A Comparion of 2 Websites

As a task I have looked at websites and the way in which they present themselves so to draw their attention in. This linked mainly to another module I did alongside this one called Digital Media where I had to create a website based on my interest. This though made me think of how much information you have to put on the main page without using too much information or text. Instead making it easy on the eye but draw the viewer into what they see. From this I looked at this resource so to give me inspiration for my own and for suggestions of many types from the suggested best but for which stuck out to me. Here I was shown a range of websites but to me these two stuck out more…

This website is based on a timescale of the Iraq war and key events that happened in it.

While this website is based on the use of music and a corporate company bringing all the pieces together to support musicians.

These though base their main images on an experimental expression. In the first you are drawn in on the large amount of smoke although until you look further from the image you do not realise it is based on the war. While in the second image it is more of a triangle, like the corner of a cd case with a circular piece next to it representing a cd. Inside the triangle is a macro effect of leaves representing the season it is for. So in both of these you are drawn into the close up, sort of macro piece before being shown the full picture. However, I feel it works better in the Iraq war option as the colours are familiar to that of a map of timeline as what the website is about. On top of the area being based on a high amount of sand which also goes with the colour. Where as in the music website, you don’t at first know what the website is about until you look into it of check their site out more.
On top of this to emphasize on the areas the images are built through a construction of different pieces being built together this is made to be more smooth through the use of computers in the music site. Giving more of a clean cut effect. While in the Iraq War option it is more rough cut in showing it’s layers, giving an impression of rough depths the people are going through and a more personal hand made touch to the piece.

 

Advertisements

A Useful Resource

During my video tasks I was asked to use an archive site for footage. This led me onto thinking about what other pieces I could use in my video such as sound effects. So when I started looking I focused on what was unusual, not giving me much of hit I looked at experimental videos and was led to suggestions from a web page of useful items to include in imagery such as blood, money, bullets etc. Although it is not much help to my video during this module it is a useful resource for anyone who will need things like it or for any future videos I wish to create. Where then I can include these features into my work plus they resemble the pieces as well as have a experimental outlook to them.

Also of use could be the site that led me to them. A place of which holds suggestion so to find pieces that can help build on your video and knowledge of creating videos. As they say “In this post, we’ve rounded up the 20 of the best FREE stock video & B-Roll websites!”. It’s a way of making your imagery more interesting with possibilities you may not be able to try before hand due to not having the items for it available or wanting to have the items available.

Another good part on top of all this though is that they are free to use, so no worries about having to pay out for anything.

As someone looking to be a part of the art industry for a career, I feel the way in which the work is shown so to make a living is an important issue.

Raised from the lecture based on the cog theory. Where a law suit was bought against Honda based on them copying an idea… bought about the point of no one owns an idea but only the outcome of which they create. This brings this on to the Creative Commons licence nowadays where people who use this licence allow for their work to be shared for use. Allowing for an image to be part of advertising or for someone to take an image/images and make it their own so long as the original artist gets royalties and recognition from it. This though reminded me of an “artist” that I was introduced to before, known as Mr Brainwash. A guy who uses the art especially of Andy Warhol and then turns it into his own by ways such as throwing paint over the image or placing two images together as with the Marilyn Monroe and Marily Manson (Marilyn Monroe, being a common theme that he has changed into many) otherwise the image of The Beetles with Neckerchief’s round their necks.

.

This as a response mainly resembled the idea of lazy business to those who I watched it with and I recall one person being annoyed based on the grounds of this guy was making money from someone else’s work and passing it off as his own through minor adjustment. Although this is not always the case and Warhol is more famously known. The point is does that then make it easier for others for chancers to then become known create a career through pieces that others have created and where does that leave the artist as such. As in this case Warhol had an idea for an image, Mr Brainwash thought of collaging or painting o top of the image. They both got final outcomes, the difference was the idea but would Mr Brainwash’s idea really be classed as his own or a way of taking advantage of established artists. This also led me onto the news articles I had seen where chains of stores such as Mark’s and Spencer had used designs either from their own choice or due to suppliers which had taken the work of an artist without their permission. This had led to a court case also but was regular happening as I recall one of a girl printing friends images on to clothing pieces for a college final only to years later find her identical design with hers and her friends images on t-shirts in large branded companies shops also. This makes me question what is the difference between the two as Mr Brainwash has become known from people’s work such as Warhol because you can see that it a famous Warhol piece while these people are fighting for their design that they make because they are being used without their permission or acknowledgement.

Is this something we have to worry about as up and coming artists that while we learn and strive to make a living out of artistic ability, someone is looking to steal the work as such so to make a quick buck or to pass off as their own and how much is copied, influenced etc. and how much is an original idea?