Bland colours in image A makes the image appear as though it has not been made to immediately grab attention of the viewer, this therefore leads you to believe that the image is to be viewed as a whole and not for an individual part of image to immediately stand out. Where as strong colours immediately grab viewers attention in image B, the entire image appears relevant to the point being made and each single aspect just as important as any other.
Fonts within the two images are fairly opposite and both have different jobs, within image A one large section of text is designed to stand out from the rest of the page, and the point is inabruptly made i.e. ‘the “uncle sam range”’. The serifs give no subtlety to the text and make the appearance seem quite harsh when added to a large bold typeface. Despite the effort to be made on gaining attention with this bold text the colour does it no justice as the wide use of colour throughout means that the colour then used in the text is not so noticeable. Text on image B is more subtle and delicate as though it is actually been said by a child, the choice of not using serifs helps define this. Also the chosen typeface shows delicacy with its smooth shape and non harsh impact on the eye. The white text on the sheer black background stands out prominently and gives the text hierarchy within the image.
Within image A there is little hierarchy due to the fact that all the colours in the piece are quite subtle, with little tone, making it quite bland. The text also blends in with the image, and doesn’t immediately stand; overall the image works more as a whole and less as individual aspects. In image B immediate attention is gained with the gaze of the father being most prominent, then followed by the text which appears to jump out at you. Once this has been read then the rest of the image is studied and the entire piece comes together as a whole.
One thing that both images have in common is that they both contain characters. A main male figure is shown in image A, appearing to be quite wealthy and snobbish, the use of ‘stars and stripes’ trousers showing his identity and dedication to his country, and the patriotism involved in the piece. Then the use of the world as a character shows that the piece is meant to be read with an open mind i.e. what you see is not necessarily what you get. You have to read more into the characters to understand what the image is trying to portray (western civilization above all others). Image B shows straight characters opposed to image A, you don’t have to read into anything to understand and what you see is basically just what you get.
The style of illustration within each image is quite opposite, A is quite a busy image in terms of style, and I believe that every detail has to be shown due to the fact that as you have to read into the image to understand it (every detail is important). High amounts variations in colour is used in the illustration with no black outlines unlike in image B where illustration is quite basic using simple colour and little detail. Also outlines are used to emphasize the characters within this image.
The social context of image reflect the social views at the time the images were produced. A shows that the western civilization is of a higher class than the rest of the world, with the figure wearing better clothes, having higher quality goods, eating better food and having clothes. Image B gets men to think about how they feel and what it would be like to know you have not contributed towards your country, you were looked down on if you did not contribute your bit in the war.
Therefore although the two image first appear to be quite relevant to the other they are in fact two completely different images, with two completely different points being made.
