barebones communication

Sorry, folks.

I have been away for a while, but hopefully I will be able to make some more substantial posts to the blog during the weekend. In the meantime, please take a good look at this picture.

Denotations could be describes as; man, sitting man, white pants, beer on table, table, motion blur, etcetera. Connotations could be described with these words; loneliness or solitude.

And here comes the question for you to elaborate on: if you were to describe a closure of this scene, what would it be?  

Please note how a title will lead your reading of a visual like this photograph. I call the picture Soul Salvation. The title could also have been Waiting For His Girl Friend, and all of a sudden there is more hope and positive anticipation connoted in the picture. 

In other words, connotations in visuals are influenced by text context. Here the title.

And of course, the opposite will be true as well: the content of a sentence is influences by visual context.

Not such a bad picture, eh? Wonder how it is done?

More on barebones notebook.   

It is really good that I have all these pictures, right . Since they all speak more than a thousands words.

Each.

Well I enjoy it, and if you too participate in the initial stages of the barebones community building, you will as well .

So here is another notebook brief for you. The white bus in Berlin. Shot this August.

I could ask you how this fit will a couple of gestalt factors, but that would be too easy. Obviously both proximity and similarity are at work here, as the two most dominant factors. Nearness and similarity of objects have me perceive this picture as a picture of two groups of people (not six individuals): one group upstairs and another group downstairs.

Let’s however make this notebook brief a bit more interesting by pointing to two levels of closure potent in the image. Do you remember, that I talked about a physical closure and a mental closure in the post on gestalt closure.

Closure is, in a quick word, the human capacity to perceive a bit more than you actually get. The whole is more than the sum of its physically given parts.  This is the gestalt basic.

Now, the picture that you find in this post is a pretty complete one. There are no blank spots or areas. Things that you need to fill in to comprehend them. You should be able to recognize, at first glance, what the picture is all about.

On the other hand, there are still things “missing” in the picture. Let me point to a few:  you don’t see the bodies of the talking heads on the bus, and you don’t see the whole bus. Yet, that is what you perceive; people with intact bodies, and a bus that will certainly drive away if the driver tends to it.  Your are not in doubt about these things.

So for reason that will be clear in future posts, I will introduce two additional layers within the closure concept. These are layers 2 and 3 below.

1) Closure, as the capacity to mentally close figures where visual information is actually lacking (as in the example with the dog in the blog post on closure). This is the gestalt original. 

Then, let me add some layers to this: 

2) Closure, as the capacity to mentally close figures where the visual information is actually hidden or cropped away (as the bodies of the talking heads or the parts of the bus that are not actually there).

3) Closure, as the capacity to mentally elaborate on the context of the actual visual stimuli. You clearly have a notion of what these people are doing on that bus, don’t you? And you have an idea of how they are going to spend the next hours, haven’t you? You even may have an idea of why these guys are in Berlin in the first place? How will you close this open context and continue the story?

It does not really matter how you close it. The important thing is that you have the ability to close it. Any way you want . Remember the last pitstop. I do .

So much for the nostalgische rundfahrt, apart from that tiny, but important thing, that what I just did was to link a gestalt factor to that popular idea of telling a story, as a communication means.  That passport to success, would you believe it? I think they call it storytelling, right? .

I also introduced another gestalt factor: the factor of experience or habit. 

More on this later, so stay tuned to a barebones blog near you.

And, sorry for taking all the notes myself.  I will make up for it .

So, let’s move on then.

Coming up is the third gestalt factor (my order): the factor, or law, of closure. Described by Max Wertheimer in the 1920’s and more potent than ever. You’ll see.

If the two first factors: proximity and similarity are need-to-know for communicators, the factor of closure is the holy grail. It’s adds the opportunity of involving your reader. Or viewer. Or whoever.

There are different interpretations of what the meaning of closure, is. Is it a reference to the process of closure, or is it the end result?  On this blog closure will refer to both, depending on the context. Leaving out the rest of possible interpretations.

Commenting upon experiments with some very basic visual objects Wertheimer says: “From an inspection of Figs. 20-22 we are led to the discovery of still another principle: The Factor of Closure. If A, B, C, D are given and AB/CD constitute two self-enclosed units, then this arrangement rather then AC/BD will be apprehended”. (A Source Book of Gestalt Psychology, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1974, page 83).

How do I understand this? Well, in two ways:

1) That which is “closed” (self-enclosed units) are more easily, and rapidly understood then that which is not “closed”. A finished story is more easily understood than an open ended one.

2) There is an inherent strive, in perception, towards “closing” of units. If they are not closed from the outset perception will do its work to close them. Gaps missing will be filled in.

Do you find this a bit cryptic. Don’t despair. I am sure that your interpretation of Wertheimer’s wording is as good as mine.

Anyway here comes an example of how visual closure works. That might bring us s bit closer.

What is that you see in this picture? Is it a spread of black and white dots? Do you find closure working for you? Do you see the dog? (I am sorry, that I don’t know who owns the copyright to this picture). 

Let’s move this factor one step up. Let’s introduce a distinction between the physical closure and the the mental closure. Does closure work on both levels? I think so. Look at these pictures:

Physical Closure vs Non-Closure: 

A pretty easy picture to apprehend to use Wertheimers notion. Not much fuzz and possible deviations here. On the other hand, you may say that this is a bit boring and not that an imaginative picture. I would say that the image has physical closure. (Copenhagen, Denmark 2003).

What happens here? Same lady, but a man added. More like half a man. Some would dismiss this image because it is not physically closed, and blaming the photographer for not being in his right mind. Others might say, that this is a much more interesting image just because physical closure is lacking. Gives you an opportunity to close it yourself. Addresses you in another way then the first image. More demanding. (Copenhagen, Denmark 2003).

Mental Closure vs Non-Closure:  

This image has closure, in my opinion. Both physically and mentally. Like the first picture it is self-contained. The young couple (please remark the effect of both proximity and similarity) don’t need anybody else. There are no elements apparently reaching out of the image. You don’t need to fill any gaps. Mental closure is in place. (Paris, France 2003).

As opposed to this image where self-containment is lacking. Puts a bit of a strain on you to close this one. Do you want to close it, or can you live with this kind of open ended solutions? You might say that this photograph lacks mental closure. I do. (London, UK, 2003). 

How to use:  

How to use the gestalt factor: closure?  

Go for closure, or go for non-closure. Depending on your communication objectives.

I use pictures to illustrate, but it could as well be texts. News articles would typically be closed acts while fiction could be non-closed acts (this could be argued). Political statements, some might say, would better be acts with an apparent closure (so that people will understand them rapidly). Poetry can live with non-closure demanding your engagement and phantasy.

What about advertizing?  If your objectives are product or consumer information, then keep messages closed. If your objectives are image, then non-closure might do better. 

By the way, did you know:

“The need for closure varies across individuals, situations, and cultures. A person with a high need for closure prefers order and predictability and is decisive and close minded. This person also feels discomfort from ambiguity (Hiel & Mervielde 2003). Someone rating low on need for closure will express more ideational fluidity and emit more creative acts (Chirumbolo et al., 2004)”.

For more on this, go here. 

Happy Holiday .