Thoughts on experimenting

So I am still kind of deciding on what direction to go in for experimenting with typography. I like the idea of mirror images such as somehow splitting the angle on a letterform to create a new one using a mirror. The idea of using the mirroring of kaleidoscopes would also be an interesting concept but I would still need to figure out exactly how to do that? I also think the use of transparencies and overlays could be a direction to study. The splitting of letterforms using lighter line weights is also visually pleasing. As you can see I am very undecided of where I am going with this but I have shown some inspiration photos of where I may be heading.

Bike progress... !

This is our first try, and revision on the instructions for changing a tire. We now need to focus on not making this so much step one two three, ect. But more in stages so the whole step idea is not overdone. Also we are trying to eliminate so things are not so wordy.

We also took 92 pictures of the bike but here is 1 :)

Some information graphs I enjoyed!

This images are a collection of graphs I found looking through the internet. I enjoy most of these for the clarity and simplicity of the graphs. If some have more information to look through, they are displayed in an easy way to navigate.

type readings

what did you think of these readings?

The bil'ak reading on type as an experiment I would have to say is a little controversial. The idea that you must be experimenting for a reason I am not sure I would agree with. I feel sometimes if you are just "messing" around and not really focusing on why you are doing something but more on how something looks, it sometimes turns out better. Even then you can usually come up with why you did this, or a process. Everything we do has a process whether it be completely random, or have some scientific experiment to go along with it. I feel we always do something for a reason, even if that reason is subconscious. So I feel this reading had some good points and some I could argue.

On the Triggs reading, I really liked the idea of how what was considered in the past as an experiment may be old news to our contemporary thought on what is an experiment. We sometimes look at older expressive typography and think ya, that is a little experimental but I have seen crazier. When at the time some of the experiments done we VERY controversial and not accepted. The rules of typography were being broken and it was something new that people did not alway agree on. I also thought it was interesting how these pieces of typography such as the work done by people such as Emigre and McCoy have sort of lead the way into what we consider experimental typography today. Their experiments have sort of set some guidelines and ideas of just how much you can do with type.

does their definition of "experimental" match what you previously thought of the term?

When I think of the term experimental I think of trying new things. It does not always work out the way you may have intended it to, but you can usually pull from your errors and learn what cannot be done, and how you have to fix it. I dont think experimental always has to have a scientific explanation or process. You as a designer can create your own process that works out for your own wants and needs.

is it really useful to experiment if it doesn't have real application? No, I feel I have expressed that above.