Guide to Visual Analysis
For some, visual analysis is a chance to shine in their Analysing Argument essays. For many others, visual analysis is an unexplored chasm of weird words and wtf interpretations. This guide is aimed at clearing up any misconceptions you may have, as well as providing you with a fairly foolproof method of unpacking visual content, so the challenge for you guys is to pick out the most important bits and just analyse those
Luckily, visual analysis is a fairly small part of the overall A.A. task,
but it is a compulsory part! Note the instructions for Section C in the exam booklet:
This means that if you totally forget to discuss the visuals (+ if you mention them but don't do any substantial analysis) then you're automatically limiting yourself. I would estimate that it would be
really hard to score above a 7/10 if you hadn't done any visual analysis whatsoever, and I've heard some teachers flat out say that you won't get an upper band mark if you haven't dealt with the visuals properly.
So trust me when I say that it's important that you know how to do this - visual analysis is actually one of the few skills that you
know will be tested on the exam since there will
definitely be a visual component within the Section C material.
But analysing visuals is a little different (and for most people, a fair bit trickier) than analysing written language, primarily because written language tends to be a lot more surface-level. If an author's trying to convey a point, the worst they can do is maybe use some sarcasm or complicated phrasing - beyond that, it's usually fairly easy to work out the gist of what they're saying. But visual imagery doesn't follow those same rules, and you might end up with photos or cartoons that depict scenarios or symbols that you can't even relate to the topic.
For this guide, I'm going to take you through a few key aspects of identifying elements of visuals to comment on using both exam-style pieces and general cartoons/graphics.
A quick note before we begin: VCAA's use of images has changed quite a bit over time...
(apologies for some of the dodgy and slightly crooked photocopies here)
You'll notice that there's a pretty wide variety of bits and pieces. Often, you're given two visuals as VCAA like to challenge you. I like to divide this material into four main subsections:
1. Cartoons- 2008
- 2012 (visual ii.)
- 2016
2. Photos/ photorealistic images- 2009
- 2010 (visual ii.)
- 2011 (visuals i. and ii.)
- 2012 (visual i.)
- 2013 (visual i.)
- 2014 (visual i.)
- 2015 (visual ii.)
- 2017
3. Clip art graphics/ logos- 2010 (visual i.)
- 2015 (visual i.)
4. Composite visuals- 2013 (visual ii.)
- 2014 (visual ii.)
So let's go through some general strategies for each.
~Cartoons~
These are rare occurrences on exams, though many schools give these to you on SACs, and I can imagine VCAA diving back into this territory if they're trying to construct a deliberately difficult end of year paper.
What's different about cartoons is that they usually depict scenarios or situations. If we compare the first visual in 2014 (picture of a boat sailing into the sunset/sunrise) with the visual in 2008 (the donkey-parent yelling at a kid at a sports match) you'll see that the 2014 one is a bit 'cartoon-y' in the way that it's drawn, but it's not an actual scenario-based cartoon like the 2008 one.
So for these scenarios, you have to keep the following rule in mind:
--> Just because a cartoonist is
depicting something, doesn't mean it's what they want to happen!
Consider the following which appeared in the Herald Sun in 2016:
That death star is a representation of Donald Trump who at the time was winning the majority of Republican primaries and looked set to be a nominee for the 2016 election (and we all know how that went...).
This is where you have to turn off the logical part of your brain and think a little more creatively. So of course his face isn't literally a death star... but why would the author depict him as such? Well, death stars represent... *death*, right? Destruction, evil, impending doom etc. Therefore (turn your logic side back on again) this cartoonist is trying to project those associations of sinister and foreboding awfulness onto the figure of Donald Trump.
The best thing about cartoons is that there are often many hidden layers of symbolism that can be unpacked too. In this kind of image, everyone's going to comment on those death star connotations, but there's more that can be done here. Maybe the fact that his giant freakin death star face is so blown out of proportion could be seen as an indictment of his ego and 'big headedness,' and the fact that he seems to be in the midst of angrily yelling could be said to represent the scary vigour with which he was been campaigning (and that compounds the audience's sense of fear... "it's a moon... it's a death star... no, it's an ANGRY death star 0.o)
And the author isn't trying to portray this as being a good or ideal scenario.
Drawing a thing doesn't mean you
endorse the thing.
Instead, what cartoons often do is depict the current situation in an exaggerated or sarcastic fashion so as to draw attention to certain problems or logical inconsistencies. That should be your mindset when approach this kind of material.
& granted, I'm an artsy nerd who loves these hidden interpretations, but I guarantee the assessors will be impressed if you can come up with those kinds of readings PROVIDED YOU CAN BACK YOURSELF UP! I'll get into this later, but trust me when I say that the 'workings' you do in justifying your interpretation are way more important than the interpretation itself.
~Photos & Photorealistic Images~
These are by far the most common options for the examiners, and it's what most of the visual analysis tasks on this board will be geared towards. Sometimes there'll be fairly simplistic images (à la the 2014 boat or the 2011 tattooed arms) where you can't really get into deep symbolic analysis without it being a bit too far fetched (e.g. the choppy waters in the 2014 boat visual represents the treacherous journey one has to make when exploring uncharted seas... maybe justifiable, but probably pushing it
) But on other occasions, you can delve beyond the basics.
Consider the following from 2010...
What the rest of the state would've said:earth is precious and it's in our hands so we have to take care of it!
What you could say if you wanted to stand out:the fact that this is the closing slide of the presentation and that while this image is on screen, the speaker is talking about passing on responsibility to the members of the audience --> encourages audience to feel obliged to take care of the earth as the image is making a gesture of holding the earth out towards them
Or this one from 2015...
What the rest of the state would've said:joined hands = group togetherness --> volunteering is an awesome communal goal to work towards!
What you could say if you wanted to stand out:the fact that the hands are coming from different directions implies that volunteers each have a unique perspective and skillset to contribute, and it is only with the support of all people in this circle that they can reach greater heights, as seen by the hand stacking.
This kind of discussion can take a little while to come up with, so don't worry if your very first thoughts upon seeing an image aren't the most revolutionary awe-inspiring assertions imaginable. In fact, it's better that you're able to find and support a basic interpretation quickly, as that's ultimately what the assessors want to see in the exam. However, if you can spice things up with just a sentence or two of this more creative analysis by reading into certain details, you'll likely be rewarded.
Another key thing to note for photorealistic images is that they will usually have clear links to the written material. Arguably, this could be said of all visual content, (e.g. the 2013 composite visual had a shopping trolley with a price tag on it, and the bit of the article just above that was talking about the HIDDEN PRICE TAG of convenience food *hint hint*) but it's especially true of these kinds because the assessors
want you to be able to make those connections. They want to see you link that written and visual material together -
especially in the cases of speeches where the speaker's words are being matched by whatever images are being shown. What they don't want to see is a paragraph at the end that simply runs through the visual in isolation with no substantial connections to the main piece whatsoever. Sure, you're technically fulfilling the visual analysis portion of the task criteria, but you won't be earning anything for the structure of your information.
So be on the lookout for those more sophisticated readings of these visuals, but prioritise links between them and the written content wherever possible.
~Clip Art Graphics/ Logos~
There's a bit of overlap here between the clip art stuff and the composite visuals discussed below, and that's probably because this is a fairly new addition to the exam material. We've seen some logos back in 2010 and they made a surprise comeback in 2015, though that visual had some photorealistic elements to it as well. But this is a bit of a catch-all category for all the material that doesn't neatly fit into the other categories.
Here, the same rules apply as with the photorealistic stuff. Look for deeper meaning, focus on the smaller details, and go beyond the basics of 'here is the most obvious thing, and this is its meaning.' <-- That base level is important, but it shouldn't be where you end your discussion.
Note: the
Week 4 content contains some great examples of logos, so if VCAA go down that path again (as they did last year) you'll want to prepare for that early by having a go at some of the ones in that thread.
Sometimes there'll be visual components of the material that don't really warrant analysis, though. For instance, the top of the 2009 material looked like this:
...and there's not a whole lot you can say about how the 'ctrl' and 'alt' buttons are persuading the readers
Even the 'bigsplash' logo on the 2015 exam wasn't really jam packed with symbolism, so whilst you can analyse the significance of the logo being included on that banner (visual i.) you don't really need to unpack its representation at all.
Logos like the 2010 one are far more weighty and analysis-worthy though. As a rule of thumb, if a visual is only taking up a few square centimetres of the page (like the 2009 header) then it's probably not worth mentioning, but if it's a significant size (like 2010) then that's the assessors' way of telling you to analyse that thing!
~Composite Visuals~
Finally, we have composite visuals, which is a fancy way of saying 'visuals comprised of different bits and pieces.' The second visuals in 2013 and 2014 are the best examples of this, and might be a style VCAA are keen to repeat in future years since it offers you the added challenge of having to analyse more than one solitary visual.
Back in my day *waves walking stick* the 2013 exam freaked a lot of people out because OMG THERE WERE FOUR VISUALS WHAT THE HELL and in 2014, there was a similar reaction of WTF THEY GAVE US SEVEN VISUALS I WANT TO CRY.
But if you prepare adequately, these don't pose much of a threat.
Firstly, you don't need to comment on each individual 'bit' of a composite visual just like you don't need to mention every single feature of a cartoon or photo. For the 2015 visual ii. I wouldn't have said anything about the clothes those people were wearing because that detail was largely irrelevant. Likewise, if you wanted to discuss the quote and the graph in 2013 visual ii. but left the shopping trolley alone, you wouldn't have incurred some insta-penalty for not unpacking the
whole image.
That said, there's a reason these 'bits' have been combined together, and in 2014 there was a reason why they were combined in a certain way (ie. with those lines all leading to the astronaut.) So rather than thinking of composite visuals as being comprised of little bits and pieces, think of it as the
sum of its parts. Aim to say something about the overall message of a composite visual, or perhaps consider analysing how the different elements relate together (e.g. the price tag on the trolley and the 'Millions ($)' of the graph in 2013).
So now that we know what kind of visual material to expect, we can start to think about the process of visual analysis.
STEP 1: Understanding the contention.Yes, visuals have contentions. And yes, you need to know what they are. A good place to start with this is trying to work out how the visual is similar to any accompanying written material since in past exams, the visuals have ALWAYS supported the main written piece they accompany.
If in doubt, follow these steps:
1. What is the subject matter of the visual? What is being depicted or portrayed?
(e.g. the 2013 visual i. is an old-style ad for gardening; the Trump cartoon from the HS depicts him as a death star)
2. Does the image depict/portray this subject matter in a good way, or a bad way?
(e.g. the cherubic faces of happy children in 2013 visual i. = GOOD; the Trump-esque death star = BAD)
3. In what way is this subject matter good or bad, according to the cartoon?
(e.g. 2013 visual i. invokes patriotism, collective happiness, independence; the Trump death star represents destruction and doom)
...and from there, you should easily be able to support the conclusions that you've reached.
STEP 2: Identify the elements to be analysed.As aforementioned, not all parts of a visual are equally important. Some bits will be laden with symbolism and associations, whilst others are just there to convey information and don't play a very important persuasive role. As such, it's up to you to be selective and to pick apart the important elements of visual material until you can find what you believe to be worthy of analysis.
Some things are easy to pick out - obvious subject matter and palpable metaphors are always favourites, and most people will talk about things like size if the opportunity presents itself, but there are other formal elements that work almost like the rhetorical devices for written texts, and if you know what they are, I guarantee you'll start seeing them in all sorts of material:
{somewhat borrowed from the VCE Art/ Studio Art curriculum for those who are familiar with it}
~TERMINOLOGY FOR VISUAL ANALYSIS~
- Linebold, dominant lines can give of a very different impression to jagged or fragmented ones
- Tonecovers things like shading and shadows; sometimes it's there just for realism, but in other circumstances you can comment on the light/dark tone or the positive/negative gradient
- Movementbit of a tricky one since you're obviously dealing with a still image, but there is such thing as
implied movement; the most obvious example would be something like
this. So there may be slow, sluggish movement or rapid, nervous ticks depending on what the subject matter is
- Colournote: this is only relevant for SACs and some of the practice content on this board because your exams will always be in black and white. But where possible, talking about colour choices and colour symbolism can be very interesting (ie.
blue doesn't always mean sadness and depression, but it can in the right circumstance.)
- Balancethe 2012 visual i. was a great example of this. Balance is basically how stuff is distributed within an image, so in that 2012 photo, you had a bunch of stuff on the right where the stack of books were, and then a lot of negative (/empty) space on the right where the ipad was (--> implying that such technology was lighter and less burdensome, but also potentially more vacuous and less reliable) so thinking about how things are distributed can also be important.
- Focal Pointwhat's the first thing your eye is drawn to? You can comment on that! Not just the fact that some obvious thing is
there, but the fact that your eye was drawn to it means that the image is clearly wanting to emphasise something. If you're really into visual analysis, you might even talk about things like vanishing points/
one point perspective/
two point perspective etc. but these are pretty rare.
- Lightthis is sort of related to tone, but think about where the light source is in an image and what that might symbolise. This was especially important in the 2009 visual where you could say a lot about the figurative enlightenment coming out of the person's brain as a result of them embracing technology.
- Contrastsimply put, this is the difference between two things, and it can be accomplished in many ways. If a cartoonist draws one person in a distinctively different way, or if a photo positions one thing as being much smaller than another, then you can consider the contrast between them as a way of uniting your analysis of different visual components.
- Scaleincludes size and perspective, but also links to the idea of
relative size where you compare aspects within the visual (eg. the donkey-parent in the 2008 cartoon is much bigger and more dominant than the other parents, suggesting that this negative parenting has a bigger, more profound effect on children and the club as a whole).
- Compositionconsider how the elements have been arranged (eg. 2014 visual ii.) and if there's any cropping or deliberate positioning of certain elements
- Foreground/Backgroundalso linked to the idea of perspective is the question of what is being foregrounded and highlighted, and what is being pushed to the back. You can also comment on movement here too, like the above example with the 2010 visual ii. being a gesture of holding something out towards the audience and entrusting it to their care
- Point of Viewcan be similar to the above (esp. in relation to that 2010 example) and is rarely relevant for typical visuals (ie. you wouldn't say point of view was very important for the 2014 boat photo since us being in the middle of the ocean isn't very persuasive
) but often thinking about where the audience are in relation to the subject matter will give you a slightly different angle (teehee) to explore.
STEP 3: Link these elements to an overall intent.Once you've found these elements and are able to consider their significance in isolation (ie. photo of a bunch of people joining hands --> unity; cartoon of someone drowning whilst someone else turns their back --> neglecting duties/ irresponsibility, etc.) then it's time to connect your analysis to the intent or the issue. The images are never totally unrelated to the content - in fact they're often central to the subject matter of the written piece. Even if you're examining an image in isolation like the
Week 4 content, you still should make some attempt to zoom out and consider the implications of those visual elements. What are these portrayals achieving? What does that symbolism make us think/feel/believe? How might the image be trying to position readers to view the issue overall?
^Answer those questions, and you've done your visual analysis.
~~ A brief note on "wrong" answers...
Golden rule: If you can justify something, it's valid.HOWEVER... sometimes choosing the more 'original'/'unique'/'creative' interpretation isn't very wise. Technically, (and this goes for all of English and a lot of other VCE subjects in general) if you are able to substantiate your view with sufficient evidence, no assessor should be able to penalise you for having the "wrong" opinion. In reality though, the markers are only human, and they are likely to be a lot more critical of your work if they believe you've misinterpreted things.
This is why I would strongly advise taking risks with your visual interpretations now so that when you get to the exam, you have a good internal barometre for what is justifiable and safe vs. what is justifiable but risky. Most of the interpretations I've given here for the VCAA material would be pretty defendable, and I wouldn't have any qualms about including them in assessment tasks, but I have seen some students go a tad overboard and end up writing stuff that's outside the realms of what the image is realistically conveying. Try and keep it fairly close to the main contention, and if you are straying into the slightly riskier territory, you can preface your point with a word like 'perhaps' as a means of reigning it in (eg. the image depicts the politician with the sun shining on one side of their face with the other in darkness, perhaps indicating their duplicity or two-faced nature...)
Other than that, visual analysis is just a slightly more difficult variation of the skills you will be developing by analysing written material, so don't see the two as inherently different. Pick out features, comment on how they're used to persuade, and link them to the argument. That core process never changes
Home
Help
Search
Login
Topic: Guide to Visual Analysis (Read 14242 times)