So there I was, sitting on my sofa, watching football and drinking beer (or maybe I was watching Golden Girls and drinking apple juice, I can’t really remember). I recall thinking, “I wish the freaking Eagles could score just once!” (or possibly, “Oh, Rose, you’ll never learn!”) and this commercial came on:
It stopped me in my tracks. I was shocked, not by the truck, but to see type used so interestingly in a purely commercial venture. I’m not a truck commercial sort of guy, but I always watch this one, purely for its visual aesthetic.
Moving type is not new, dating back as far as cinema itself, but a specific vernacular of moving type, commonly called dynamic typography, has sprung up in the last four or five years. It usually involves slab-serif or sans serif all-caps type appearing in exact synchronicity with spoken words. The words on screen fit together like puzzle pieces, with quick pans, rotations, and zooms. Frequently, words on screen will reflect their meaning through movement (e.g., if the word is “fall,” the word will actually fall off the screen).
I think that the music video below, “Ya no sé qué hacer conmigo,” which my wife tells me translates to “Would you please shut off your stupid computer and come help with the dishes,” is a visual masterpiece. It was made in 2007, when this particular brand of dynamic typography was relatively new.
A quick search of dynamic typography on YouTube will turn up countless student projects that set type to music or movie quotes in this style. Here’s an example from student Linzi Bergmann, set to audio from the movie Zoolander:
While I really enjoy this style visually, the interesting thing about this type of moving typography is that it directly violates one of the tenets of good visual communication. Any presentation expert will tell you not to read the words on screen, that it’s redundant to visually represent words that exactly replicate what is being spoken. I look forward to the growth of this movement, when these beautiful and intricate typographic treatments are more than just visual reinforcements, but rather add their own element to messages.
I don’t think they are redundant. I believe (from experience) that they enhance the communication experience for those of us who strongly lean toward the verbal and visual learning styles.
I agree with Kelly – its different from the PP presentation where the speaker simply reads static text on the screen. It add emphasis to the statement as would the picture of a waterfall showing while the narrator is commenting on the “magnificent waterfall”.
As someone who ALWAYS watches her movies with subtitles, I am a fan of this style.
I find messages presented in this way strangely compelling, and I’m sure there’s a psychological explanation for what draws me in. It’s very different from the presenter just reading what’s on the screen. It’s the timing of the appearance of each word that makes it different by reinforcing each spoken word. That said, if overused (and it will be) we’ll grow tired of it and it will lose its value. I was very surprised to see this technique used in an opening video for a local church – and I thought it was well produced. You may see that video here you like: http://www.mycitylifecenter.com/index.php
Thanks for sharing these clips! I loved them. But feel compelled to echo thoughts shared above. To me, these were nothing like the poorly designed power point that deadens my ability to attend. Instead, these examples seemed to highten my senses, engage me more fully, and to reinforce the message. I’m sure you are all right that this approach will grow and change – but I liked what i saw here. How fun! thanks again.