Art and Visual Perception: Google Chrome Logo - Term Paper Example

Art and Visual Perception: Google Chrome Logo Introduction As design student, for this paper I had to take a logo, that is, the current identifying symbol of a current company, business, or organization, large or small, and I have got Google Chrome logo. According to the conditions of the paper, it must have been logo, not a logotype, symbol must be recognized independent of the logotype, and ultimately symbol/logo must have been graphic and geometrically-based. Therefore, based on Rudolf Arnheim’s authoritative book ‘Art and Visual Perception’ we would have four main chapters within the current term paper. The first chapter will be focused on Visual perception of the Google Chrome logo; second one would be dedicated to the symbolical meaning of the Google Chrome logo; third one is on stages of development of the logo presented an overview of how it managed to go through changes; fourth part is a conclusive one, where some overall implications and key moments of the whole research on visual perception of the Google Chrome logo will be gathered in order to underline the most crucial points for revising them ‘in a better shape.’ Obviously, all the project was built up on the categories of visual perception of Rudolf Arnheim, therefore, if sometimes some references would be broken or absent, do not be bothered or distressed with all that. Let these necessary references be broken on behalf of intensity of discourse. Also, I will attach a concept page with the logo, as well as sometimes our suggestions would be supported/illustrated by this additional page of the term paper. From the other perspective, except Rudolf Arnheim, there are some powerful sources for referencing, for example, ARAS, Cirlot, Cooper, Luingman, and Jung. Google Chrome Logo: Visual Perception In the current chapter we will make a ‘trough statement using element’ and ‘laws of visual perception’ (i.e. Gestalt Theory) relating to the logo/symbol of the Google Chrome; additionally, the aforesaid statement can be aided by using visual ‘to show aspects of at least 5 of the 10 Arnheim’s elements which are dominated in this logo.’ Similarly, we will use the terms of Arnheim’s theory and concepts of visual perception; we will describe as many aspects of the individual elements of visual perception as possible, along with two of the laws of Visual Organization (in relation to the logo). Then, no to be immersed nor into ‘symbolism’ of the second part of the term paper no into a ‘company career’ of the logo, let us count the most evident traits within it, as they are presented steadily in the additional page: ‘the circle,’ ‘power of center,’ ‘eyeball,’ ‘rotate movement,’ ‘number three’ (divided three), and active/pure colors like red, yellow, blue, green, and white. From the other perspective, let us to get involved into Arnheim’s conception in order to combine these findings in the end of the chapter for synthesis. Accordingly, there are some items or visual categories in his ‘visual organization’ of all images, they are: ‘balance’ (‘symmetry,’ ‘asymmetry,’ ‘tension,’ ‘direction,’ ‘power of center,’ ‘counterbalance’); ‘shape’ (‘law of simplicity,’ ‘leveling and sharpening,’ ‘law of proximity,’ ‘boundaries and edge’); ‘form’ (‘versus shape,’ ‘law of constancy,’ ‘flat/2D,’ ‘ways of show shape,’ ‘law of closure,’ ‘abstraction’); ‘growth’ (‘developmental stage,’ ‘motor activity,’ ‘the circle,’ ‘law of differentiation’); ‘space’ (‘3 dimensionally figure/ground,’ ‘convergence/divergence,’ ‘obliqueness,’ ‘law of continuity,’ ‘gradients’); ‘light’ (‘brightness,’ ‘reflectance,’ ‘glow,’ ‘illumination,’ ‘shadows,’ ‘contrast’); ‘color’ (‘fundamental primaries,’ ‘constancy,’ ‘harmony,’ ‘color wheel,’ ‘hue,’ ‘brightness,’ ‘middle mixes,’ ‘saturation’); ‘movement’ (‘simultaneous,’ ‘sequential,’ ‘creating movement: direction, repetition, speed,’ ‘visual path’); ‘dynamic’ (‘tension,’ ‘visual tension,’ ‘obliqueness,’ ‘directed tension’); ‘expression’ (‘physiognomy,’ ‘symbolism,’ ‘structure,’ ‘visual form,’ ‘anthropomorphism,’ ‘gestalt’). Afterwards, we will discuss two of Arnheim’s laws, ‘law of simplicity’ and ‘law of constancy.’ Thus, we will go steadily in our analysis, from one category to the next. Firstly, ‘balance.’ The logo is particularly well-balanced: three parts of different colors (red, green, and yellow) encircled another one, blue, small circle in a white frame. Its ‘symmetry’ lies in a geometrical balance of circles and rhythmical order of active colors within a ‘rotate (but compositional) movement.’ ‘Asymmetry’ of the logo is determined by a disharmony between three ‘pieces’ (in a geometrical sense) and ‘rotated’ circle. ‘Tension’ presented here is due to ‘power of center,’ ‘counterbalanced’ with a means of rotated ‘direction’ of the circle. Secondly, ‘shape’ of the circle embodied the ‘law of simplicity,’ ‘leveling and sharpening’ by the outer emptiness almost without any other ‘boundaries and edge’ except its own power of ‘rotate movement;’ ‘law of proximity’ in this composition was not identified. Thirdly, ‘form.’ Going against ‘shape’ in Arnheim’s conception, encircled composition with a rotate movement presented not only ‘law of simplicity’ but also ‘law of constancy’ of the eternal movement of two rotated circles, inner and outer ones; supposedly, in this 2D ‘ways of show shape’ and ‘law of closure’ must be connected in both meanings, geometrical and color, because according to ‘law of closure’ active colors are represented in separated and ‘non-mixed’ positions and relations, in order to be more influential onto the reader of the visual message. Fourthly, there is ‘growth.’ Of course, there is ‘motor activity’ of the circle on its ‘developmental stage’ (geometrical composition), coloristic composition of which has been built up accordingly to the ‘law of differentiation’ (of colors: red, green, and yellow outside blue circle in a white frame). Fifthly, ‘space’ (as one of the most vital categories of ‘visual perception’ and ‘visual organization’ of psycho-emotional space/time). Thus, the logo contains two elements from this category, ‘convergence/divergence’ and ‘gradients’ framed by ‘law of continuity.’ Exactly, our ‘color wheel’ could be regarded as a manifestation of ‘law of continuity,’ with all ‘gradients’ of active colors and ‘convergence’ between them in a color sense and ‘divergence’ in a geometrical one – when ‘three pieces’ of ‘wrong’ shape are in the same time inside one circle, the big one, and outside another, the small one. Sixthly, (seventhly, eighthly, ninthly, tenthly), there are ‘light;’ ‘color;’ ‘movement;’ ‘dynamic;’ and ‘expression’ as specific categories of Arnheim’s visual discourse. Accordingly, ‘light’ of the logo is mostly ‘contrast’ and full of ‘brightness,’ without ‘shadows,’ along with dispersed ‘illumination.’ Furthermore, ‘color’ is made of ‘fundamental primaries’ (red, green, and yellow, with additional ones – blue and white) which are full of unpredictable ‘brightness’ – in order to conduct the ‘color wheel’ of geometrical and color ‘harmony’ of simple but differentiated ‘constancy’ of rotate movement. Moreover, ‘movement’ of the logo is partly ‘simultaneous’ (constant, simple, and rotate movement of the circle) and partly ‘sequential’ (color segments). Finally, on ‘dynamic’ and ‘expression’ of the logo: obviously, there is a ‘visual tension’ of the directed parts within the circle movement of constancy combined with ‘directed tension’ of the whole composition; as for ‘expression,’ ‘physiognomy’ is a quality of image’s ‘anthropomorphism,’ and ‘symbolical structures’ of different ‘visual forms’ are made of ‘gestalts’ as unique but nuclear items. About these ‘symbolical structures,’ ‘visual forms,’ and ‘gestalts’ as unique but strongly ‘nuclear’ items we will have a discussion in the next chapter dedicated to Symbolic Meaning. However, before this, let us discover who are they, ‘law of simplicity’ and ‘law of constancy.’ Thus, ‘law of simplicity,’ according to Rudolf Arheim’s ‘Art and Visual Perception’ (p. 112-114, 124), is a tendency of visual communicator to reduce the quantity of visual information in order to increase and accumulate the qualitative and powerful impact on the readers’ of the particular message: in short, ‘the less information you use the more it influences.’ Unlikely to the aforesaid law, ‘law of constancy’ is based on ‘law of simplicity,’ because in visual arts ‘constancy’ could be seen as being like an outcome from ‘simplicity:’ ‘more simple you are (in terms of visual information and images used), then, more ‘constant’ you are’ (without any wasted time and space both yours and your readers). For example, as for the logo, these laws mean: the less additional elements it have the better it is (and our logo is completely without such ‘wasted’ elements of visual time and space); the more laconic the object is the more constant and influential it is (therefore, Google Chrome logo must be treated as very powerful and highly influential, being constructed of all necessary elements with highly evaluated motivation of each visual part/object/element within the overall composition). Google Chrome Logo: Symbolic Meaning In the current sub-chapter dedicated to symbolic meaning of the logo we will discuss, both ‘cross-culturally’ and ‘archetypal,’ the individual graphic/geometric components in order to explain why this particular symbolic meaning is significant to the company; in other words, logo will be related directly to the company’s identity, brand, mission, and product. So, let us try to explain symbolical meanings of elements within the logo. Firstly, Circle (Shape). According to Luingman (p. 96-98), one of the most ancient and contradicted symbols throughout humans’ history; ‘circle’ as a shape could be connected with an idea of permanent movement without stops, movement that is eternal (also, Cirlot, p. 112-117). Secondly, as it appears in the logo, Eyeball can be presented as a ‘divine eye.’ (Jung, p. 135-138) Eyeball is a sign of godlike activity, which is intended, motivated/powerful, and eternal (also, Cooper, p. 127). Thirdly, Power of Center (Balance). As it was stated previously, Eyeball can be regarded as being ‘power of center’ or ‘center of power’ in the given circle. It means that one of the immortal and immaterial substances (powerful divinity) drives the circle and rotates the whole movement of the visual composition. Also, this ‘center of power’ within the circle is responsible for the balance of asymmetrical elements (compare ‘circle’ elements with three ‘colorful’ parts geometrically). Fourthly, Rotate movement (Movement). While in the circle, ‘rotate movement’ is determined by the eternal movement of the circle, which contains at least three ‘colorful’ elements (‘number three’ of the additional page; red, green, and yellow) – for the balance of symmetry and asymmetry within the whole composition (ARAS, p. 81-85). Afterwards, we would force a thesis if these symbolical meanings are present in the current company’s identity, and to what extent; in other words, we must define a correlation between symbolic meanings of some relevant elements within the composition of the logo and company’s mission, identity, and products. Accordingly, there are three big moments due to an identity and mission of the Google Chrome: initially, circle symbolizes global presence of the company, as well as digital network for which this browser was initiated; furthermore, ‘colorful’ movement of the circle is eternal and ‘brightly’ aggressive, as a monopolist on market; ultimately, expanded character of this monopoly is supported by two circles, with one inside the other, what means total expansion on market. From the other perspective, it is not only expansion of the Google Chrome and Google on digital market, but it is also a belief in progress of humanity, technology, and democracy on the globe (what was mentioned also by Google’s creative designer, Steve Rura, who stated that ‘a simpler icon embodies the Chrome spirit – to make the web quicker, lighter, and easier for all’). Google Chrome Logo: Stages of Development In the current sub-chapter dedicated to an overview for the stages of development of the logo, we will put an emphasis on questions like: how was this logo conceived, and what process has been done to the logo going from original concept to its current form. Thus, it is well-known (from the internet sources) that ‘in March 2011, Google introduced a new simplified logo to replace the previous 3D logo that had been used since the project’s inception.’ So, we know that before 2D logo, created in 2011, there was 3D logo. Except this information, nothing is known about how was the logo conceived, and what process has been done by the researches’ from original concept to the current form. Conclusion As for the conclusion, we must bring together the information that was gathered above, along with a concluding statement which contains at least three parts: first, according to visual analysis that was provided across the term paper, is the company successful in communicating its identity (thus, its product) to its audience; then, does the logo have a deeper (than ‘a sign’) in-built meaning, making it ‘archetypal;’ third, it is necessary to give some statements on how Rudolf Arnheim ideas, symbolic observations, and company identity could be connected properly in term of the given paper. Thus, it can be stated that the Google Chrome logo (please, see the additional page) is obviously one of the most successful visual ‘identity’ in the international market today, due to a successful coherence between its inward ‘company’ career and functional implementation of the most relevant Rudolf Arnheim’s ‘visual perception’ and ‘visual organization’ categories concerning the logo – based on a solid ground of symbolism: for example, ‘power of center,’ ‘the circle,’ ‘rotate movement,’ as well as numerological principle of ‘divided three,’ anthropomorphist ‘eyeball,’ and colorful co-union of red, yellow, green, blue, white. Therefore, in the light of these three chapters, dedicated to ‘visual perception,’ ‘symbolic’ meaning, and company ‘career,’ not only some interesting and hidden (deeply built-in) meanings were exemplified thoroughly, but also the whole conception of ‘visual perception’ of Rudolf Arnheim obtains the ‘other life’ being applied to the Google Chrome logo. Again, first chapter found out how it is possible to describe key facts of visual perception of the logo; second one answered a question on deeply built-in symbolism of the logo; third one was sufficient enough to connect the company ‘career’ of the logo the previously written ‘histories’ concerning the case. Furthermore, we must point out on ‘how do you see its identity today:’ firstly, it is predominantly a ‘circle’ (‘eternal’ signification) divided into three parts (active colors of the ‘rotate movement’), along with ‘eyeball’ symbolism/anthropomorphism. In fact, discovered identity is quite similar to Steve Ruhr, creative designer from Google, own phrase that in the logo ‘there embodied a spirit of Chrome – to make the Network faster, easier, and more simple for everybody;’ nevertheless, there are also some hidden connotations from perspective of ‘visual perception:’ pretence for monopoly on market – ‘eternal’ (‘the circle’), bright (colors), active (‘rotated movement’), and ‘rotated’ one (‘eyeball’ metaphor in terms of anthropomorphism). Works Cited ARAS. ‘The Book of Symbols: Reflections on Archetypal Images.’ Taschen Book, 2010. Cooper, Jacques Carl. ‘An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Traditional symbols.’ New York, 2005. Cirlot, Andre. ‘A Dictionary of Symbols.’ Paris, 2009. Liungman, Carl Gustav. ‘Dictionary of Symbols.’ New York, 1988. Jung, Carl Gustav. ‘Man and His Symbols.’ London, 1968. Read More