Week 14. Appraisal.

Ok I have to be honest here. I did not like the lecture/blog side of things in the course. I found it really hard to keep up my attention in classes. Furthermore, I always get bogged down when writing the blogs because I have that fear that I am writing about something irrelevant and illogical (this is probably why I had fallen so far behind in my blog entries).

Maybe it’s just my poor English, but I do find it hard to read through a 40 page long reading and respond to it in insightful and thoughtful manner. I would much rather a concise text, that does not throw a hundred facts and hypothesizes at you. The fractural geometry reading was probably a good example of this (though I am questioning the relevance of knowing how spiky an object is). Diagrams are usefully, because we are design students, I feel the majority of us would be more comfortable visualizing concepts things better than read a lot of text.

The 175 studio is good how it is. It teaches everyone who doesn't even have the vaguest idea how to draw to be pretty competent by the end of the semester. Generally the progression of work is good. We started from the humble line drawings, to the great foreshortening activities. It was all very entertaining and enjoyable. Also not forgetting about the great educational value we got from it. I definatly benefited from the studio classes (though I’m still a bad drawer, I have now a nice grounding which I can work on in the future).

In general, I would say that the unit is about 7.5/10. Unfortunately to me, the lectures really didn’t help my designer career except for the grid and the topic on perception. The blogs are not so bad (not that I really liked them, but I’m lazy so that’s my own problem), and I suppose it helps us keep track of what we have done throughout the semester. Well that’s only my opinion, I would still like to thank the staff for organizing the unit and making it possible; I know you are trying your hardest to make the unit fun and relevant. Cheers...

Week 13. Comments on Frank Miller’s Sin City, 2005, Frank Miller & Robert Rodriquez

Sin City has an unreal setting where everything is so corrupted and violent. It is a hardly believable future to a saint person. Nonetheless, I feel that the effective use of dark lighting and black and white film really added an extra depth to the film; making it believable for the moments that we were watching ( I say this because the plot is so out there I’m not going to worry about getting diced up on my way to Uni).

During the scene where Kevin, the psychotic antagonist is being feed to his dog, the effective use of lighting and a black and white filter really adds an extremely gruesome feeling to the scene. Opposed to using a monochrome filter, the black and white filter projects a very unsettling and raw mood to the film. This almost depicts the basic instincts of a dog; something is clearly labeled as food, or not food. Through the use of this limited color, I am able to imagine how brutal and gross how a situation like this in real life would be.

I think it is evident that one of the key techniques of design in the film Sin City is its use of limited color and lighting. Without it, the city of danger lurking around every corner would seem far less threatening, and the real horrors of an alternate reality would be hardly imaginable.

Week 12. Comments on Thackara, John, 2005, "Speed", In the Bubble L designing in a complex world, MIT Press Cambridge, MA, pp. 31-50.

Excellent final reading... I guess a movie isn't really a reading. But anyways, this narrative explores the accelerating nature of modern society and it hints at a distance dystopian result (I think). I shall be discussing computer games as a designed environment and through the use of design fundamentals; the game can instill an addition on the user.

Firstly, I shall be just referring to World of Warcraft (WoW), a mass multiplayer online role playing game (MMORPG). This game is imbued will lust colorful landscapes which real add a very mystical and fairytale like touch to the game. I feel that the use of colors and textures intrigue the users and initially enjoy this “new” experience of being somewhere magical.

The consistency of this textures and colors eventually creates this alternate environment that the user exists in. As if he/she has become part of the fantasy story. Therefore, it can be seen that in this analogy, that a user who has visited this human designed environment has been shaped to make their experience magical and alternate to the real world, and hence encouraging them to become a part of it.

I have come to a realization, that shooting games are becoming more and more realistic. The advancements in computer graphics and even physics are to merely make the game more believable. As if to make it seem that the players are in a life and death situation. I feel that this shaping which is employed by the design fundamentals are used to enhance the user’s enjoyment value while playing the game.

These computer games simulate a virtual environment for the user and through the fundamental techniques of design; I believe the general experiences of user can be enhanced. However, these games require a faster computer in many cases and yet a gain we are forced to keep up with the ever increasing speed of the world.

week 11. Comments on Mansbach, Steven A., 1980, "Kinetic Art for a Dynamic Age', in Visions of Totality, UMI Research Press, Michigan, pp. 43 - 68.

AND

http://www.yugop.com

Well this week, we have to discuss the works of contemporary visual designer Yugo Nakamura and a pioneering “movement” artist. Looking at some of the kinetic drawings of the pioneering artists, I found it hard to make a comparative argument with the majority of their works. The mediums of which the pieces of art are presented on are very differnt, making it complex to underline some common ground for the two.

However I did find a piece by Theo Van Doesburg, which really utilizes perceptions and contrast to emphasis kinetic design. The slight differ in each white background square in the picture, the change of size, and the consistent parallel side lines of the square gives the impression of forward movement towards the viewer. Furthermore, the triangles formed but the black and white squares indicate the direction of desired propagation.

Nakamura’s piece "shift cover", gives us the same impression of the zooming effect by similar ideas such as strong black and white contrast, and the change of size of objects. Being an interactive piece, the direction of the movement is generally forward and sideways.

http://yugop.com/ver3/index.asp

Effectively both pictures use the same idea of dynamic interaction between the observer and each piece gives a sense of life and conveys a sense of flow of energy. Like in Nakamura’s piece, it is as if the energy is passed from text to text. In Theo Van Doesburg, the energy is passed to progressive squares. Therefore, I think it is fair to say that these two artist still share ideas and concepts when approaching kinetic art.

Week 10. Comments on Hyde, Lewis. 1999, "Introduction", The Gift: imagination and the erotic life of property, Vintage, London, pp. xi-xiii

AND

Hyde, Lewis. 1999, The Gift: imagination and the erotic life of property, Vintage, London, pp. 48 – 53

The readings are essentially about how art is a gift that an artist is blessed with. And with this power, one can use it for good or evil (in layman’s terms). Effectively what I mean, is that one can make a work of “art” which sells for a lot and this designer can roll in the money, or make some real art which people can enjoy because of its unique qualities. Real art is as I would like to define, is art which really comes from the heart and the soul of a designer. Something which lasts and has a pleasant and strange feel to it and is not made to get people all excited and wanting to pull out their wallets.

The first reading made sense to me and I have a slightly compromised perspective. I do believe great designers make enormous amounts of money, but I do not know how good they feel about their work. Ideally, I would always want to make something I can sit back and be proud of. A piece of work which is a new challenging experience. Hyde portrays to us that our so called “art” works will probably be treated like keepsakes. And money is secondary. I disagree to his stance. I believe money is important, but then at the same time so is creating “art”. I do not see the reason why one cannot sell their piece of work, and at the same time be pleased with the passion you put into it.

The second reading was a bit too far fetched and unreal for my liking. Apart from the fact that the analogy is somewhere in fairyland and elves do exist, I find it hard to believe that ones talent can be somehow be uplifted by more than one party. I mean, if one has a gift, what the point of hoping something magical will happen to help you. Maybe I merely misread the text, but to what I can gather, the second reading has not related to me and is illogical to me as a designer.

Week 7. Comments on "How to Make a Monster" exhibition.

Well I was actually feeling pretty good going to this gallery. The title just made it interesting. Although I expected a bunch of monster paintings, the exhibition still greatly surpassed my expectations.

Its was a really practical and educational environment which showed us the procedures of production including character designs, storyboarding, sculpting, right up to the final product. I felt it was rather enlightening seeing how these unreal creatures come to life in the movies we watch today.

So anyways my questions are:

1. Is CGI going to make animatronics obsolete?
2. Well what’s in it for me? (show me the money)
3. My goodness how hard was it to make that gorillas lip sync so well with the voice?

In response to question one, I found an interesting article which basically discusses CGI and animatronics. Marc Savlov’s ‘Godzilla vs. Green Screen’ (retrieved 11/6/06 at http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2005-04-22/screens_feature.html) pretty much talks about how CGI is superseding animatronics and puppets. I feel it’s a slightly bias article considering the fact that hardly any good points are talked about animatronics and puppets. Nothing bad is really said about it, just that it implicates that CGI is generally easier, cleaner, and better. His supporting points for CGI are valid, but as some movie reviews like this "Alien vs. Predator" (retrieved 11/6/06 at http://www.dvdfanatic.com/review.php?id=avpur) indicates the movie only used CGI only when necessary. People in suits were still in this recent movie. I believe the same concept is evident in "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen". The Invisible man is partly CGI and partly man. I guess the lack of human touch in a movie will render it cold and unrealistic. Therefore, I conclude the CGI is probably never going to wipe out animatronics, but I think it will steal a large share of the market from it.

Well the second question is pretty simple, so I just looked up some websites will average job salaries. This website (retrieved 11/6/06 at http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/cgi.do) states that the average CGI salary is around £40 000 a year. This is around $67 000 AUD. Hmmm that’s quite good.

Wow I’m surprised. According to this website (retrieved 11/6/06 at http://www.androidworld.com/prod56.htm ), there is a microchip which can pretty much do the work of an animator by telling you the mouth positions. What can I say? It must be pretty easy then. Probably not as hard as my egg lip syncing I had to painfully do.

Week 6. Comments on Ghiselin, Brewster (ed), 1996 (Reissue edition), "Poincarre", The Creative Process: a symposium,University of California Press, California, pp. 33-38

And

Ghiselin, Brewster (ed), 1996 (Reissue edition), "Henry Moore", The Creative Process: a symposium, University of California Press, California, pp. 73-78.

The first narrative, describes creative process as with the illustration of a mathematical theorist who works hard on a problem having little or no progress. Then he “rests” and does something else not related, and a revelation comes about. This creative process actually works well for me and I understand it quite well. This Mathematician spends many hours and days solving a theory making close to no progress at all. He then does something unrelated and then he just works everything out. The author describes this as the unconscious thinking process. Your mind is still figuring out the problem while it is doing something else. However, the unconscious cannot exits without the conscious thought and effort put into it.

The second text was a bit more difficult for me to grasp as I am actually quite horrible at “3D” works. I’m just not really good at visualizing things in more than 2 planes. I can honestly say I have come a long way with the studio classes’ perspective sessions, but there is still a long way for me to go. I guess it does make sense that the author says that drawing on paper allows for you mind to visualize your object. Theses may include the volume, the weight, the centre of mass, and other relevant features. This creative process, I would imagine is very useful for people would model and draw well.

My Creative Process

The first creative relates to me more that the next one because I am quite Mathematical myself, and even my design process works quite similarly. Let us say I am working on flash and I cannot figure out how some of the scripting should work with colors etc. After spending countless hours to no avail, I go over to my friend’s house and out of the blue I will just figure it out. Maybe it’s something I saw on the television or a graphical piece on my friend’s shirt. One thing is for sure though, if I had not put in the effort to look at the program, I would not have picked out the solution even if I was looking at it. This is me speaking more generally of course.

If I had to make a more specific mention, I would have to say this creative process was really reflected when I was doing the first few collages. I know this make be very hard to believe, but I have never cut up a magazine before. Serious… My parents hardly even ready magazines. Neither do my siblings. I had to look up Good Sammie on the net to find magazines. Ok anyways (getting side tracked), having no experience in this supposedly easy work, I really did not know where to begin. Looking at the first set of four I made in class, which I wanted to burn to cleanse their ugly looks, I thought well… lets make my remaining 12 collages much better than this. So I stare at a design’s worst enemy. The blank page. Must have been around half and hour or so till I got bored and decided it was due till next Wednesday ( yeah it was not a good decision) so I walked down to the park(coincidently this is the same walk I talked about in week 1). I not quite sure happened, but the color schemes, textures and commentary shapes all came to me as observing the scenery. This continued for the rest of the week (yes I know I should have done it earlier anyways…). On the Tuesday night(…), I was again faced with the blank page. But this time there was this time, there was flow in the air. Although my collages are not masterpieces, and aren’t that great compared to others in the class, they are a massive improvement of my first four. Not to say I’m really proud of my work (because its not that great), but if I keep improving at a steady rate, but using these creative processes I think I could actually get somewhere someday. So my moral of the story is not do work at the last minute, but rather take time to absorb creative inspiration after spending sometime with a piece.

Week 5.

Awesome fractual geometry. Since I'm don have grid paper, and I'm bad at drawing, I decided to do my drawing on the computer. This was a very painful 2 hour process(it would have been shorter ifI got my script to work, but my other computer has died so I don't have the script... arh nevermind). Please have a look anyways.The original tree

Painfully Flash traced tree(I don have a drawing tablet... I drew it with a mouse).
85 squares in grid.

325 squares in a grid.
My manually counted squares... Sigh If only my hitest scripted worked, then this would have taken 2 mins.


log(325/85)/log(2) = 1.934904972
This shows a very high fractual dimension. Which I think it means its very dense.

Week 4. Power of Ten.

Great I missed the bus to the lecuture, and the reading is a vide shown. Awesome... So i had to go down to the main libary and find that book. Which I did, it reminded me f the video that my physics teacher showned when we were learning about powers. Maybe its the same video.

So anyways, here are my ten pictures10^5m


10^4 m

10^3m

10^2m

10^1m
10^0m
10^-1m
10^-2m
10^-3m10^-4m


well about half of them are ral and half are digital. If only I had a mircroscope and a lot of time. Fortunately for the 100 km one, my parents live up in the hills which is around 100 km aways from Perth. Hahaha.

Week 2. Comments about "Visions of Vision" by Richard L. Gregory.

Alternatively, Richard L. Gregory's "Visions of Vision" discusses sight through the use of more scientific facts and observations. It talks a lot about how we tend to see what are seems fits best. We can predict what a cloud looks like, what objects stars can form. The text explains how my mind relates shapes and patterns to real objects. Almost any normal person should be able to do this. Our understanding of objects actions and the surroundings is what we call perception.

This reading really relates to the lecture on closure, on how the mind tends make a picture from patterns and shapes. The reading says that essentially our eyes works like a camera, but it is not as shallow. A camera accurately records the images it is exposed to and is able to reproduce it to a reason quality each time. Our minds can do this, but it is definitely subject to distortion. We can see that patterns and ultimately see things a camera cannot pick up. For example, our brain is able to understand a cartoon drawing of a person almost immediately, whereas a real picture and the drawing will hardly even match up. We have formulated our conclusion on the image we saw and hence formed closure.

Additionally, optical illusions trick people into thinking its more than one thing. Our brain analyses at the illusion one way and recognizes a pattern and formulates a hypothesis. Then we pick up another set of patterns and see another perspective. And then we get confused and our brain cannot make a decision to what the image is. So, is it a rabbit or a duck?

This reading supported my understandings of predictions of patterns in pictures. Generally from what I have read and what people have told me, I had already made up my mind that we form closure when we see a sort of pattern in a picture. This reading was slightly useful in backing up my ideas and hypothesizes I had prior.