I didn't find anything grammatically wrong with your text about the history of each object. I noticed on the first date for each object you mention the name of the object in the text, for everyone besides the telephone. " The first successful transmission of clear speech" ?. Was that not with an actually telephone or was it called something else? I don't think there is a need for the text "Information Graphic" at the top right corner. No need to label this as an information graphic, unless it is suppose to say information graphic side facts?The timeline is great. I'm glad you only used the dates that are needed, as appose to having the numbers even all the way across. It's also nice that you spit up the the objects and used both sides of the timeline. Is there a reason the pan and phone are on the left and the other three are on the right? Could there be a reason if there isn't? Maybe that's not important, just a thought. Also, I think you need more wear and tear into this graphic. I know that this is about the history of each object and how the object shows more wear and tear overtime, but the wear and tear part isn't too clear or important. Looking at your icons over time it is clear that they get more banged up, but don't people already know this? Is there additional info that you could say that would talk about the wear and tear of the objects? I am also getting a relationship with the icons and the text in a way that I think that you didn't exactly want, which is, when there is a new invention or improvement the object is crappier. Either the new invention isn't better than the previous product or this newer invention wears and tears faster?I'm not sure if I explained myself that clearly, but we can talk about it in class.
dear tezz. i had no idea people actually looked at my blog. thank you for your observation. :-D
Post a Comment