Logo Parodies that Speak the Truth

Artist name not stated

1.Describe the logo using the language of the Elements and Principles of Design.
The logo has the BP symbol along with dead fishes and oil surrounding the logo. It does not use a lot of colour in general as it tried to show a more saddening side to the issue. Different tones and shading were used to make the picture more realistic.

2.Describe the symbols used in the logo. Why did the graphic artist use such imagery?
The symbols in this logo are the BP logo, oil, and fish. The BP logo is there because it is a requirement. This logo is created for BP and so their original colour and design must be used. The oil is used surrounding the logo because the issue now is the oil spill and adding oil to the logo will address people with the issue. The fishes are used because it is supposed to show that there are fishes who swam in this dirty water and now they are all dead.

3.What does this logo say of BP's coroporate identity?The logo keeps that same original flower design as it represents BP. The oil and dead fishes added to the logo shows that a great issue now to the BP is the oil spill that recently happened. The use of dead fishes and oil added to the logo shows that BP is slowly being covered by oil which contributes to dead fishes and so it warns people about this issue.

Digital Actors

1. Is this acting or is this animation?
I believe that this is acting because they need actors to act certain scenes out for them to animate. I would consider it animation when the characters are being completely drawn out and onlt voice actors are needed. The actors in this animation actually do have to act because their facial expressions and mouth movements are used and animated for the movie. Even though animation is involved and this whole movie is basically animated, actors were still needed to act out the facial expressions.

2. Do you think that animated character should be eligible for acting awards?
No, I do not think that animated characters should be eligible for acting awards as they are still animations. I think that the actors playing the role should be the only one eligible for acting awards because they are the ones that acted as the animated character was created from them. No matter how real it may seem, animated characters are fake and I do not believe they should get an award as the actor playing the role should.


3. Do you think that human actors will ever become obsolete? Why or why not?
No, I do not think that human actors would ever become obselete because they are the original. Animated characters can not show the same emotions that humans could and that is a major reason why human actors wouldn't become obselete. If they did, the need for actors wouldn't be as high but the need for voice actors would be. Humans are the only ones that the viewers could relate to and so I do not think that animated characters would satisfy the viewers more than humans.

Graffiti Revised

This example of light graffiti really caught my attention as I was very shocked at how well the artist drew it. From my knowledge with light graffiti, it is not very easy to remember where you drew the first stroke and where the next would go as it is light that can not be seen over time. The artist did a great job with relating the object to the setting and made it look so amazing. I'm really envious of how this artist could draw so precisely with light.

This example of street graffiti caught my attention because of how detailed the artist was in creating this. I could tell that the artist used many different shades of colour and did a great job in blending. Although the picture is cartoon, I would say that it looks very real. The cartoon person has perfect shading on certain parts to make it so believable and amazing.

       Both of theses examples of graffiti show a wonderful form of art but they still have differences. The light graffiti has some difficulty as you can not see what you are drawing but looking at it seems simpler. The light graffiti looks like a simple picture that everyone can do but in reality, it is quite difficult. Street graffiti pictures tend to be a lot more colourful and aspiring but I believe that they both have their unique forms of art.

Mashups and Copyright Law

1. What is this mashup trying to communicate? Is it technical experiment, social or political commentary, a comedic parody, or an abstract work of media art?

I believe that this mashup is trying to communicate that if you try, you can create a new and interesting song just by mixing songs together. I think that it encourages people to try some new things with songs because you'll never know what you'll get. This mashup is an abstract work of media art because it doesn't seem to be saying anything in particular. I believe that this was created just for fun and entertainment so it would not be anything serious.

2. Did its creator follow or break copyright laws in its production?
I believe that the creator followed the copyright laws in its production because they did not claim the song to be theirs. They even named it a mashup and so I believe they have no intention of taking credit for the songs. Also, the creator is known for creating mashups of songs and soo everone already knows that the songs created by this creator are usually just mashups of original songs by other singers.

3. Do you think that mashup like this requires copyright permission? Why or why not.
Yes, I think that this mashups like this requires copyright permission because sometimes when the songs are editted so much, people can't tell which song is which. The creator would be taking songs that belong to other people so advertise and promote their own and so I believe copyright permission is required. This song would be used for a television show and so anything that would be publicly revealed like that should require copyright permission.

A Critical View of Music Videos

Initial reaction: When I first saw this music video, I would say that this song has a very confusing storyline. What confused me was that I thought the guy was singing a song to his fiance but it turns out that he wasn't. I like how the scenes all worked together to create a story.

Analysis and interpretation: I had to watch the music video a few times to understand it but when I did, I felt that the story was really touching. This music video is about a guy, who is the singer, who likes a girl but his friend also likes her. He tried to propose to that girl but as he was searching for the ring, his friend proposed to her. I find this story confusing because when I read the title and watched the beginning, I thought that the story would be about a guy getting married and singing about his fiance. As I continued watching, I realized that the singer was actually watching the girl that he liked get married to his friend.

Consideration of cultural context: I think that because there are so many people out there having a one-sided relationship, that is the reason why the artist created this song. This song is stating the opinion of that guy in the one-sided relationship and it lets the audience know how sad it is to be in a one-sided rlationship but you still have to move on.

Expression of aesthetic judgment: The cinematography, acting and performance, choreography, storyline, special effects, lyrics, and musicality work together in this music video by telling the story behind the song. The acting shows you what the singer is seeing and the whole storyline explains the song. If you just heard the song, you may think that it's just another love song but after watching the music video, you would completely understand the song. The visual effects make the story more believable like the flashbacks and certain other scenes.

Ongoing reflection: The music video has helped me see that the love song actually had a deeper meaning. The love song was written by someone in a one-sided relationship viewing the girl he loves with another man.