72/01/2016 HWCAAAAAAAR

10 Feb

Zihan Hannah Zhao

How many ways can you do something…..?
How many ways can an articulate aline analyze an animated robot?
= HMWCAAAAAAR
The first time you been to somewhere- compare to several times you been to.
The different ways entering the LCC among classmates. For this session imagine you have just landed on earth having come from a distant aplant, in a galaxy far, far away. (btw You are a very curious and highly observant species.)

note: Philosophy qualia

PHASE 1: observe, collect, analyse, compare, notice patterns.

The first time you land the earth, you see, hear, touch, taste, feel,  & think, you are always meticulously externally recording with you. Your internal memory systems are used in more imaginative ways. All you know about the planet you are now on is
from Voyager 1 a space craft sent into outer space from  Earth on September 5, 1977

Picture1Data have been collected from graphics. It can be life, rythem…

View original post 351 more words

Advertisements

LCC Photography Research Show

21 Mar

LCC Photography Research Show

20140321-194926.jpg

This research hub based at London College of Communication (LCC) brings together practitioners and theorists to explore and promote photography as a mode of imaginary thought and its relation to a collective imaginary.

Specifically, we are interested in the increasingly complex research methodologies that underpin fine art photography as a form of knowledge with its own epistemology. Particular emphasis will be given to photographic works that explicitly engage with contemporary thought; theories that engage with contemporary photography; as well as photographic images and philosophies of the image that contribute to how the imaginary is invested in photographic production and the ‘as if’ condition of the photographic image.

The Photography and the Contemporary Imaginary Research Hub builds on LCC’s international reputation for conceptual photography and is organized by Dr Wiebke Leister and Paul Tebbs.

Events

The Photography and the Contemporary Imaginary Research Hub is pleased to announce the second LCC Photography Research Show

Private View: Thursday 27 March 2014, 18.00-20.00 Nursery Gallery, London College of Communication, Elephant & Castle

Jananne Al-Ani . Beverley Carruthers . Robin Silas Christian . Edward Dimsdale . Matthew Hawkins . Claire Hooper . Tom Hunter . Mark Ingham . Melanie King . Wiebke Leister . Dallas Seitz . Sophy Rickett . Tansy Spinks . Monica Takvam . Esther Teichmann . Val Williams .

The Photography and the Contemporary Imaginary Research Hub builds on LCC’s international reputation for conceptual photography. This event is organized by Beverley Carruthers and Wiebke Leister and supported by UAL Communities of Practice funding.

;

David Hammons performing ‘Bliz-aard Ball Sale’

31 Dec

20121231-170511.jpg

David Hammons performing ‘Bliz-aard Ball Sale’ (1983), Cooper Square, New York City
Courtesy Migros Museum, Zurich © David Hammons. Photo: Dawood Bey

From An Interview with David Hammons:

1. I CAN’T STAND ART ACTUALLY. I’VE NEVER, EVER LIKED ART, EVER. I NEVER TOOK IT IN SCHOOL.

2. WHEN I WAS IN CALIFORNIA, ARTISTS WOULD WORK FOR YEARS AND NEVER HAVE A SHOW. SO SHOWING HAS NEVER BEEN THAT IMPORTANT TO ME. WE USED TO CUSS PEOPLE OUT: PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT OUR WORK, DEALERS, ETC., BECAUSE THAT PART OF BEING AN ARTIST WAS ALWAYS A JOKE TO US.

WHEN I CAME TO NEW YORK, I DIDN’T SEE ANY OF THAT. EVERYBODY WAS JUST GROVELING AND TOMMING, ANYTHING TO BE IN THE ROOM WITH SOMEBODY WITH SOME MONEY. THERE WERE NO BAD GUYS HERE; SO I SAID, “LET ME BE A BAD GUY,” OR ATTEMPT TO BE A BAD GUY, OR PLAY WITH THE BAD AREAS AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

3. I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY BLACK PEOPLE WERE CALLED SPADES, AS OPPOSED TO CLUBS. BECAUSE I REMEMBER BEING CALLED A SPADE ONCE, AND I DIDN’T KNOW WHAT IT MEANT; NIGGER I KNEW BUT SPADE I STILL DON’T. SO I TOOK THE SHAPE, AND STARTED PAINTING IT.

4. I JUST LOVE THE HOUSES IN THE SOUTH, THE WAY THEY BUILT THEM. THAT NEGRITUDE ARCHITECTURE. I REALLY LOVE TO WATCH THE WAY BLACK PEOPLE MAKE THINGS, HOUSES OR MAGAZINE STANDS IN HARLEM, FOR INSTANCE. JUST THE WAY WE USE CARPENTRY. NOTHING FITS, BUT EVERYTHING WORKS. THE DOOR CLOSES, IT KEEPS THINGS FROM COMING THROUGH. BUT IT DOESN’T HAVE THAT NEATNESS ABOUT IT, THE WAY WHITE PEOPLE PUT THINGS TOGETHER; EVERYTHING IS A THIRTY-SECOND OF AN INCH OFF.

5. THAT’S WHY I LIKE DOING STUFF BETTER ON THE STREET, BECAUSE THE ART BECOMES JUST ONE OF THE OBJECTS THAT’S IN THE PATH OF YOUR EVERYDAY EXISTENCE. IT’S WHAT YOU MOVE THROUGH, AND IT DOESN’T HAVE ANY SENIORITY OVER ANYTHING ELSE.

THOSE PIECES WERE ALL ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THE BLACK VIEWER HAD A REFLECTION OF HIMSELF IN THE WORK. WHITE VIEWERS HAVE TO LOOK AT SOMEONE ELSE’S CULTURE IN THOSE PIECES AND SEE VERY LITTLE OF THEMSELVES IN IT.

6. ANYONE WHO DECIDES TO BE AN ARTIST SHOULD REALIZE THAT IT’S A POVERTY TRIP. TO GO INTO THIS PROFESSION IS LIKE GOING INTO THE MONASTERY OR SOMETHING; IT’S A VOW OF POVERTY I ALWAYS THOUGHT. TO BE AN ARTIST AND NOT EVEN TO DEAL WITH THAT POVERTY THING, THAT’S A WASTE OF TIME; OR TO BE AROUND PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT.

MY KEY IS TO TAKE AS MUCH MONEY HOME AS POSSIBLE. ABANDON ANY ART FORM THAT COSTS TOO MUCH. INSIST THAT IT’S AS CHEAP AS POSSIBLE IS NUMBER ONE AND ALSO THAT IT’S AESTHETICALLY CORRECT. AFTER THAT ANYTHING GOES. AND THAT KEEPS EVERYTHING INTERESTING FOR ME.

7. I DON’T KNOW WHAT MY WORK IS. I HAVE TO WAIT TO HEAR THAT FROM SOMEONE.

I WOULD LIKE TO BURN THE PIECE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE NICE VISUALLY. VIDEOTAPE THE BURNING OF IT. AND SHOOT SOME SLIDES. THE SLIDES WOULD THEN BE A PIECE IN ITSELF. I’M GETTING INTO THAT NOW: THE SLIDES ARE THE ART PIECES AND THE ART PIECES DON’T EXIST.

8. IF YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE THEN IT’S EASY TO MAKE ART. MOST PEOPLE ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR IMAGE. ARTISTS HAVE ALLOWED THEMSELVES TO BE BOXED IN BY SAYING “YES” ALL THE TIME BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE SEEN, AND THEY SHOULD BE SAYING “NO.” I DO MY STREET ART MAINLY TO KEEP ROOTED IN THAT “WHO I AM.” BECAUSE THE ONLY THING THAT’S REALLY GOING ON IS IN THE STREET; THAT’S WHERE SOMETHING IS REALLY HAPPENING. IT ISN’T HAPPENING IN THESE GALLERIES.

9. DOING THINGS IN THE STREET IS MORE POWERFUL THAN ART I THINK. BECAUSE ART HAS GOTTEN SO….I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK ART IS ABOUT NOW. IT DOESN’T DO ANYTHING. LIKE MALCOLM X SAID, IT’S LIKE NOVOCAINE. IT USED TO WAKE YOU UP BUT NOW IT PUTS YOU TO SLEEP. I THINK THAT ART NOW IS PUTTING PEOPLE TO SLEEP. THERE’S SO MUCH OF IT AROUND IN THIS TOWN THAT IT DOESN’T MEAN ANYTHING. THAT’S WHY THE ARTIST HAS TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHAT HE SHOWS AND WHEN HE SHOWS NOW. BECAUSE THE PEOPLE AREN’T REALLY LOOKING AT ART, THEY’RE LOOKING AT EACH OTHER AND EACH OTHER’S CLOTHES AND EACH OTHER’S HAIRCUTS.

10. THE ART AUDIENCE IS THE WORST AUDIENCE IN THE WORLD. IT’S OVERLY EDUCATED, IT’S CONSERVATIVE, IT’S OUT TO CRITICIZE NOT TO UNDERSTAND, AND IT NEVER HAS ANY FUN. WHY SHOULD I SPEND MY TIME PLAYING TO THAT AUDIENCE?

DAVID HAMMONS 1986

20121231-170550.jpg

2012 in review

31 Dec

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 3,500 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 6 years to get that many views.

Click here to see the complete report.

From Wish You Were Here? to GAMSWEN… Mark Ingham

6 Dec

Journal of Writing in Creative Practice

From Wish You Were Here? to GAMSWEN and onto Designed Dissertations: Connecting the design studio with writing in design
Author:  Mark Ingham
///
///

This review describes the evolution of three art and design ‘writing’ projects delivered during the contextual studies courses of the undergraduate Graphic and Digital Design and 3D Digital Design and Animation programmes in the then Communication Media for Design Department in the University of Greenwich’s School of Architecture, Design and Construction. This review briefly tells the story of how and why these projects have developed over the past five years. 

///
ISSN: 17535190
Online ISSN: 17535204
First published in 2008
3 Issues per volume
Volume 5 Issue 2

Cover Date: November 2012

Contents
Writing GOLD: A celebration of writing at Goldsmiths
Authors:  Marl’ene Edwin

Page Start: 175
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

Fragmented temp(oralities): A Caribbean perspective of time in literature and art

Page Start: 189
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

How to write the perfect beginning and end
Authors:  Naomi Folb And  Aby Watson

Page Start: 205
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

Learning from the past to challenge the contemporary context of design: A collaborative enquiry investigating the effect of time on the design process
Authors:  Svenja Bickert And  Edward Johansson

Page Start: 223
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

Contours and shadows of selfreflection: Creating a ‘Narrative Hologram’

Page Start: 239
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

The art of letters: An epic journey of intimate thought and exchange

Page Start: 251
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

No one expects the design inquisition: Searching for a metaphorical solution for thinking, researching and writing through design
Authors:  Julia Lockheart And  Maziar Raein

Page Start: 275
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

Making the workshop work: A dialogue between Alke Gröppel-Wegener and Pat Francis

Page Start: 291
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

From Wish You Were Here? to GAMSWEN and onto Designed Dissertations: Connecting the design studio with writing in design
Authors:  Mark Ingham 

Page Start: 301
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

Practice Ph.D.s, regulation and the elusive Type C
Authors:  Rebekka Kill

Page Start: 319
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

BOOK REVIEW
Authors:  Joan Turner

Page Start: 325
View Header/Abstract   purchase PDF

///

Mark Ingham: New Paradigms in Pedagogical Thinking for the Academy of the very near Future, or how the Wasp Became the Orchid #STU10

3 Jan

Mark Ingham: New Paradigms in Pedagogical Thinking for the Academy of the very near Future, or how the Wasp Became the Orchid #STU10.

What is Design Thinking Anyway?

16 Feb

Roger Martin from: http://observatory.designobserver.com/entry.html?entry=11097

*

The Design of Business


Design thinking, as a concept, has been slowly evolving and coalescing over the past decade. One popular definition is that design thinking means thinking as a designer would, which is about as circular as a definition can be. More concretely, Tim Brown of IDEO has written that design thinking is “a discipline that uses the designer’s sensibility and methods to match people’s needs with what is technologically feasible and what a viable business strategy can convert into customer value and market opportunity.” [1] A person or organization instilled with that discipline is constantly seeking a fruitful balance between reliability and validity, between art and science, between intuition and analytics, and between exploration and exploitation. The design-thinking organization applies the designer’s most crucial tool to the problems of business. That tool is abductive reasoning.

Don’t feel bad if you’re not familiar with the term. Formal logic isn’t systematically taught in our North American educational system, except to students of philosophy or the history of science. The vast majority of students are exposed to formal logic only by inference and then only to the two dominant forms of logic — deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Those two modes, grounded in the scientific tradition, allow the speaker to declare at the end of the reasoning process that a statement is true or false.

Deductive logic — the logic of what must be — reasons from the general to the specific. If the general rule is that all crows are black, and I see a brown bird, I can declare deductively that this bird is not a crow.

Inductive logic — the logic of what is operative — reasons from the specific to the general. If I study sales per square foot across a thousand stores and find a pattern that suggests stores in small towns generate significantly higher sales per square foot than stores in cities, I can inductively declare that small towns are my more valuable market.
Deduction and induction are reasoning tools of immense power. As knowledge has advanced, our civilization has accumulated more deductive rules from which to reason. In field after field, we stand on the shoulders of the giants who have come before us. And advances in statistical methods have furnished us with ever more powerful tools for reasoning inductively. Thirty years ago, few in a boardroom would have dared to cite the R2 of regression analysis, but now the statistical tools behind this form of induction are relatively common in business settings. So it is no wonder that deduction and induction hold privileged places in the classroom and, inevitably, the boardroom as the preeminent tools for making an argument and proving a case.
Yet a reasoning toolbox that holds only deduction and induction is incomplete. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, American philosophers such as William James and John Dewey began to explore the limits of formal declarative logic — that is, inductive and deductive reasoning. They were less interested in how one declares a statement true or false than in the process by which we come to know and understand. To them, the acquisition of knowledge was not an abstract, purely conceptual exercise, but one involving interaction with and inquiry into the world around them. Understanding did not entail progress toward an absolute truth but rather an evolving interaction with a context or environment.  

James, Dewey, and their circle became known as the American pragmatist philosophers, so called because they argued that one could gain understanding only through one’s own experiences. Among these early pragmatists, perhaps the greatest of them and certainly the most intriguing was Charles Sanders Peirce. Peirce (rhymes with “terse”) was fascinated by the origins of new ideas and came to believe that they did not emerge from the conventional forms of declarative logic. In fact, he argued that no new idea could be proved deductively or inductively using past data. Moreover, if new ideas were not the product of the two accepted forms of logic, he reasoned, there must be a third fundamental logical mode. New ideas came into being, Peirce posited, by way of “logical leaps of the mind.” New ideas arose when a thinker observed data (or even a single data point) that didn’t fit with the existing model or models. The thinker sought to make sense of the observation by making what Peirce called an “inference to the best explanation.” The true first step of reasoning, he concluded, was not observation but wondering. Peirce named his form of reasoning abductive logic. It is not declarative reasoning; its goal is not to declare a conclusion to be true or false. It is modal reasoning; its goal is to posit what could possibly be true. (For further information, see “Why You’ve Never Heard of Charles Sanders Peirce.”)

Whether they realize it or not, designers live in Peirce’s world of abduction; they actively look for new data points, challenge accepted explanations, and infer possible new worlds. By doing so, they scare the hell out of a lot of businesspeople. For a middle manager forced to deal with flighty, exuberant “creative types,” who seem to regard prevailing wisdom as a mere trifle and deadlines as an inconvenience, the admonition to “be like a designer” is tantamount to saying “be less productive, less efficient, more subversive, and more flaky” — not an attractive proposition. And it is a fair critique that abduction can lead to poor results; unproved inferences might lead to success in time, but then again, they might not.

Some abductive thinkers fail to heed Brown’s requirement that the design must be matched to what is technologically feasible, launching products that do not yet have supporting technology. Consider the software designers who inferred from the growth of the Internet that consumers would want to do all their shopping online, from pet supplies to toys to groceries. Online security and back-end infrastructure had not yet caught up to their ideas, dooming them to failure.

Other abductive thinkers fail to address Brown’s second requirement: that the innovation must make business sense. Looking back on the dot-com crash, Michael Dell, founder of Dell, argues that little has changed. “Still today in our industry, if you go to a trade show, you walk around and you will find a lot of technology for which there is no problem that exists,” he says. “It’s like, ‘Hey, look at this, we’ve got a great solution and there is no problem to solve here.’ ” [2] Think of the Apple Newton, the world’s first portable data assistant. Launched in 1993, it utterly flopped. According RIM’s Lazaridis, it was a failure of abduction. “It had no future,” he argues. “What problem did it solve? What value did it create? It was a research project. What could you do with it that you couldn’t do with a laptop? Nothing. And everything you could do with it, you could do better with a laptop.” Apple Computer (as it was known then) wasn’t wrong when it inferred that customers would value a small, portable, digital assistant, but it didn’t ultimately deliver a solution that matched the insight.

So the prescription is not to embrace abduction to the exclusion of deduction and induction, nor is it to bet the farm on loose abductive inferences. Rather, it is to strive for balance. Proponents of design thinking in business recognize that abduction is almost entirely marginalized in the modern corporation and take it upon themselves to make their companies hospitable to it. They choose to embrace a form of logic that doesn’t generate proof and operates in the realm of what might be — a realm beyond the reach of data from the past.

That’s a risk many leaders won’t take. Making Peirce’s logical leaps is not consistent or reliable; nor does it faithfully adhere to predetermined budgets. But the far greater risk is to maintain an environment hostile to abductive reasoning, the proverbial lifeblood of design thinkers and the design of business. Without the logic of what might be, a corporation can only refine its current heuristic or algorithm, leaving it at the mercy of competitors that look upstream to find a more powerful route out of the mystery or a clever new way to drive the prevailing heuristic to algorithm. Embracing abduction as the coequal of deduction and induction is in the interest of every corporation that wants to prosper from design thinking, and every person who wants to be a design thinker.
“What is Design Thinking” is an excerpt from Roger Martin’s new book The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking is the Next Competitive Advantage (Harvard Business Press, 2009).
Notes
1 Tim Brown, “Design Thinking. ” Harvard Business Review, June 2008. p. 86.

2 Michael Dell, in conversation with the author as part of the Rotman School of Management’s Integrative Thinking Experts Speaker Series, September 21, 2004.

Learning to Design Without Losing Your Soul

2 Feb

Learning to Design Without Losing Your Soul

By Francisco Inchauste on January 27, 2011

Aspiring designers are failing. They are being let down by their schools and sometimes by our design community. In America, creativity is on a decline. The resources available online are massive; Quality content is hard to find.

“I’m eager to hire the next great class of designers, but to my dismay–and the dismay of many young hopefuls who’ve often spent many years and thousands of dollars preparing to enter the industry–I’m finding that the impressive academic credentials of most students don’t add up to the basic skills I require in a junior designer.” — Gadi Amit1

The design community has a new challenge. It’s not how we push design to the next level. It’s not how we best design publications for the 80 tablets coming out this year. It is something I see as much more critical: Guiding the next generation of designers.

More at: http://www.getfinch.com/finch/entry/learning-to-design-without-losing-your-soul/

From:

Smashing Magazine http://bit.ly/exJnSA
01/02/2011 16:40

Just in Time

19 Jan

Just in Time, or A Short History of Production

Installation/Book

London

A book printed through a printing chain made of four desktop printers using four different colors and technologies dated from 1880 to 1976. A production process that brings together small scale and large scale production, two sides of the same history.

  • MAGENTA (Stencil duplicator, 1880)
  • CYAN (Spirit duplicator, 1923)
  • BLACK (Laser printer, 1969)
  • YELLOW (Inkjet printer, 1976)
  • 210 x 297 mm
  • 42 pages
  • 100 copies
  • english


@title
@title
@title
@title
@title
@title
@title
@title

D&AD Student Awards: Help is at hand

12 Jan

Help is at hand PDF

Dear Mark,To help your students in the generation and development of their ideas for this year’s briefs we’re running three Student Awards Sharp’ners on 25, 26 and 27 January in London. Each event will play host to recent graduates, Creative Directors and Black Pencil winners who will share their experiences, top tips and sources of inspiration.

Each event will feature a Creative Brief Station, where you and your students can meet the D&AD team and practitioners to get advice on your students’ ideas and work so far. In addition, many of this year’s sponsors will be present to reveal the inside-story on their brands.

Venue: Vibe Bar, Brick Lane, E1 6QL
Start-time: 6:30pm
Members: Free
Non-Members: £5 per night

Tuesday 25 January 2011 – Advertising: What’s with the big ideas? Having them, honing them and winning with them, four teams will push their creative generation skills battling against other teams to win the rest of the audiences’ vote.

Confirmed so far:

Albion
Aaron Hinchion
Jon Plackett
Nick Darken

AMV BBDO
Nicholas Hulley
Nadja Lossgott

BUY TICKETS

Wednesday 26 January 2011 – Crafts 6 x 6Six speakers with six minutes each share their latest insights and inspiration from the worlds of Typography, Animation, Illustration, Photography, Copywriting and Film-making.

Confirmed so far:

Noma Bar
David Wilson
Chris O’Reilly
Laura Pannack
Sarah Brownrigg
Amelia Noble
Phil Nutley
Walter Campbell

BUY TICKETS

Thursday 27 January 2011 – You The JuryWhat’s the story behind those harsh decisions that govern the course of the design categories in the professional and Student Awards each year? Understand why things win, see a Student Awards category being judged live and test your own designs against the criteria.

Confirmed so far:

Jake Smith – JP74
Steve Owen – Figtree
Clem Halpin – Turner Duckworth
Paul Kemp-Robertson – Contagious
Fanny Siglers

BUY TICKETS