Matthew Richardson works in a way I’d love to explore at some point, using collage, photoshop, with primarily(if not entirely) found images, distorting the context of images by changing the size, and putting them with things out of place, giving ht images completely new context.
They are all beautifully simplistic, and yet intriguing, and original, a personal aim for my work.
What are the key ideas has the illustrator picked up on in the text?
No idea, I found these pieces without the context.
Have they taken a direct or indirect approach?
It is obvious she took an indirect approach to the pieces, going for a very obscure abstract type of response.
Does the image attempt to sum up the crux of the article or just pick up on one idea within it and run with that?
Honestly, it could be either, but thats the genius of this type of work, you can make it as crazy specific, or unbelievable abstract and loosely connected as you want as your not limited by the ability to create an idea from scratch with traditional techniques like drawing, painting etc.
What are the main characteristics of the visual language? Is it emotive, funny, clever, expressive, narrative, symbolic, metaphorical, satirical?
Funny, clever, expressive, symbolic, metaphorical.
Does the image have visual charm? If so how and why? How do the choices for material process, composition and colour work with the idea and/or make it appealing?
These images don’t have the traditional charm of an editorial illustration, but a different kind of charm, as its indisputable how visually pleasing these images are. The collage style is creative and innovative, manipulating scale, and context to completely change meaning.