DT78 - MemberI still don't get the garmin logo
No you must understand it - its a universal language that everyone bar me understands and even I am lying when I claim not to - according to some on here
[img] 
[/img]
pjbarton - Member
I still don't get the garmin logo
me neither. apparently triangles are "clever"
POSTED 7 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST
It is a pointer pointing north above the letterform 'N' for a company selling satnav equipment, not just a triangle. Subtly clever I thought.
Then we had 1,350 posts of complete bollocks to follow.
it's just a nice, clear, simple well thought out bit of design. Big WOW.
apparently there is lots of meaning there that everyone but me gets - the font used has meaning, the colours used have meaning, the little triangle has meaning and all these are seen by everyone. all this stuff is a universal inherent attributes and everyone gets the meaning
Or conversely - it only means anything to the people who know the code
There's still life in the old fella yet. 😀
Is that it? I'be been sat here turning my laptop upside down looking for some hidden message...
Course there is!
Good evening, Mr Jeremy. Ahem...
meaning, significance, symbolism. Got that general theme? don't get hung up on picking holes in the words and dictionary definitions.
colours, forms, words, elicit intellectual, emotional and physiological responses in people. When a lot of people respond in the same way, and people start to understand these patterns in responses, they can use them in in their communication order to elicit the responses they want in others.
Once they've been used often enough, they take on a meaning/significance/symbolism in line with the reactions they tend to elicit.
Edited for english usage. I have learnt (been reminded of) something from Jeremy in this thread!
🙂
Its far from the universal and obvious that was claimed.
Elicit not illicit might give you more meaning 🙂
colours, forms, words, illicit intellectual, emotional and physiological responses in people. When a lot of people respond in the same way, and people start to understand these patterns in responses, they can use them in in their communication order to illicit the responses they want in others.
bolleux.. says who..?
prove it
Apparently flogging a dead horse will bring it back to life. 🙄
Brand is just a name and what you associate with the name.
Marketing is bringing the product to the attention of those who might want to buy it and developing an image for the brand (see above).
Selling is full of lying cheating c***s!
ps. colours work on the subconscious. 🙄
this is where everyone should switch on the xbox and get multi-playering Modern warfare 2, whilst shouting design philosophy rhetoric into their headset microphones.
"it is harder to design a first rate chair than to paint a second rate painting-and much more useful DIIEE YOU SLAAAGGGS!!!.."
Double post. 😳
This thread is seriously screwing the STW servers.
It was claimed that colours (fonts, shapes etc) elicited responses in people.
You said they did not elicit a response in you.
or were you being difficult about the word "meaning" and choosing a narrow definition that meant you could divert the argument away from a point you'd have to concede?
bolleux.. says who..?
!!!
says bloody loads of people, and has been proved countless times in scientific studies.
Do you not "get" art either? When you paint your house, do you buy whichever paint is the cheapest, regardless of colour?
No ned - it was claimed far more than that and that additional meaning was universal and inherent. Page 4 and 5 IIRC
Whereas I said it was a construct known only to some. The idea that the same word in a different font or colour has different meaning that is universal and inherent is BS You can see this by peoples reactions. a significant number of us do not react to this so it is not universal and inherent.
and how on earth did this get started again?
has no one written the script that limits the number of posts one can make on a thread?.
I do get art ned.. quite instinctively these days I like to think.. it's my profession so I feel I ought to..
I just don't get design.. (well.. more specifically the type being discussed here) It's like the evil capitalist twin of art and should be outlawed or at the very least ridiculed until it feels silly enough about itself to stop being so naughty and do something more useful instead...
and I'm not daft.. I buy whatever paint my other half tells me to..
If I chose the paint myself I can quite confidently assure you that it wouldn't fit in with any norms imposed by the science of design studies..
says bloody loads of people, and has been proved countless times in scientific studies.
yes loads claimed this- despite asking I saw no references to the studies. I did offer to post up links form psychics and astrologers proving they worked though.
Tj you are like my new neighbour in the flat upstairs. Once engaged in conversation he just goes on and on, and won't stop until you go "BYE, gotta do stuff...(close door)"
The idea that the same word in a different font or colour has different meaning that is universal and inherent is BS
Oh, lordy, and you want to convince him otherwise. Good f*****g luck!
This is all quite amusing in a shaking head (and sometimes fists) kind of way and for the most part I've been pleased with myself for not getting too drawn in. There have been many lows but some awesome highs. Jackthedog's summary of events was probably the single funniest thing I've ever read on STW. Bravo to him. That he contributed the most sensible posts on here too wins him a medal. Come back Jack, you are my new forum hero 😀
As a 'believer' I wouldn't say it was universal - but I think that it means something to more than just people who work in design, those 'in on the code'. Nor would I say it was inherent. Again, I think, that one could consider it conditioning. It'd be interesting to see a survey of a valid cross section of society, using something along the lines of M_F's funeral director example. I'd be genuinely interested in that one.The idea that the same word in a different font or colour has different meaning that is universal and inherent is BS
Off to google scholar
Yunki, so art is your job, you "instinctively" react to form and colour, and you don't beleive that there are common themes of reaction in people to form and colour?
If there aren't common themes of people's reactions to form and colour, what the hell have artists been up to since forever? They might as well have been shouting at the moon.
Thanks stilltortoise. I had almost lost the will to live 34 pages ago but couldn't resist a look at the last page - then had to go back and look for Jackthedogs post.
Well worth it <doffs cap and applauds jtd>
2 of them worth finding Woody.
ned.. I'm mostly taking the micky and hardly half interested..
It's always amusing to see the blank looks and hostility in adult learning classes when the group is presented with the concept of visual language..
which kind of lends weight in my mind to the idea that the code is indeed a construct rather than a universal truth.. I would certainly be sad if I found myself having to apply learnt scientific process to convey meaning in my work..
Incidentally Lucien Freud has apparently just died of boredom after looking at this thread.. 😯
(...rewind) deffo Jack The Dog FTW. good work 😆
If there aren't common themes of people's reactions to form and colour, what the hell have artists been up to since forever?
Groundbreaking work
Seriously how does that fit in with your view?
Mebbe, but **** is a rude word. A complete construct, but as universal a truth as you're likely to get (it's the c word, btw).
Also half interested, just blowing on the embers to see if I can get it going again. Off to brush my teeth now.
Ok. I'm taking a risk in having this thrown back at me by more knowledgable types, but I think this adds something to the debate... 🙂
A very brief search with 'graphic psychology' on google scholar led me through to this;
[url= http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews//32/font.asp ]A Comparison of Popular Online Fonts: Which is Best and When?[/url] It's not from a proper journal or owt, nor is it peer reviewed, but it's a start...
highlights;
[img] 
[/img]
Figure 3. Perceived as having personality (1 = "Not at all" and 6 = "Completely").
[img] 
[/img]
Figure 6. Perceived as being business-like (1 = "Not at all" and 6 = "Completely").
And lifted straight from the the conclusions:
Applying this information can help establish the proper mood of a particular site. For example, fonts that are perceived as being business-like and elegant may be more effective for a site such as an online bank. Conversely, fonts perceived as being youthful and fun, along with having personality, may be more effective for sites directed at children, such as an online toy store.
I'd be interested in your interpretations of this article.
That Bradley's a *@#* and no mistake. loads of personality, but shi* at business. I told Alan Sugar but he wouldn't listen.
...in a sec.
Seriously how does that fit in with your view?
That people have common reactions to form and colour, and that artists use these to convey messages and feelings to their audience, and elicit emotional, intellectual and physiological responses
In the same way that advertisers and designers do. (not comparing merit btw)
If you're saying that advertisers and designers can't do that with form and colour, you're saying artists can't either.
[img] 
[/img]
If you're saying that advertisers and designers can't do that with form and colour, you're saying artists can't either.
i am not i am merely saying that no matter how good it is it , alone, wont make me buy their product/s.
For example I have a garmin and did not know what the logo looked like. I got it because it was cheap of here.
I prefer SRAM gears to Shimano and I am pretty sure i can picture both logos and neither is inspiring tbh and neither is the reason for my choice.
Militant_biker
The only person to actually produce some evidence.
there are significant major flaws in the methodology which will lead to false positives and its s very small sample. interensting all the same
so colour does have meaning and so it can be an influence in certain marginal circumstances, done to death already.
To say that in your entire life, you (and TJ) have [u]never[/u] been nudged one way or another on a marginal decision over some inconsequential purchase due to some of these influences is incredible.
Bloody hell!2 of them worth finding Woody.
*goes off to trawl through pages
ned - neither of us have said that. throughout this thread people keep taking qualified statements and turning them into absolutes
I prefer SRAM gears to Shimano and I am pretty sure i can picture both logos and neither is inspiring tbh and neither is the reason for my choice
So, someone is doing their job then. 😉
this'll never make 2000 posts.. 🙁
quick - slaughter another sacred cow!
[img] 
[/img]
Well, you need to be clearer in your communication then, TJ!
This thread is the length it is because pretty much everybody has read your words and understood you were making absolute statements that couldn't be true.
You've not done a great job of allaying that!
Actually, you've done a fantastic job of doing the opposite!
Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 2 (2002), pp. 93-106All Dressed Up With Something to Say: Effects of Typeface Semantic Associations on Brand Perceptions and Consumer Memory
That's my insomnia sorted... 🙂
