I feel that my final image shows some of the things that interest me. If someone who didn't know a thing about me were to look at this image they would get a pretty good idea of what kind of person I am and what kind of things I like to do. What this image doesn't show is that I'm not as materialistic as this makes me seem. On here I have quite a few items of high value (oakleys, tv, PS3, iPhone) but that doesn't mean that I only buy expensive things or that I'm loaded. One would not be able to know from this how much I value the nice things I have or how hard I work to have these nicer things.Monday, January 30, 2012
Micro Project 2
I feel that my final image shows some of the things that interest me. If someone who didn't know a thing about me were to look at this image they would get a pretty good idea of what kind of person I am and what kind of things I like to do. What this image doesn't show is that I'm not as materialistic as this makes me seem. On here I have quite a few items of high value (oakleys, tv, PS3, iPhone) but that doesn't mean that I only buy expensive things or that I'm loaded. One would not be able to know from this how much I value the nice things I have or how hard I work to have these nicer things.Thursday, January 19, 2012
Micro project 1- Mapping

For my project, I started with Ohio Stadium as my primary layer. The reason I chose the stadium is because clearly, it is my arrival point; It is my destination. The reason that I have the stadium blurred out (other than the fact that it looks cool) is because walking there is a blur. I walk to Ohio Stadium so often that the path I take feels so normal, almost like I don't have to pay attention to where I'm going. It feels as though I leave my house, look up, and I'm just there.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Kimmelman
Monday, January 9, 2012
Walker/Barrett
What I liked about the Walker article is the comparison of a theme to a big idea. The author gives very good examples showing how the theme and the big idea of an artists’ work can either be the same or they can be two completely different things.
I think that the author could have done a better job of explaining how a big idea and the subject matter are different. I feel like he just wasn’t as clear about this point as he was on some of the other points he made. Another thing I disliked was how I had to jump around the pages to make sure I read only the things that pertained to me and not read irrelevant information such as teaching tips.
I would have been interested in seeing how high school aged kids interpreted connotations and denotations in images and other things. In the article, they just skipped from graduate students to middle school-aged children. There was no in-between.
Cheese monkeys/ Heresy of the Zone Defense
What I did like about Cheese Monkeys is how cerebral it was. It was something that truly made me think about how when we get one concept in our head, such as the form of something, we forget about all other aspects of what we are observing.
I thoroughly enjoyed The Heresy of Zone Defense. I thought that basketball was an excellent analogy for the author to use to get his point across that the rules should enhance life, not govern it. I also really liked the Julius Erving story. It was a very good way to grab the attention of the audience and make them want to read on.
I didn’t like the story about Jackson Pollack and being able to drip paint. I felt that this story was uninteresting and didn’t really fit the overall theme of the reading. It didn’t really go with the idea that rules were needed to enhance the quality of our life activities. I also would have liked if the author had expanded more on some of the original rules of basketball laid out by James Naismith.