Though the Rorschach is the most famous psychological test in the world, it is little understood outside of psychology circles. The test, in the news this week and under much debate, is a series of 10 colored ink blots created nearly a century ago by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The ink blots are a projective test; patients are asked to interpret the patterns for a psychologist or psychiatrist. As a subjective test, there are no official right or wrong answers, but test-givers do have a list of what are called normed responses — the most common answers. The premise behind the test is that the answers provided by people who suffer from mental illness will be markedly different than the answers provided by normal people. A controversy erupted recently when Wikipedia posted the ink blots online, along with the “correct” answers to each. No big deal, right? Well, here’s the problem: The Rorschach blots (not to mention the “answers”) are supposed to be kept secret.
T S E
T
Many psychologists were outraged, believing that having the information out there would make the test worthless, since test-takers could memorize the answers and “cheat.”
Rorschachs Open Secret
In fact, the Rorschach blots have been publically available for more than 30 years; they were published in the 1975 book “The Nuremberg Mind,” available online for under $3.
...Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife. William Poundstone’s 1983 book “Big Secrets” not only shows all the Rorschach blots, but devotes a whole chapter to them, including discussing how to “cheat” — what answers to provide so that you don’t appear psychotic. (Here’s a hint: don’t say, “It looks like the mess I made this morning when Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.”)
So the Rorschach images themselves are hardly top secret, though never so easily available. Validity Problems
The furor over Wikipedia’s posting of the Rorschach blots obscures a far more important issue. The real concern should not be whether people might be able to cheat on the test, but whether or not the Rorschach is valid in the first place. After all, if the test is worthless at diagnosing mental illness, assessing personality disorders, or predicting behavior, there is no point in “protecting” it. Scott Lilienfeld, an associate professor of psychology at Emory University and co-author of the 2003 book “What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?” is one of many psychologists who doubts the validity of the test. Lilienfeld and the other authors surveyed more than 50 years of research and studies on the scientific evidence for the Rorschach, concluding that it is
Furthermore, Lilienfeld and colleagues point out, studies show that about half of the normal Rorschach test-takers will be labeled as having “distorted thinking.” This staggeringly high false-positive error rate (among many other problems) suggests that the Rorschach should be relegated to the pile of once promising but now discredited psychological tests.
distorted thinking
It seems that the test has remained in use more out of tradition than good evidence. Wikipedia’s publication of the test blots may unintentionally be the final nail in the coffin for Hermann Rorschach’s idea.
Image: Herman Rorschach
E T
distorted thinking Image: Herman Rorschach Though the Rorschach is the most famous psychological test in the world, it is little understood outside of psychology circles. The test, in the news this week and under much debate, is a series of 10 colored ink blots created nearly a century ago by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The ink blots are a projective test; patients are asked to interpret the patterns for a psychologist or psychiatrist. As a subjective test, there are no official right or wrong answers, but test-givers do have a list of what are called normed responses — the most common answers.
T S
The premise behind the test is that the answers provided by people who suffer from mental illness will be markedly different than the answers provided by normal people. A controversy erupted recently when Wikipedia posted the ink blots online, along with the “correct” answers to each. No big deal, right? Well, here’s the problem: The Rorschach blots (not to mention the “answers”) are supposed to be kept secret. Many psychologists were outraged, believing that having the information out there would make the test worthless, since test-takers could memorize the answers and “cheat.”
Rorschachs Open Secret
In fact, the Rorschach blots have been publically available for more than 30 years; they were published in the 1975 book “The Nuremberg Mind,” available online for under $3.
...Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife. William Poundstone’s 1983 book “Big Secrets” not only shows all the Rorschach blots, but devotes a whole chapter to them, including discussing how to “cheat” — what answers to provide so that you don’t appear psychotic. (Here’s a hint: don’t say, “It looks like the mess I made this morning when Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.”) So the Rorschach images themselves are hardly top secret, though never so easily available.
Validity Problems
The furor over Wikipedia’s posting of the Rorschach blots obscures a far more important issue. The real concern should not be whether people might be able to cheat on the test, but whether or not the Rorschach is valid in the first place. After all, if the test is worthless at diagnosing mental illness, assessing personality disorders, or predicting behavior, there is no point in “protecting” it. Scott Lilienfeld, an associate professor of psychology at Emory University and co-author of the 2003 book “What’s
Wrong with the Rorschach?” is one of many psychologists who doubts the validity of the test. Lilienfeld and the other authors surveyed more than 50 years of research and studies on the scientific evidence for the Rorschach, concluding that it is Furthermore, Lilienfeld and colleagues point out, studies show that about half of the normal Rorschach test-takers will be labeled as having “distorted thinking.” This staggeringly high false-positive error rate (among many other problems) suggests that the Rorschach should be relegated to the pile of once promising but now discredited psychological tests. It seems that the test has remained in use more out of
tradition than good evidence. Wikipedia’s publication of the test blots may unintentionally be the final nail in the coffin for Hermann Rorschach’s idea.
Though the Rorschach is the most famous psychological test in the world, it is little understood outside of psychology circles. The test, in the news this week and under much debate, is a series of 10 colored ink blots created nearly a century ago by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The ink blots are a projective test; patients are asked to interpret the patterns for a psychologist or psychiatrist. As a subjective test, there are no official right or wrong answers, but test-givers do have a list of what are called normed responses — the most common answers. The premise behind the test is that the answers provided by people who suffer from mental illness will be markedly different than the answers provided by normal people. A controversy erupted recently when Wikipedia posted the ink blots online, along with the “correct” answers to each. No big deal, right? Well, here’s the problem: The Rorschach blots (not to mention the “answers”) are supposed to be kept secret. Many psychologists were outraged, believing that having the information out there would make the test worthless, since test-takers could memorize the answers and “cheat.” Rorschach’s open secret In fact, the Rorschach blots have been publically available for more than 30 years; they were published in the 1975 book “The Nuremberg Mind,” available online for under $3. William Poundstone’s 1983 book “Big Secrets” not only shows all the Rorschach blots, but devotes a whole chapter to them, including discussing how to “cheat” — what answers to provide so that you don’t appear psychotic. (Here’s a hint: don’t say, “It looks like the mess I made this morning when Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.”)
...Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife. Validity problems The furor over Wikipedia’s posting of the Rorschach blots obscures a far more important issue. The real concern should not be whether people might be able to cheat on the test, but whether or not the Rorschach is valid in the first place. After all, if the test is worthless at diagnosing mental illness, assessing personality disorders, or predicting behavior, there is no point in “protecting” it. Scott Lilienfeld, an associate professor of psychology at Emory University and co-author of the 2003 book “What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?” is one of many psychologists who doubts the validity of the test. Lilienfeld and the other authors surveyed more than 50 years of research and studies on the scientific evidence for the Rorschach, concluding that it is “weak at best and nonexistent at worst.” Furthermore, Lilienfeld and colleagues point out, studies show that about half of the normal Rorschach test-takers will be labeled as having “distorted thinking.” This staggeringly high false-positive error rate (among many other problems) suggests that the Rorschach should be relegated to the pile of once-promising but now-discredited psychological tests. It seems that the test has remained in use more out of tradition than good evidence. Wikipedia’s publication of the test blots may unintentionally be the final nail in the coffin for Hermann Rorschach’s idea.
Though the Rorschach is the most famous psychological test in the world, it is little understood outside of psychology circles. The test, in the news this week and under much debate, is a series of 10 colored ink blots created nearly a century ago by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The ink blots are a projective test; patients are asked to interpret the patterns for a psychologist or psychiatrist. As a subjective test, there are no official right or wrong answers, but test-givers do have a list of what are called normed responses — the most common answers. The premise behind the test is that the answers provided by people who suffer from mental illness will be markedly different than the answers provided by normal people. A controversy erupted recently when Wikipedia posted the ink blots online, along with the “correct” answers to each. No big deal, right? Well, here’s the problem: The Rorschach blots (not to mention the “answers”) are supposed to be kept secret. Many psychologists were outraged, believing that having the information out there would make the test worthless, since test-takers could memorize the answers and “cheat.” Rorschach’s open secret In fact, the Rorschach blots have been publically available for more than 30 years; they were published in the 1975 book “The Nuremberg Mind,” available online for under $3. William Poundstone’s 1983 book “Big Secrets” not only shows all the Rorschach blots, but devotes a whole chapter to them, including discussing how to “cheat” — what answers to provide so that you don’t appear psychotic. (Here’s a hint: don’t say, “It looks like the mess I made this morning when Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.”)
...Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife. Validity problems The furor over Wikipedia’s posting of the Rorschach blots obscures a far more important issue. The real concern should not be whether people might be able to cheat on the test, but whether or not the Rorschach is valid in the first place. After all, if the test is worthless at diagnosing mental illness, assessing personality disorders, or predicting behavior, there is no point in “protecting” it. Scott Lilienfeld, an associate professor of psychology at Emory University and co-author of the 2003 book “What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?” is one of many psychologists who doubts the validity of the test. Lilienfeld and the other authors surveyed more than 50 years of research and studies on the scientific evidence for the Rorschach, concluding that it is “weak at best and nonexistent at worst.” Furthermore, Lilienfeld and colleagues point out, studies show that about half of the normal Rorschach test-takers will be labeled as having “distorted thinking.” This staggeringly high false-positive error rate (among many other problems) suggests that the Rorschach should be relegated to the pile of once-promising but now-discredited psychological tests. It seems that the test has remained in use more out of tradition than good evidence. Wikipedia’s publication of the test blots may unintentionally be the final nail in the coffin for Hermann Rorschach’s idea.
Damien Hirst Hirst is an English artist and art collected born in Bristol in 1965. He was taking over the art scene throughout the UK throughout the 90s, and is the most well known member of the Young British Artists group. He has made artwork for many exhibitions, but I will be focusing mainly on his work within the Schizophrenogenesis exhibition of his. This is relevant to my article and DPS as he has created many ‘spoof’ pharmaceutical labels, replacing the medicine name with ordinary food, such as Cornish Pasty. I worked out the pantones for the colours so I would be able to use his work as an influence more closely. The washed out yellows are usually 7499U or 607U. The blues are usually 7464U or 7457U. I also discovered that he used original pharmaceutical labels and traced over the original text. I couldn’t find the original name of the font, so I will be doing the same from his work for my headings and subheadings. I have catalogued a range of swatches to use within my own work. He also made several colourful prints of pills. These colours are a stark contrast to the traditional pharmaceutical labels. I would like to experiment with these vibrant colours, perhaps for the front cover of my magazine. This in itself would contrast the traditional, ink splatter feel on the inside. I couldn’t find an exact reason for this exhibition, as he wanted to leave the interpretation to the viewers. I personally think it was to make people think about how they’re taking medication – is it just like eating normal foods, especially with society’s controversial taboo topic of mental health and weight issues. All of which people are taking medication daily for.
By creating my own ink splatters and image tracing them in Illustrator, I placed them over my letters.
I then used the Pathfinder to crop the splatters that overlapped the outlines, and to keep them confined within the boundaries of the letters.
This was the original eect I was going for. But some of the best outcomes happened by accident. I wanted to group my selection and create a compound path to see what this would look like. The result is below.
By ungrouping my compound path I could select 3 letters at a time, and place them in a grade so they were equally spaced within the kerning of each line of text.
The text is transparent so I found I could experiment with images and colours behind this. I decided to go with the design to the right. This was made using the compound path, a black box, and using Pathfinder > Exclude. The following slide shows more experimental text and colours.
Though the Rorschach is the most famous psychological test in the world, it is little understood outside of psychology circles. The test, in the news this week and under much debate, is a series of 10 colored ink blots created nearly a century ago by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The ink blots are a projective test; patients are asked to interpret the patterns for a psychologist or psychiatrist. As a subjective test, there are no official right or wrong answers, but test-givers do have a list of what are called normed responses — the most common answers. The premise behind the test is that the answers provided by people who suffer from mental illness will be markedly different than the answers provided by normal people.
A controversy erupted recently when Wikipedia posted the ink blots online, along with the “correct” answers to each. No big deal, right? Well, here’s the problem: The Rorschach blots (not to mention the “answers”) are supposed to be kept secret. Many psychologists were outraged, believing that having the information out there would make the test worthless, since testtakers could memorize the answers and “cheat.” Rorschach’s Open Secret In fact, the Rorschach blots have been publically available for more than 30 years; they were published in the 1975 book “The Nuremberg Mind,” available online for under $3.
...Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.
William Poundstone’s 1983 book “Big Secrets” not only shows all the Rorschach blots, but devotes a whole chapter to them, including discussing how to “cheat” — what answers to provide so that you don’t appear psychotic. (Here’s a hint: don’t say, “It looks like the mess I made this morning when Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.”) So the Rorschach images themselves are hardly top secret, though never so easily available. Validity Problems The furor over Wikipedia’s posting of the Rorschach blots obscures a far more important issue. The real concern should not be whether people might be able to cheat on the test, but whether or not the Rorschach is valid in the first place. After all, if the test is worthless at diagnosing mental illness, assessing personality disorders, or
Illustration by April Williams
predicting behavior, there is no point in “protecting” it. Scott Lilienfeld, an associate professor of psychology at Emory University and coauthor of the 2003 book “What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?” is one of many psychologists who doubts the validity of the test. Lilienfeld and the other authors surveyed more than 50 years of research and studies on the scientific evidence for the Rorschach,
concluding that it is “weak at best and nonexistent at worst.” Furthermore, Lilienfeld and colleagues point out, studies show that about half of the normal Rorschach test-takers will be labeled as having “distorted thinking.” This staggeringly high false-positive error rate (among many other problems) suggests that the Rorschach should be relegated to the pile of once-promising but now-
discredited psychological tests. It seems that the test has remained in use more out of tradition than good evidence. Wikipedia’s publication of the test blots may unintentionally be the final nail in the coffin for Hermann Rorschach’s idea.
ch ha c ors the ’s lots ms R a e i l o ed ch b nt the ed t but gical rob p i t a p t ik ha rt a ng o ha y s t releg misi chol r W orsc impo dit t i e l s v y o e Va r o he R ore rn ple gg ld be e-pr d ps o o u r t e y e m s c u of ar c r p the n ite dl ou ef f on s rke sh of o cred Th sting s a al c ethe t on e a ha t of e dis l t m e e i h a r h r s s o p wr e p scu he te e ou nce. e w o che not t first l b swe le. e l o b r i T e b n ts. o ue. not le t t th mo evid f the or the s w e an peop s a r s s y e e h o t e h tl is uld e ab ethe id in s t in us ood tion nally or illn an t rmal en o l b m s l c h h f a g s io e a t a s re e h ut w is v le nt nt th y no se ined han blic tent offin g h d i e t t h e e I r t t b h t u m t, a . m ere d b in c th wo ess, s chac rup sted ith em ition ia’s p y un the idea r e s e i t diff vide n l w o d t a y s n il rs . tra kiped ts m ail i ach’ tes ntal ers dia p long ach Ro ce. pro v e n i h o e o e h s tr pe , a W t bl nal rsc pla if t g m nality ng n re’ on Wiki nline rs to i fi , l e c l t n i i h o ict oin tes the n Ro a os A en s o swe s , r l h r l e ft agn g pe pred o p be rman We chac A wh blot t” an i n ? n r d rs ht He at essi rs, o re is ink rrec te rig e Ro the s a e , o i e l n c h d a as ord r, th it. “c so at de m: T entio ose o s ” s i i , g a g v d ha y bi ble n m upp ny ed tin , a holog cobe otec No pro ot to re s . Ma utrag d l r t nfe psyc and k “p the ts (n rs”) a ecre re o the d e i l o i l t L or of rsity 3 bo he blo swe pt s ts we ving wou ince t o ny e Sc fess nive 200 ith t f ma the “an be k logis t ha here ss, s e U e pro ory f th ng w ne o ubts ld to ycho g tha out t rthle oriz o m o n m E thor Wro ” is o o do ienfe ps lievi tion st w me at.” e a d au hat’s ach? ts wh t. Lil be rm e te oul “ch ars t o h c re “W rsch logis e tes thors 0 ye inf ke t ers and c se Ro ycho of th r au an 5 es on ma t-tak wers n s e t lo ble ps idity othe re th tudi for tes ans op b s e l o g a ’ h va d the d m and s enc udin the ac avail ey ch h a c h h an veye rch evid oncl t and ors ically rs; t 5 rsc r R o 7 su resea ntific ch, c t bes R he publ 0 yea e 19 ind,” t ” , e t h of scie scha ak a orst. ac een an 3 in th rg M r $3. d f st l e r e i an es th Ro “w at w In ve b e th ed be nde ch gica i d s a h l e r m i t fe stud th t it ten ha mo blis ure or u ch olo le n s 3 r e e u s a f r i th nexi 98 ly fo re p he N line Ro sych is litt Lil out, of th 1 , e , n p it ’s th no we ok “T e on ore oint half stf st, ne ot o blots m l o gh mous orld, de o e te r t o n b u e s p ut te s b o i h la rth gue abo ach d as g.” nd rets” hach pter Th st fa he w outs s. T and eries avai u u F llea at e n h e Po Sec orsc cha sing h sc label hinki alsemo t in t ood circl eek s a s ated t o r s m e c l o R f w t w illia “Big the who discu tes derst logy this ate, i s cre ho al R ill be rted high ng s W l t k l t m a o n b u ych ews de blo y or rs w isto gly (amo oo s a tes ding wha that . n n b b n w d k n e h in ps he ho devo inclu t” — e so hotic ak ing “ gger rate ms) uc d in ago erma t s t m r e , a le c t v d It in der lor ntury ist H ha is sta erro prob bu them “che rovi psy ay, “ this o n c r r p e e e t u 10 c ia ve Th sitiv ther to w to s to pea n’t s ad ch cti m p r of arly a sych o n e o I j a e po ny o h sw ’t int: d ess Cru ith a ro to n p ne iss p ach. n . o d t a ma h a u d ’s a the m Cap og w re aske or a t. Sw rsch a o f y re d s s e ike hen my Ro lot s are erns iatri l H b ( ks g w ut tt ch re nt nk es loo rnin to g ”) e i patie he pa r psy , the ong g h a . o t r T t; e p y m w t t t o es m d m nife o h i ly to easil l k tes erpre logis ive t ht or rs d ed c o r a d t tte r e t h o int ycho bjec l rig t-giv call sc re ha er s u r b a o e i v ps a su ffic t tes t ar the e R ves a h ne h o a t u s l h g — A no s, b f w rs. So mse thou es are swer list o ons swe t the ret, e. n es t l c an ve a resp on a se ilab the ided a ha rmed mm d 3 av ov in eh rs pr from no st co b ise swe ffer mo m u n e pr he a ho s e t Th hat le w t is peop by
T THINK magazine
THINK THINK T Think THINK
magazine
MAGAZINE
M A G A Z I N E
M A G A Z I N E
£1.50
OFF THE WALL
OFF THE WALL
www.vans.com
My Advert At first I made an advert about visiting New Zealand with Kiwi Experience. My feedback revealed that people didn’t want a small, irrelevant ad placed to the side of my article, so I decided to create an advert for the back cover of my magazine. I felt the advert worked better as a small, side advert but not so much a full page advert. But in agreement with my peers, I also felt an advert within the article wouldn’t work either. So, I had to change my advert altogether. I decided to conduct a bit of research about adverts, as I wasn’t quite producing what I felt was a successful advert. This is shown below:
Now I had a better idea about magazine advert formatting, I decided to go with a different concept to better show this. After researching a few shoe advertisements I settled on designing an advert for Vans shoe company. As I consumer myself, I felt I could produce something a little more personal and creative. My research influenced me to make my illustrated shoe the main focus. I wanted a soft, neutral grey that would compliment a bright coloured background (much like the Heinz ketchup). Like all of the adverts above I subconsciously made the decision to position my logo and website information at the bottom of the page. I chose a type named Hogfish, which complemented the playful theme I was aiming for with the shoe illustration style, and bright orange background. There is no way this advert can’t be eye-catching, therefore fulfilling its purpose.
OFF THE WALL M A G A Z I N E
www.vans.com
T hink Magazine
£1.50
Though the Rorschach is the most famous psychological test in the world, it is little understood outside of psychology circles. The test, in the news this week and under much debate, is a series of 10 colored ink blots created nearly a century ago by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The ink blots are a projective test; patients are asked to interpret the patterns for a psychologist or psychiatrist. As a subjective test, there are no official right or wrong answers, but test-givers do have a list of what are called normed responses — the most common answers. The premise behind the test is that the answers provided by people who suffer from mental illness will be markedly different than the answers provided by normal people. A controversy erupted recently when Wikipedia posted the ink blots online, along with the “correct” answers to each. No big deal, right? Well, here’s the problem: The Rorschach blots (not to mention the “answers”) are supposed to be kept secret. Many psychologists were outraged, believing that having the information out there would make the test worthless, since test-takers could memorize the answers and “cheat.”
distorted thinking Rorschach’s Open Secret In fact, the Rorschach blots have been publically available for more than 30 years; they were published in the 1975 book “The Nuremberg Mind,” available online for under $3. William Poundstone’s 1983 book “Big Secrets” not only shows all the Rorschach blots, but devotes a whole chapter to them, including discussing how to “cheat” — what answers to provide so that you don’t appear psychotic. (Here’s a hint: don’t say, “It looks like the mess I made this morning when Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife.”) So the Rorschach images themselves are hardly top secret, though never so easily available.
...Capt. Crunch told me to gut my dog with a butter knife. Validity Problems The furor over Wikipedia’s posting of the Rorschach blots obscures a far more important issue. The real concern should not be whether people might be able to cheat on the test, but whether or not the Rorschach is valid in the first place. T hink Magazine
After all, if the test is worthless at diagnosing mental illness, assessing personality disorders, or predicting behavior, there is no point in “protecting” it. Scott Lilienfeld, an associate professor of psychology at Emory University and coauthor of the 2003 book “What’s Wrong with the Rorschach?” is one of many psychologists who doubts the validity of the test. Lilienfeld and the other authors surveyed more than 50 years of research and studies on the scientific evidence for the Rorschach, concluding that it is “weak at best and nonexistent at worst.” Furthermore, Lilienfeld and colleagues point out, studies show that about half of the normal Rorschach testtakers will be labeled as having “distorted thinking.” This staggeringly high falsepositive error rate (among many other problems) suggests that the Rorschach should be relegated to the pile of once-promising but now-discredited psychological tests. It seems that the test has remained in use more out of tradition than good evidence. Wikipedia’s publication of the test blots may unintentionally be the final nail in the coffin for Hermann Rorschach’s idea.
Q&A
What’s the most impressive thing you’ve ever made?
a silly thing about how to plant marijuana - but I never smoked it.
Bin it or mend it?
I mend things: I’ve just mended a small automaton that a friend I painted The Last Supper Where do your tools of mine, Keith Newstead, on the bedroom wall – it’s live? made and gave me years still there. I did a book They are in the back ago. I mended the wings about Leonardo in the room of the studio with on it, you turn a little 80s, and I wanted to some sculptures that I’ve handle and they flap up do three things – build made out an umbrella and down. His automated a flying machine, do an handle and some logs. models are brilliant. We anatomical drawing and paint The Last Supper. For I’ve become a polluter – I made one together called pollute by making too Mad God Universe, which the flying machine I used shows God rising out of a structure of bamboo and many things. an intestinal storm – I old nylon tents. I threw it off a flat roof but it stalled What’s your favourite bit designed it and he made it. It’s fantastic and you and caught on the clothes of kit? can see it online. line. A lovely old plane that my father used when he was Who is most likely to alive. He loved making change a lightbulb in things. When I was a kid your house? he built me a table for my Me; I’m good at changing train set: I could stand in the middle and change lightbulbs. I live with my the points and direct the wife Anna, my youngest Hornby trains round me. daughter Sadie and His big ambition was to her husband, and my build cars like Henry Ford grandsons, Oliver and but his father wanted Toby. him to be a surveyor. He eventually became When do you call in the a commercial traveller, professionals? selling ladies’ knickers. At the moment I’m looking What was the last thing for a decent roofer to fix a leak in the studio. I also you bought from Ikea? need a gardener too – I’m wondering … have I although I was gardening ever bought anything from correspondent of Rolling Ikea? I have just ordered a Stone years ago. I wrote squirrel scarer off Amazon because I’m sick to death of them pinching the nuts that I put out for the birds.
T hink Magazine
Evaluation Magazine/Designer Influences Craig Ward’s work with the smashing glass typography really influenced my type style for my article title. The black and white is a main factor, as this allows for the best looking contrast. The shattered glass effect influenced me to play around with negative space, which in turn made me look into ‘Pathfinder’ options to divide the text with ink, and merge them so it all becomes one object. Alex Trochut was an initial influence of mine thanks to his work with liquids such as ketchup, paints and gels. This naturally lent itself to using think ink for my first DPS title. Although I didn’t end up going with this idea, it was an important part of developing my DPS and style. If I had continued with the old-fashioned style, I would have kept the ink title. But as I decided to go for a sleeker, cleaner feel for the Rorschach article this type did not fit well. It did however influence my second DSP about Ralph Steadman, as his work is all created using ink. Ralph Steadman was a major influence for my illustration style in my original Rorschach DPS. I set out to find an ink illustration artist, and after much searching I found Steadman’s elaborate, eccentric pieces and knew he would be an influence. He was so much of an influence I decided to create an interview DPS about him and his work. His messy, almost abstract, style portrayed an interesting, inquisitive feel about his work. There was a slightly manic, scary feel to it which reflected well with the elements discussed within the Rorschach DPS. Although this style didn’t quite suit my modern, sleek revamp I did try to use it as a front cover. Ultimately, I went with the cut-up style image and typographic piece which I feel fit the modern style whilst still retaining a rustic quality. Brand Positioning, Layout Design, Type, and Colours I wanted to keep my brand colours black and white, so the articles and front covers would be the most enticing element of my magazine. I used a sans-serif typeface for ‘Think’ as this reflected the modern style I was going for. The ‘Magazine’ is written in a serif typeface as this portrays a traditional, reliable feel as researched in my typography report. When creating my front cover logo typography I altered the kerning of magazine to fit the width of ‘Think’ above it. I feel this compacts the logo, uniting the two fonts and words together, whilst allowing it to feel spacious and not overcrowded. This means that the viewer can easily read what the magazine in, but it is ultimately the image cover that would draw them in. Meanwhile, loyal customers would be able to recognise it by the bold type. My main logo is placed at the top of the page within the top row of 3 in my layout grid of my front cover. I also feature a simple, small version of my logo on pages as part of the folio at the bottom of the page alongside the magazine name, beside the page numbers. This allows my brand to be consistent and relevant throughout the magazine. This idea was influenced by Empire Magazine, except mine is featured in the centre of the bottom of the page. Part of my brand identity is using the 3 column grid layout. Although this is quite common, it is common for a reason. It makes it much easier and clearer to read article text, whilst allowing clear and proportionate room for images, adverts and folios. By altering the
kerning within my Rorschach text title, which also acts like an image on the whole of page 2, it allowed me to keep each letter confined within my 3 column layout. Using inverted ink splatters to distort each letter it clearly reflects the ‘ink’ theme of the article, which is all about the inkblot psychology test. The letters are not clearly readable as some points of the letters where the stems meet an apex are missing. I included many traditional layout design components within my work; Beginning with page numbers and folios. Beginning with my page numbers, I wanted them to be more interesting than the generic, small numbers in a corner. I wanted my page numbers to reflect the bold statement that everything on each page is worth reading - almost like each page is a stand-alone feature piece, including my typographic, title page 2. I was heavily influenced by ‘Fiera’, a publication layout I analysed earlier on. This featured a 3 column layout. The vertical type of the title alongside the left external margin intrigued me and motivated me to allow some unconventional layout devices, such as the page numbers I use. The use leaving a column blank within the publication seemed a bit excessive for an informative magazine, but I used the idea of space and brought that into my design. In my Ralph Steadman Q&A article I used the first column of both pages to display his artwork. Imagery After I discarded my Steadman-style illustration from my DPS I tried to use it as a front cover image. Although I really liked the illustration style, it didn’t seem to have the eye-catching effect that I was after. I was wondering if this was down to the lack of colour. After adding some colour to my logo, it was clear that it was the imagery that needed colour. I played with adding colour to certain elements of the image, such as the doctor’s jacket, but this seemed to come across more tacky than the sleek, intriguing style I was aiming for. So I decided I needed to change my front cover image. I wanted my new image to pack an inquisitive impact on the viewer. I wanted it to be just difficult enough to read what it is that the viewer has to read it up close. But I also wanted it to be clear enough in an interesting way that would make the viewer want to read what’s inside and buy it. Feedback Based on my feedback, I am glad I decided on the front cover I did rather than my first illustration. It had the desired impact of enticing the viewer to want to see what it is about, as well as reflecting article elements well. Millicent’s suggestion of creating a full page advert on the back would be beneficial to me, as there would be a larger proportion of blank space to experiment with on the final DPS. I could then work on a heading page similar to that of the first DPS which would unite my brand and whole magazine as a whole. Lisa suggested it would allow room for imagery, and for my article it would be beneficial to include an image of Ralph Steadman as it is a Q&A about the illustrator/designer. But there is then a risk of overcompensating in imagery rather than text content - this would be something I need to experiment with. For these reasons, I would like to develop my advert, or perhaps change it completely to suit a typical advert found on the back of magazines. I would also need to develop the Ralph Steadman DPS further to unite all of the pages as a brand.
Post-feedback final changes I am glad I took the feedback on board, as the changes I have made really bring the magazine together as a whole. I personally this the advert conforms to realistic adverts like the ones I researched. This is because an advert’s purpose is to catch the viewer’s attention. My favourite advert being the bottle of tomato ketchup depicted as a sliced up tomato, with a very simple tagline. Although it doesn’t immediately make you want to go out and buy ketchup, the subliminal context is there for when you’re next at the shops. This advert was my main inspiration, followed by Nike’s “The sneaker makes the man”, hence why I created a shoe advert. The Ralph Steadman DPS is much better for the changes I made, and the coloured title page brings a bit of life to the pages. I did originally create both DPSs in black and white, but I thought it needed to some colour to brighten it up and interest the viewer. Overall, I am really happy with how the whole magazine came together. I feel my brand is clear, sleek and professional, as well interesting, inspiring and intriguing.