Visual Rhetoric...help

[GnipGnop]

Visual Rhetoric:
1.) visual artifact as communication: symbols for the purpose of communication

2.) symbolic form of communication: symbolic process by which symbols perform communication

I feel like I know how to describe the two, but I can't for the life of me give an example of how the two are different. Help?

[Richard]

maybe i'm getting this wrong but...

1) -> could be hieroglyphs?

2) -> could be the traffic signs we see everyday

they both communicate, but both in a different way?

[Richard]

or...

2) could also be stuff like this : -_-' ^___^ : - ) etc?

[GnipGnop]

Yeah...but i need a clear definition separating the two. I know what suasive images are, but how they work is slightly confusing...

[DjMattyD]

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-...4197262&sr=8-1

this book has a great breakdown of exactly that.

[Richard]

Yeah...but i need a clear definition separating the two. I know what suasive images are, but how they work is slightly confusing...

hmm isn't it just very simple?

for example, hieroglyphs were used to just communicate in general,
while a smiley or ASCII writing also brings in a certain emotion, like : ( of ^___^ ?

[GnipGnop]

I read the previews pages and while it looks interesting, I think that deals with the language of visuals. I am looking at the suasion and persuasion of visuals, which while using visual language, are making an argument (persuading you to think a certain way or telling you to think about something in a certain way.)

[GnipGnop]

hmm isn't it just very simple?

for example, hieroglyphs were used to just communicate in general,
while a smiley or ASCII writing also brings in a certain emotion, like : ( of ^___^ ?

Yeah, I know that Richard. But this deals with the ability images have to make arguments, to persuade and to alter opinions. Think advertising, iconic imagery and the like. Not just communication through images, but suasion through images.

[Richard]

ok, sorry, i've been working for about 20 hours today, and i'm dead, worked my ass off and i'm going to bed haha.
goodluck with it, thinking about it even more gives me a headache, i think you're smarter than me :P

tomorrow, skiimmiiiinnngggg <3

[GnipGnop]

Im not smarter, this is just my area of study. Thanks for trying anyway though.

[DjMattyD]

its kind of misleading the order that the questions are put in because 1 is what 2 is composed of.

Basically 1 would be an icon, 2 would be something like pictograms

[GnipGnop]

They aren't really questions, it is just a way of describing visual rhetoric. I think I figured it out though. I see what you are saying though and that's why I was confused.

From what I gather, It is the use of symbols to give something meaning. (I.e. A stop sign arbitrarily uses red to symbolize stopping.) Someone chose the shape and colour to communicate STOP (as well as the letters). The Shape and colour from then on symbolically represent stop. When an audience sees the shape and colour, the suasion to stop manifests itself in the mind of the viewer.

You're right Matty, but usually Icons are pictograms because they ask you to think of something when you look at them. (I.E. the Microsoft Word symbol)