the legibility of a cup

What is it? What do we do with this hollow and empty cylinder? It is a container. The cylindric hollow is good for holding things within the structure. It can contain anything from liquid, grain, rocks, air, and clothes. Of course, I know it is a cup. A cup is the container for drinks which we grasp and take toward the lips to slide the liquid into the mouth. Then how do we read it as a cup just by looking at it? What visual cues make us to perceive it as a cup among other containers?

(1)Scale
The scale gives us the clue about how we relate to a cup. It can be decoded from the scale that the cup is small enough to be graspable.

(2)Shape
The shape can add more clue about whether it invites our hands to touch it, whether it helps liquid to flow in an intended direction, and whether it invites us to put our lips onto it. It can be decoded from a spiky surface that this object is not meant to be grabbed. The smooth surface invites the touching of hands. Also, the rounded edge of the cylindric shape is proper for the lips to touch. If it is square-shaped, it is not as inviting as a rounded edge from an ergonomic point of view. Also, the liquid will only flow in an intended direction at the four points of the end of four sides.

Some clues about handling is a very useful way in judging whether it is a cup or not. A square does not help the object to look like a cup, while adding an ear-shaped handle suddenly makes the object to look like a cup although the object is square-shaped. The shape of a handle is also one reason why the giant sculpture above looks like a cup in spite of its scale. But the unconventional shape of handle does not help the object to look like a cup, because the visual and experiential unfamiliarity interrupts the efficiency of object recognition. So it can be said that the acquired social knowledge also affects the legibility.

In some cases, the shape also tells which part to direct the cup toward the lips.

(3)Material
The material can be another clue for decoding of the meaning of the object. Although it has the shape of the cup, the mesh and cloth does not make the object to look like an actual cup, because it seems not to be able to function as a cup. The container made of mesh or cloth would not hold the liquid. It will spill the liquid or it will get wet(and spill the liquid).

Conclusion
A cup becomes distinguishable among other containers based on the clues coded, for example, in its scale, shape and material. And these clues form our conventional expectation about something perceived as a cup. The contribution of the clues sometimes differs. The legibility of a cup depends on whether or how easily these clues can be decoded from the object.



a question:
The left one is a cup for infant, and the right one is a water glass. The left one seems to have many clues for being perceived as a cup. It is round, it has smooth surface, it has two handles for the ones with weaker grasping strength, and it has the direction for locating the mouth. On the other hand, the right one has less clues. It is round and smooth. However, the left one does not seem to be more legible than the right one. Then why is the left one less legible when it has more clues? How does the right one achieve more legibility? Does it relate to the efficiency of communication achieved by focusing the point? Or does it mean the abstractness(of the right one’s shape) can convey more powerful and intuitive meaning?