amazement and lack of confidence in taking action shots. Never once in all my years of seeing newspapers, magazines, and webpages devoted to sports images have I stopped to think about all the deeper issues blended with this cultural phenomenon.

The issue I found to be the most fascinating after reading the article Framed and Mounted was the issue of sports media and gender. Being a little bit of a self-proclaimed feminist, I am always drawn in by the difference of roles between men and women, but sports was never an area I paid much attention too. I agree with the author that in sports media, women are often far more sexualized and at the same time, featured less often. Women are also featured more doing tasks that have nothing to do with sports, such as holding their children, embracing their significant other, and caring about their appearance. I feel this difference stems from the inability of society to disassociate women from their maternal/caregiver role. This is also why more women are photographed in still, reclining, inactive poses, contrary to the male image which is typically in motion.

I feel that in a time when women and men are equal in most aspects, sports and sports images are still behind. Attention to both genders should be given in a similar manner in the media. If all sexual connotation can't be taken out of the female image for obvious reasons, then coverage should at least be equal. One area I found that, in my opinion, gave attention to both male and female athletes was this years coverage of the Olympics. With sex symbols like Micheal Phelps and Ryan Lochte, is the sexualization of athletes still slanted more towards women? How do you feel about the integrity of athletes posing nude for advertisements and articles?

A Reading on Digital Still Photography

In a class like Digital Communications, it is important to learn about all aspects of media, including where they came from and how they can effectively tell a story. While we have recently studied journalism in the form of writing, until now we have yet to get to the true importance of images in media, or photojournalism. I personally love taking pictures of the things that happen in my life. What is more special than being able to capture a distinct moment in time, right? I found this reading to be very valuable and am now hungry for more information on images. Most of all, I can't wait to take food photographs for this blog, Uncovering the Upstate.

Like many things in life, you have to know where something comes from to understand why it is important and useful. By painting a picture of the early days of photography, ones that included whole camera wagons and hundreds of glass plates, the article allowed the reader to see how far we have come. It is important to know that technology often limits and defines what we can do as far as presenting stories in the media. Of course with all the equipment once required to take a simple photograph, it wasn't easy to take motion shots such as those for sports. As cameras developed and being more portable, images such as sports photographs and action shots became more popular. Much in the same way, DV (digital video) photojournalism, or platypus journalism, is seeping into media outlets because digital video imaging is the technology that is hot now. This can easily be compared to the ways in which internet is shaping the way we communicate, with blogging becoming increasingly popular.

One of the main points I got from the article is that no matter what form the images are being captured in, they are crucial to the ways in which we as humans tell stories. Often times, an image can express so much more than words can on their own, the reason why newspapers and magazines, both print and online, accompany their articles with photographs or videos. I especially enjoyed the quote from the article that "photojournalism tells stories about life". I found this to be strongly supported by the example of photographer Lewis Hines using images of children, such as the image below, to fight child labor abuse. Without an image, a face, a look to associate with the stories of child labor abuse, the story could be easily overlooked due to emotional detachment. In what ways do you think images support traditional writing? Are you more apt to find emotional connection to an image or an article?

Chapter 4 and Chapter 6

When you look at the forms of communication currently used in society, blogging is one that comes to mind instantly. It seems that most people write, read, follow, and discuss blogs in some form. Since this blogging phenomenon has set sail and picked up speed, many questions arise as to the legality and economics behind blogging. These readings do a great job of asking some of the important questions, such as: Are bloggers considered journalists? Do mainstream media and blogging mutually benefit each other? How is money made from blogging?

We can start by answering the first question: Are bloggers considered journalists? Although most people would respond "no" right away, the use of technology that is creating more "citizen journalists" is making this line blurry. I enjoyed how the articles both compared and contrasted mainstream media and blogging, letting us decide for ourselves if bloggers can be considered true journalists. Even after considering both points made in the chapter, I am still torn on the issue myself. One of the things I love most about blogging is the opportunity for anyone and everyone to have a voice in our society. Gone are the days when you had to work for a newspaper or magazine to get published, and if I am speaking honestly, I am happy to say goodbye to those times. It is by nature though, the subjectivity and inclusivity that fuel the current debate. Do you feel a blogger being openly honest and subjective adds more trust to the table or takes away from the reliability of the source? Do you trust bloggers more than mainstream media? If so, why?

The second issue that blurs the lines between blogging and recognized journalism is the matter of money. Chapter 6 suggests that if a person makes a living from blogging, they are considered a journalist. This is also an area that is not truly black and white. These days, bloggers can get paid a number of ways for their thoughts. Advertisements, sponsorships, donations, and being paid by a company are all ways ordinary bloggers can use their sites to earn a living. With it becoming increasingly easier to make money by blogging, does that mean that all who profit from blogs are journalists? Another question that begs to be asked is if bloggers being paid to write takes away the trust and integrity of the authors work? It is my opinion that as long as bloggers are open and honest about any sponsorships, advertisements, or other funds received from the blog, it is perfectly fine for people to follow their dream of writing about something they love while also earning a living.

While there are still many questions to play with and answer regarding blogging, I view this modern form of communication as a great tool for both individuals and companies. Not only does blogging give more people an opportunity to express themselves and get their voices heard, it also gives internet communication a more personal and thoughtful quality. Do you agree or disagree that blogging benefits mainstream media? Why or why not?

A Blog About Blogs: Chapter 2 and 3

   In our world today, blogging seems to be as natural a form of communication as showing printed pictures to a friend from vacation or confessing your point of view at an open debate. But the questions remain, how did we get to the Internet driven point we are at now? And if blogging really differs so much from the common form of print, how so?

   After taking a mass communications class, I have learned quite a bit about the progression from orality to literacy, literacy to print, and now print to digital media. I feel Chapter Two, From Bards to Blogs, did a great job of highlighting all the major points in the history that got us to where we are now. It is comforting to know that while print is something that seems so natural to us now, at the time the switch was made from spoken language to writing things down, many people questioned it much as people today question the goodness of online forms of writing such as blogging. This idea speaks to the ever-changing nature of technology and the way we communicate. As Chapter 3 later discusses, years into the future, blogging and social networking will be the form that seems natural to us while we are questioning some new and futuristic form. 

   One of my favorite topics covered in Chapter Two was the notion that digital media is on the rise in amount used daily in people's lives while use of printed sources have shown a decline. In the mass communications class I mentioned earlier, we were required to log our daily use of different forms of media throughout a week and write a paper on our findings. I was a little surprised to find that the number of hours I use digital media outlets, specifically my laptop, was so high. I think this shock came from the fact that to my generation, using computers in our daily lives seems just as innate as reading a book does to past generations. As the chapter mentioned, I also saw a great number of hours where I was using multiple media outlets at one time, such as checking my Facebook, watching TV, and looking at my Twitter on my phone. I believe it is this sense of constant connectivity and natural feel that make blogging such a prominent form of communication today. When you read and follow blogs, do you feel more connected to the world by following others thoughts? If so, are blogs as conversational and interactive as you would like them to be? 

   I also found Chapter Three on blog communities to be very interesting and eye-opening. While I partake in both blogging and social networking, I had never taken time to think of these sources as online connected communities. While there can be both positives and negatives to being so interconnected, I ultimately think blogging and sites such as Facebook and Twitter open so many doors for people that never could have been seen without the Internet world we live in today. These sites make it so easy to stay connected with old friends, meet other people who are searching for similar jobs, and find out news and info from people all over the world, all with the click of a mouse. On the other hand, I thought the chapter did a great job of explaining and giving advice on the dangers of putting information on the web for all to see. Unlike print, many things on the internet can't just be forgotten or destroyed, something we need to be quite careful of when sharing our thoughts. On that note, do you have any stories of people posting things on the internet that came back to bite them later? How can we be more active in making sure what we post on the internet reflects us in a positive light? 

   

A Look at NYTimes.com

New York Times.com

What is your first impression of the site? 

• When we first brought the page up, both the ads and the videos on the page took about 10-15 seconds to load, something that potentially lose audience attention. 
• The page is instantly very clean and neat, with a main headline for the page that is recognizable and draws you in. 
• Both top and left rows and columns easily list links on the page and make it easy to find information you are looking for. 
• Hyperlinks are clearly displayed in a color and text that is not far off from the content text, making it easy to click and be redirected to other places on the site. 
• The white to the left and right of the main page makes for visual rest space, not overwhelming the reader from the start. 

How does this site establish credibility? How does it establish trust? Or does it? 

Authentic voice? Genuine? Transparency? 

• In the articles Without Spirit of ’08, Mutual Fears Reunite Democrats, the author leaves aside bias and presents the facts and quotes in a straightforward manor. Other nonpolitical articles were also written without much personal bias. At the top, right of the page, there is a designated place for opinion readings. This helps the reader know up front that they are going to be getting the bias of the author if they choose to read those articles. The New York Times is being honest with their readers from the start. 
• In the Obama’s Speech article transparency is shown. The author from the start references God, showing his personal religion, something that is not typically politically correct in unbiased articles. The author also reveals his political views. He uses words like personally and “I wish”. 
• If you reference page 29 in the textbook, the NYTimes website meets many or most of the criteria for a credible site, including appears professionally designed and frequent updates. 

What is the general writing style? 

• We think the main writing style of the New York Times is objective, with the articles having facts and quotes presented in a straightforward manor that doesn’t sway the reader one way or the other. Judging by the articles posted on todays page, there seems to be more of a democratic slant with the choice of articles that are published. Overall, the site seems more reliable and neutral than openly slanted news sources such as Fox News. 

Does the writer IDENTIFY with his or her readers, or not? How (or why not)? 

• After reading a selection of articles, we find it difficult for authors to identify with readers and stay objective at the same time. It would be easier for authors of blogs or entertainment sites to identify with readers because their purpose isn’t to inform without objectivity. 

Does the writing style get to the point? 

• The articles are clean, easy to read, and easy to take in. The authors do a good job of being descriptive and wordy when necessary without being overwhelming to the reader. They do a great job of “chunking” text together to make it easy to scan and skim the articles. This is done well in the opinion article on Obama’s Speech by David Brooks. 

How is it arranged? It is arranged in reverse pyramid style? 

• We found most of the articles to be arranged in reverse pyramid style. By reading the first paragraph or two the audience has a clear idea of what the article is about and what main points are trying to be made. “The Ice Pick” article by Wendy Ruderman does a great job of catching the readers attention in the first few paragraphs, another arrangement that draws readers in.

Is content shaped for scanning? How in the content layered? 

• The content is very much shaped for scanning. As we mentioned earlier, the descriptive headlines, teaser sentences, brief paragraphs, visuals, and related stories/links, make it very easy to skim the article, pulling out the main points and being able to jump to other sites to get different info or opinions. 

Is the tone or rhythm of the site consistent throughout? 

• All the articles seem to have the same objective throughout the site and are very fact oriented. They do a good job of keeping the language neutral and basic. The articles also utilize short sentences and a direct writing style. 

How does the site use headlines? 

• None of the headlines on the webpage are cutesy or fluffy, instead, they are direct and to the point, explaining to the reader quickly what the article will be discussing. They “inform rather than entertain”. The headlines match the tone of the writing as well, presenting just the facts. A few good examples are: “ Democrats Say U.S. Is Better Off Than Four Years Ago.” and “Syrian Children Offer Glimpse of a Bitter Future.” One that was less effective was “A Summer of Easy Guns and Dead Children.” 

How does it use links? Effectively or not? 

• They effectively link within their website, using links to navigate to different portions of the website as well as linking to other related articles on their own page. They also do a good job of linking to outside sources within articles as well. The bottom of the page offers links to AP and Reuters, offering the readers other new sites that will also keep them coming back to NYTimes.com. 

How is multimedia used? 

• Along with a main picture of video for each article, the article offers a Multimedia section to the left that encompasses all related media. They do a good job of leaving multimedia out when it isn’t related or wouldn’t be effective. We didn’t enjoy how the biggest picture on each page was an ad. It distracted from over multimedia on the page. 
• While the homepage was saturated with multimedia, we both thought the site kept the homepage clean and uncluttered. 
• The graphics are consistent throughout the site, using effective and professional videos and pictures throughout each article. 
• Each page can stand on its own because of the clear headlines and navigation use. 

How is the navigation? 

• Navigation of this site is wonderful. The articles are organized by interest or topic and the topic is clearly listed at the top of the page along with the NYTimes logo. Every single page links back to the homepage which is found by clicking on the logo. 

How does the site incorporate/interact with the audience? 

- The site has places for the audience to chat about articles, follow them on Twitter, and send articles to friend’s with an email feature, making it very social and active. 

Give two examples on your site of poor headlines used as hyperlinks and fix them. Why were they poor headlines? 

- “A Summer of Easy Guns and Dead Children” > “Gun Violence Increase in the Bronx Raises Death Toll of Children” .... the first headline was vague and left us with little info about the location and specifics of the article 

Chapter 4 and Journalism of Verification

   The two readings, Chapter 4 on Hyperlinks and Hypertext and the article on Journalism of Verification, may not seem to relate at first, but with further studying, they both focus on points crucial to the success of journalism. Taking advice from the two articles, I am going to keep this blog concise and do my best to use the information I learned in these readings to contribute to my thoughts.
 
   As a frequent and dedicated user of the internet, I have come across websites that I enjoy and find useful, such as jcrew.com, and ones that I despise, like Target.com. I have clicked on links when skimming webpages, had trouble understanding what the author was trying to get across when reading articles, and become overwhelmed when a website gives me too much to digest at once. Chapter 4 offers great advice on how to successfully hyperlink, use headlines, create lists, and "chunk" your words so your followers aren't lost in a deep sea of thoughts.
   When it comes to hyperlinking, I never knew things such as color, size, and length could play such a vital role in directing the audience to the right place and allowing them to know what is coming next. Being more of a creative writer/thinker, I would think it best to create a cutesy, catchy headline followed by content that is littered with lengthy, wordy hyperlinks. I now know that to get my point across and keep my readers focused and clued in, I have to remain concise and clear, not only with the set up of my blog, but also with my language and tone. Before reading this, I never once thought that what I might say with my own cultural style might not translate properly to readers around the world.
   In the case of "chunking text", I knew that wordy webpages bogged down the reader but I never had clear advice on how to fix this problem. Starting now, I plan to display my thoughts in a way that is both visually appealing and easy to comprehend, giving my audience the opportunity to experience the information on my page as well as on linked outside sources. What sites do you feel best utilize hyperlinking and offer a clean, concise layout?

   While the textbook dealt more with the layout and attention-getting aspect of writing on the internet, the article on Journalism of Verification addressed the important aspects of any writing that must be followed to gain the trust of readers. Whether it is an author writing for The New York Times or a stay at home mom blogging about raising children, it is important for any author to be seen as reliable and trustworthy. After all, we do get all of our information from other people, right?
   I agreed totally with the articles thought that research for journalism needs to be somewhat more like the scientific method, in which facts are researched, checked, and double-checked until they are accepted to be fact. I think the internet, and the race for journalist to be the first to not get the right information across, but any information across at all, contributes to the lack of reliable information on the web. If there were a method in which to be followed, there could be less mistakes made in journalism and less false information produced. One of my favorite quotes from the article was "Facts have become a commodity." It is my belief that just because facts are a commodity, they shouldn't be false commodities. In the world we live in today, I can't help but ask, do you think method of verification is able to exist? If so, can it be mastered in the world of the internet?