Final Reflection

Overall, I learned an extensive amount of information from this course. The theoretical foundation that was built throughout the semester served as a basis for my semester project and all of my subprojects. Prior to this class, I created visuals but did so without any knowledge or guidance. This course has taught me that all visual representations have deeper meanings and those who choose to visually communicate should do so wisely and skillfully. In the future, I will take all of the knowledge I’ve learned in this class and apply it to all of my impending experiences with visual communication. As a composer of visual communication, I have a huge responsibility and many things to take into consideration.

This course also taught me how to be a more informed viewer of visual representations. In the past, I have viewed images in a narrow fashion; I have not given images the consideration that they deserve. For example, at the beginning of the semester we spent time looking at company logos. It was brought to my attention that the Fed Ex logo contains an arrow. For the first time in my life I actually “saw” this arrow and hidden meaning contained within the logo. This experience completely changed my perspective not only on company logos but also every other image I’ve come into contact with since then. I finally realized that, literally, there is much more to images than what meets the eyes! I have learned to open my eyes much wider and truly examine images now that I am a proud, card-carrying member of this visual culture.

Thanks to Kress and van Leeuwen (2006), I finally have a language to describe the phenomena that I see on a daily basis. My awareness of conceptual and narrative meanings have helped me see beyond just the image itself. I have learned to become both a responsible and informed composer and viewer of visual communication. This experience has truly been eye-opening. While I’ve built upon my theoretical knowledge in this course, I’ve also refined my practical knowledge. I have used a variety of software programs such as Adobe Photoshop, Dreamweaver, and InDesign as well as Windows Movie Maker. In addition, I’ve had the opportunity to experience a virtual world such as Second Life. I feel that after completing this course, I have broadened my skill set to the point where I feel extremely marketable. The wealth of knowledge that I have learned will help me contribute an unprecedented amount of information to my future career, workplace, and colleagues.

This course was extremely effective because it is a culmination of theoretical and practical knowledge. There is a delicate balance between both, which is something many courses in this program lack. This course is undoubtedly one of the most enjoyable and informative courses I’ve taken in the MAPC program. This course has also given me the opportunity to apply information from other courses such as Rhetorical Theory, Business and Technical Communication, and Workplace Communication. Most importantly, this course helped me put everything into perspective so I can confidently walk away singing, “I can see clearly now...”

Stick a fork in me...I'm done!

It's what we've all been waiting for... now, Vizzie can reach audiences across the nation and worldwide... she's finally established her on-line presence! Now, if we can only get those Food Network producers to take notice!

Vizzie McAndrews' Website

Materiality, Meaning, and the Third Dimension

Kress and van Leeuwen regard material production as particularly significant because often it is in its processes that unsemioticized materiality is drawn into semiosis (p. 217). To explore material production is therefore also to explore the boundaries between the semiotic and the non-semiotic, and between individual expression and social semiosis. There are three major classes of production: (1) production in the narrower sense--that is, technologies of the hand, technologies in which representations are, in all their aspects, articulated by the human hand, aided by hand-held tools such as chisels, brushes, pencils, etc.; (2) recording technologies--that is, technologies of the eye (and ear), technologies which allow more or less automated analogical representation of what they represent, for instance, audiotape, photography, and film; and (3) synthesizing technologies which allow the production of digitally synthesized representations.

They also assert that for the time being there exists newly the need for conceiving of social semiotic practice in terms of rhetoric and 'design', where the term 'rhetoric' focuses on the social relations which obtain in the process of communication, and the term 'design' focuses on the arrangement of the available semiotic resources in the making of the representation as a message. Technology has also developed different distribution media, and it is here that the issue of (mass) reproducibility belongs, together with that of communication at (long) distance. What matters most is the production medium in which images are produced, and the distribution medium in which they are received, if the latter is different from the former, be it because of transcoding (photographic reproduction of paintings) or because of recoding at the other end of the telecommunication channel.

Kress and van Leeuwen argue for the meaning of material. They assert, "Our assumption remains that signs are motivated" (p. 225). It is no accident that the statues erected to commemorate heroic figures are made of durable materials. The durability of the materials makes them usable signifiers for the meanings of permanent feelings we intend to produce. There are also serial relations of translation between production media also, as in the case of the relation between paintings and their photographic reproductions.

The authors also discuss the communicative functions of colour saying that it is not restricted to affect alone. Colour is used metafunctionally, and that it is therefore a mode in its own right. Colour fulfills the three functions of a communicational system simultaneously: ideational, interpersonal, and textual.

Modality & Composition

Kress and van Leeuwen begin their chapter on modality with a charge to society. They assert, "as members of society, we have to be able to make decisions on the basis of the information we receive, produce, and exchange" (p. 154). In addition, the authors tell us we have to trust some of the information we receive, and do so, to quite some extent, on the basis of modality markers in the message itself, on the basis of textual cues for what can be regarded as credible and what should be treated with circumspection. So who exactly creates these so-called modality markers? Or, in other words, who determines whether or not a message should or should not be trusted? Kress and van Leeuwen argue that modality markers have been "established by the groups within which we interact as relatively reliable guides to the truth or factuality of messages, and they have developed out of the central values, beliefs, and social needs of that group" (p. 154). I think Foucault fits in nicely here and his assertions of discourse community and the rules and expectations set forth by particular discourse communities.

Kress and van Leeuwen provide a definition for modality. They assert, "The term modality comes from linguistics and refers to the truth value or credibility of (linguistically realized) statements about the world" (p. 155). In regards to visual communication, the authors discuss how visuals represent people, places, and things as though they are real, as though they actually exist in this way, or as though they do not--as though they are imaginings, fantasies, caricatures, etc. As with linguistics, modality judgements are social, dependent on what is considered real (or true, or sacred) in the social group for which the representation is primarily intended. An important point they also make is that reality is in the eye of the beholder. Or, what is regarded as real depends on how reality is defined by a particular social group. Once again, Foucault as well as Burke fit in nicely here. Your terministic screen determines how you view and interpret certain images, assertions, etc.

For example, take this image below. As a UNC grad, this strikes a chord with me and really hits home... and perhaps brings tears of joy to my eyes. However, this same image has the potential to mean absolutely nothing to other groups or invoke pure hatred from others.


Composition relates to the representational and interactive meanings of the image to each other through three interrelated systems: information value, salience, and framing. Information value is how the placement of elements endows them with the specific informational values attached to the various 'zones' of the image: left and right, top and bottom, center and margin. Salience deals with elements that are made to attract the viewer's attention to different degrees, as realized by such factors as placement in the foreground or background, relative size, contrasts in tonal value, differences in sharpness, etc. Framing is the presence or absence of framing devices (creating dividing lines or actual frame lines) that disconnect or connect elements of the image, signifying that they belong or do not belong together in some sense.

Website... Rough Draft!

I still have a long way to go... but here is my first rough draft of my website. I'm creating the website in Dreamweaver, and my audience is Food Network viewers who watch Vizzie McAndrews' show or are interested in learning more about her. I have a basic layout that incorporates the technology theme, but I am still in the process of changing the copy on each page. Any feedback or advice is welcomed!

Vizzie McAndrews' Website

Film Project...Take Two!

In an attempt to get some of the movie's flaws and kinks taken care of... I gave it a second attempt. Also, I used YouTube to upload my video this time since blogger took a millenium the first time I tried to upload my Oscar-worthy piece of visual communication. Enjoy!