Digital Drawing Trials - Test activity - Stage 2

Testing the trials with 10 of my costume design students gave the opportunity to:

Check the time scale of the activity
Ensure the activity was clear and achievable
Ensure the activity achieved and answered the aims
To check the questions were not ambiguous
That the participants felt comfortable

The result of the test highlighted the following things:

The activity took approximately 40 minutes however the students really got involved and I concluded that the activity could be achieved (with perhaps less detailed results) in a less time as I can not imagine anyone at the exhibition able to spare the time. The environment was different from the expected environment at the exhibition. The students participated in a classroom environment which may have added to there focus. I asked all students so complete a simple questionnaire about the activity. All students achieved the activity and the feedback concluded that they understood the activity and felt the instructions were clear.

No negative feedback has ensured that activity is successful from the participant’s viewpoint and mostly the answers to the questions were able to answer the aims of the experiment. However I observe that one key issue was not highlighted in the answers gathered. In the set questions I was hoping to gather the views on the potential the graphic tablet for the artist/ designer. On reviewing the questions again and taking into consideration the responses from the students I have concluded to add a question to tease out the information from the participant that I wish to gather.

In constructing an appropriate question I found it had to not be leading in its style. I felt the using the phase like ‘what do you think the potential…’ presumed the participant could see a potential in the equipment. I therefore constructed the following question:

What is your opinion on the graphic tablet and pen becoming part of the modern day Artist/ Designers tool box?

I felt this question is open to negative and positive responses and asked about possible potential without assuming there experience with necessarily be positive

With the response from the test activity I feel confident to enter the trials at the SBTD Conference on the 3rd Feb 07.

Images: a selection of students’ digital drawing from the test activity

The Digital Drawing Trials - Stage 1

Aim

By interacting with the digital pen, stylus and the computer can the experience of drawing on a computer reflect in some way the experience of drawing with a pen or pencil on paper.

By asking individuals, mainly theatre design students and professional attending the SBTD (society of British Theatre Designer) exhibition at Nottingham, to ‘try out’ drawing with a digital tablet and stylus I hope to gain insight into the physical and emotional experience of sketching on a computer screen

Objective

My objective is to obtain qualitative date about the sketching abilities possible potential use, and personal response of exhibition visitors when using a digital stylus and pen.

Development : Stage 1

With aim to get the participant to not worry about the drawing but embrace the experience and record their response I wanted to choose a subject which they could all draw, that could be easily be designed so the focus of the experiment was on the drawing activity and not the design. Initially I intended the participants to draw a beggar woman. I decided this character would be stereotypical and call for little need for design consideration. A beggar women could be of any period, any style, and for numerous production but could also lend itself to a scratchy non-finished look which may be all novice participants could achieve in this brief encounter with the equipment.

I chose to use PhotoShop as the software to perform for the experiment. Firstly as I am familiar with the programme, I feel comfortable that I would be able to support any problems which may occur. Secondarily, as the most popular art software program, even if the participant had little experience of using it, they would most likely have come across its interface at some point.

When planning the exercise it was important for me to approach it as if I were a participant. The very first thing I realised is that if they don’t have basic computer skills then I would have to introduce a few fundamental elements of Photoshop. This reflection has lead me to decide to limit the use of Photoshop tools to the following:

1. Paint tool (using the pen): This tool may change its size and brush style using the paint pallet
2. The eraser tool:, (turning the pen over) if the participant wishes to correct a mistake
3. The Zoom tool: (To be able to draw straight on to the screen can be hard and to be able to zoom in can make details easier to sketch.
4. The colour pallet: if they wish to add colour to the image.

Trying to echo the same experience as a participant at the exhibition I decided I would not take to much time over the drawing. Though not rushed a person at the exhibition would not want to spend a long time on something they had not anticipated to schedule into their day.

So following rules I had set out and using the digital stylus I draw a beggar woman. Image 1 took approximately 10 minutes.

From this I observed the following:

1. I found the exercise hard and a little clumsy, a bit daunting and not very inspiring. I have some experience of drawing with a stylus and I found the blank screen and the subject a challenge thing to start.
2. To get proportion right on a screen first time is difficult and though the pen is fun to make marks the activity could be a negative one if someone used to drawing freehand with a pencil suddenly not being able to draw proportion or anything that resembles there own drawing.

Outcome and areas to change:
1. Re-try the same exercise using a body as a template.
2. Allow participants not familiar with the stylus (or Photoshop) a few moments mark making to get used to it.

Image 2 was drawn over a template (on a another layer the template was hand drawn by pencil and scanned in)

Observation:
1. Drawing over a template is easier to keep proportion but, working on top of a template could restrict the participant to feel free to use the pen naturally. This has however highlighted an experiment I can do with my students later this year about ownership and authenticity.
2. The subject character is wrong. A beggar woman is hard to draw because there is a huge element of design decisions which has to go into it. Designer however hard they try will try to design it and not just experiment with the illustration style.
3. However experienced or not the participant is they may feel their drawing ability is on TRIAL which may make them feel insecure and judged. This may generate negative response just because of the surroundings and not the activity.

Outcome and areas of change:
1. Try an image which does not need precise accuracy, can be easily designed (stereotypical and not to serious) make them feel is ‘just a bit of fun’ to get involved in.
2. Don’t use a template but emphases the importance of a quick marking session and the unimportance for a ‘good’ illustration. Its just to have a go.

I decided to draw a clown. (image 3)


Observations
1. Though a clown can obviously be designed the general look it is a stereotype and design ideas can form quickly easily and the essence is easy to convey quickly in an image. It’s also fun!
2. Proportions can be over emphasised and not necessarily important and the use of colours can lift the image.

Outcome:

1. I have decided to use this the clown as the subject of the trail experiment with my students and then evaluate the outcome.
2. I will make sure there is a mark making/ warm up exercise built is into get used to the pen.
3. My verbal attitude and introduction to the exercise will need to be up beat to make sure the emphasis is on the fun, ‘have ago’ side.

What do 'they' think

Reading a great deal about contextual reviewing and frameworks and the process of research has further informed me of the need to know what others are thinking. Literature reviews and visual analysis is essential and with every word I am gaining further insight not only into digital costume design but that of scenography in general. However along the way I have swayed from my original focus of capturing the thoughts and views of practitioners. I intended to gather qualitative data from personal experiences and gather view of not only costume designers but other stakeholders in the production process such as makers and directors. Also by unpacking other design disciplines and establishing an overview of the use of computers within the wider context of design, I hope to learn more about the potential possibilities which could be exercised in my own practice. Abstracting and collating information from background research will obviously place this enquiry in context with other similar investigations but it’s people’s views which will really bring currency to this investigation. Therefore I need to focus my time on constructing questionnaires and establishing a coherent well represented interview group.
Which I propose will consist of

3 Costume Designers – Using traditional rendering methods
3 Costume Designers – Embracing digital media in their renderings
2 Costume makers - With experience of working with a variety of designers
2 Directors – To speak about there experience of working with costume designs

Also I intend to use the Arts Institute as major resource for other design disciplines I will approach colleagues from Fashion, Model making, Illustration and Graphics.

In addition to this it would seem without consideration not to include the views and thoughts of the current students on the BA Costume for the Screen and Stage course. To add inexperience and uninfluenced views to my contextual research I intend to ask a similar set of questions to 1st year costume students in a group seminar situation. For this I will allow them time to consider their answers and record them on a pre designed sheet. I will also welcome comment and encourage debate amongst the students. This will be conducted at the beginning of a CAD unit where the students are first introduced to the technical and artistic elements of Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator. Hopefully this debate will draw out views on authenticity and ownership as well as capturing fears and interest into the use of computers. Some of the students will come with pre learnt skills from foundation course and A levels and there knowledge and ability may generate supporting or opposing argument for using digital rendering for costume design. I will film the debate for further consideration and review.
I hope to further capture their views via an email survey later in my study.

Putting my research question in context

Julia Delohoy, fellow costume educator and acquaintance shares my interest and vision for the development of CAD for costume design. Her thesis in 2004 introduces some of the same themes and topics which are evolving out of my own reflections and research framework development. As part of her thorough investigation into CAD in UK costume design education she discusses the issue of the hand rendered imagery and compares them to the aesthetics and function of digitally rendered costume illustrations. Her observations are solid and coherent and raise a series of interesting questions which encapsulates and raises question which can be considered for my research. She comments:

In regard to aesthetic comparisons between digital and hand-rendered costume imagery, there is scope to explore this debate beyond this project. Many issues concerning authenticity, ownership and artistic merit are raised …(Delahoy 2004)


The main focus of Delohoy studies focuses around the development and production of teaching material for use by HE costume design students to develop their knowledge, technical ability and appreciation of CAD image making. Her research leaves a substantial area for further investigation which I am hoping to capture as part of my enquiry. She concludes her research with 2 questions which relate particularly to my investigation

How does the use of CAD alter our perception of image content?
How does the use of CAD alter our criteria for judging ‘good’ and ‘bad’ costume design?
(Delahoy 2004)

I had already read Delohoy’s thesis when first completed in 2004 and again in the summer of 2006 just before starting the MA at Nottingham Trent. Since then I have purposely kept away from it thus far so not to be over influenced by it. Leaving reading it until now and scrutinising its content has enabled me to not only ground my work in someone else’s findings but also confirm to me the area and issues which still need to be researched on the subject. I am supported in the fact that my own readings and personal experimentation had lead me to an area which has not only already been identified as an area for further investigation but also something I think is at the forefront of costume design exploration in the 21st century.

I intend to look at classic and key contemporary costume designer’s illustration work to compare and contrast the use on line, silhouette, texture and media to create character and encompass the emotion of the piece. By scrutinising these illustrations I hope to get a sense of ‘good’ costume illustration. By investigating the style of designers and unpacking the difference between design and illustration I will gain a more grounded knowledge of what I feel works for effectively for a good costume design. Also I hope to be able to identify areas for experimentation and investigation when replicating using digital media.