In my experience communication has always been regarded as key to a good costume design. As a teacher I speak of clear and strong visual communication skills with my students, but what does that mean and how can I enable myself to make a valid analysis of what makes a good costume design illustration.
My initial approach was to ask my students:
I asked costume students from the BA (Hons) Costume for the Screen and Stage course at the Arts Institute at Bournemouth the following question:
What makes a good costume design illustration?
The question, which I e-mailed to students from all three year’s received a 20% response rate. The following points were identified by the students as things that they thought made a good costume design illustration. I have grouped the qualitative responses together under key indicators. The indicators were identified by picking out recurring words and statements in the student responses. All indicators received more than 13% response with the most response being 61%.
The order of the list is defined by the most recurring indicator to the least.
Clear communication of technical information
Character/ Characterisation
Colour and fabric
Mood/ atmosphere
Detail
Flexibility for interpretation
Though the responses had familiarities, some students’ comments were more detailed and profound. Two examples follow:
"What is important is that the design conveys the mood and colours of the costume. You can’t really define what makes a design good because one really painterly atmospheric design can be amazing, but so can a detailed drawing which includes all the technical aspects. It all depends on the designer. Also successful designers design from photocopies and still produce beautiful shows. Who can say?"
Katy Boon – Level 3,
BA (Hons.) Costume for the Screen and Stage: Design students
"A good costume illustration… makes you start thinking. How am I going to make this, is there a story behind why this character is wearing this costume? .. A good design illustration communicates the idea the designer is [thinking] very clearly."
Eva Hodnefejell - Level 2
BA (Hons.) Costume for the Screen and Stage.
Once I had established key indicators from the students I needed to test them at face value. My personal response did not agree with all the indicators identified from the students and I felt more robust and experienced opinions could aid me to firm up the key indicators and establish a formula to assess ‘What makes a good costume design illustration’. To gain this insight I wanted the indicators to be considered at face value. I asked a series of my colleagues the following questions.
Do you agree with the indicators identified by the student group?
Would you add or subtract any indicator?
Please indicate which indicator(s) you think are the most important
What do you think make a good costume design illustration?
The group, who from now I will refer to as the ‘professional group’, consisted of 7 costume educators from the Arts Institute. Out of these four of the academics main discipline was in costume making and three in costume design. To get an external point of view I also emailed Julia Reeves (nee Delahoy), costume designer and tutor at Leicester University. Julia’s own thesis in 2004 investigates ‘Digital Scenography’ and in particular teaching strategies for the delivery of computer aided costume design. In part two of her thesis she wrote about ‘the form and function of professional costume design imagery’ (Delahoy 2004). I felt to gain her opinion and add an external voice at this stage would help establish a clearer picture.
The following findings were established.
All members of the professional group approached answered the questions, which were sent by email. 7 out of 8 agreed that the indicators were appropriate but there was concern over the order of importance. Another issue raise by 2 respondents was that the priorities of a costume design would change depending on who they were trying to communicate to. When asking the group if they would subtract any of the indicators the only one which received a reaction was the indicator, ‘interpretation for maker’. I was not surprised to see this as it echoed my personal reaction. This particular indicator only had a 13% response from the student group therefore had not been a strong contender at the initial stage. One member of the professional group felt ‘flexibility could be a little ambiguous’ (Email: Barrington 2007) and 2 others identified they could not understand its importance. From these responses I have chosen to remove it from the indicator list.
The group did identify a variety of things they would add. I had considered before sending out the question that each individual may respond personally to this question and I did not find any particular recurring subject in the answers not already included in the student list except one. The communication of historical period/ genre and a visual ‘translation’ of the director’s concept were both identified under this question. I interpreted these to be the same things, and collated them under the heading ‘communication of the production style’ which I will add to the indicator list. Other subject like artistic skill, understanding of the body shape and pose were also suggested but I felt the latter 2 of these were already considered under characterisation. As for the heading ‘artistic skill’, I felt this would be difficult to determine as artistic skills can be viewed subjectively and what one person thinks is solid art skills someone else may not agree with.
When establishing the importance of the indicators, characterisation, mood and atmosphere became the hot favourites closely followed by technical information. Colour and fabric though important became the least referred to indicator. Throughout all the professional respondents emphasised the importance of clear communication and referred to it throughout the answers to the questions. Julia Reeves refers to the costume design illustration as a ‘springboard for discussion/ design conversation’ she goes on to say ‘a good costume design translates the text into a visual language that can be understood…’(Email: Reeves 2007)
With my findings from the professional group I reworked the indicators as follows:
Clear communication of
Character/ Characterisation
Mood/ atmosphere
Technical information
Colour and fabric
Detail
Production style
Finally I felt it important to establish external benchmarks for my question. For this I looked at a series of citing’s from a variety of sources which would be able to verify my findings and give me structure to form opinion on the work of others and reflect on my own practice. For this I referred to key subject specific texts which would enable me to establish an overview and find answers to my question. Of the 7 books I referred to, two were English and five American. All were devoted to costume design and were ‘how to’ style books for students, teachers and industry beginners. I hoped that the experience and knowledge of these frequently referred to text’s would add great value and breadth to my inquiry. In addition to the texts I also referred to journals and conference papers to support my findings.
Throughout my reading the costume design was referred to in variety of ways. The costume drawing, final design and costume rendering were used to describe the image used to visually communicate what a character wears. However the most frequently used phrase was the costume sketch. An example of this is demonstrated by Ingham (1992 pg 88) ‘ there are very few rectangles of paper or board anywhere else in the world that must communicate as much information…as a costume sketch’. Interestingly not one reference was made of the design illustration except for La Motte (2001 pg ?) who identified the differences between the role of the designer and the illustrator. This discovery did not support the terminology I had been using and I started to doubt my findings thus far. If I had not been utilizing regularly used terminology, would the results of the question I had been asking be correct. I reflected on my developments so far and referred to the dictionary. The Collins Dictionary describes an illustration as ‘pictorial matter used to explain or decorate a text’. A sketch is described as ‘a rapid drawing or painting, often a study of subsequent elaboration’ it goes on to describe a sketch as ‘to make (a rough drawing, etc.)’ Reading through these two descriptions I was comforted to see that actually when thinking of a final costume design that an illustration better described the product. However the dictionary describes a design as;’ to work out the structure or form of (something), as by making a sketch, outline, pattern or plans’ (Collins dictionary). This concluded that the word design in fact best describes the drawing a costume designer uses to communicate costume. However during the initial construction of the question I felt reluctant to use the expression ‘what makes a good costume design?’ as I did not want the final product that was seen on stage, but the drawing to be analysed.
I continued to seek knowledge from the specialised costume design authors to answer my question. Obviously characterization was regularly cited as essential. Cole and Burke (2005 pg 117) states ‘a costume presentation….must strongly express the personality of the character’. Interestingly I also noted the amount of reference to the skill of figure drawing as a key attribute to a good costume design. Motley, 1992; Curry, 2007; Cole and Burke, 2005; Ingham, 1992; Cunningham, 1989; and Huaixiang, 2004; all mention the key importance of figurative proportional drawing which ‘illustrate garments meaningfully’ (Cunningham 1994 pg 147). On reflection I reconsidered the previous results from the professional group. I had discarded body shape and pose and bundled them together under character. I do agree that the choice of pose is part of the characterisation but body shape is perhaps a different aspect to judge. The better the proportions and figure drawing the more effective communication of the costume can be executed.
A fundamental point raised during my literature study was the purpose of design and who it is communicating to. The importance of mood and atmosphere as well as technical detail is important to ‘convey ideas to the directors and inspire the actors by showing them how they will look’ (Anderson and Anderson 1999 pg 154). Colour and fabric were mentioned as well as the representation of texture which, I felt was an essential addition to the indicators list together with colour and fabric. Detail and technical information was widely discussed as an essential ‘road map leading to the costume that will eventually be cut and stitched’ (Ingham 1992 pg?). A good technically drawn design communicates a visual language for a costume maker to transform the 2D image into a 3D creation. An important advantage as Cunningham states is ‘a clear understanding of the designers intentions will limit expensive changes later’ (1998 pg181).
Throughout each book the author reminds us that the costume illustration is ‘nothing but a way of getting the production on’. (Brown 2007 pg35). Though this is the case a costume designers’ uses the 2D image to express what they cannot communicate in words. To discover what makes a ‘good costume design illustration’ I will need to seek further and speak to the audience that receives and uses the design in different ways. The director to visualise their concept, the actor who uses it to help them picture what they will look like in character, and the costume supervisor/ maker who will realise the image and transform it into a costume to be seen on stage. As Delohoy maintains ‘the costume drawing is … a vital stepping stone in the development of a production, the 2D image provides the link between an initial concept and an actual performance’ (2004 Pt 2)
From review subject specific literature I have considered my findings and have revised the key indicators as follows:
Clear communication of
Character/ Characterisation
Mood/ atmosphere
Technical information
Colour, fabric and texture
Detail
Production style
Proportional figure drawing
ANDERSON, B., AND ANDERSON, C., 1999. Costume Design, second edition, Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publishers
BROWN, P., 2007. Craft with a Bit of the Gob. In: BURNETT, K., ed., Collaborators: U.K. Design for Performance 2003 -2007. U.K: Society of British Theatre Designers.
COLE, H., and BURKE, K., 2005. Costuming for Film, Los Angeles: Silman-James Press
CUMMINGHAM, R.,1994. The Magic Garment, Illinois: Waveland Press Inc.
CURRY, A., 2006. Drawing Conclusions: The Importance of Drawing in the Process of Costume Design. In: The Arts Institute at Bournemouth, ed., 2006 Costume Symposium 2006: Promoting Research in Costume and Performance, Bournemouth, 19 -20 July 2006. Bournemouth: AIB
DELAHOY, J., 2004 Digital Scenography: Costume Design. MA Thesis , Nottingham Trent University.
HUAIXIANG, T., 2004. Character Costume Figure Drawing; Step – by – Step Drawing methods for Theatre Designers. Burlington USA: Focal Press
INGHAM, R.,1992. Costume designers Handbook, 2nd ed. Heinemann Education.
LA MOTTE, R., 2001 Costume design 101 – The art and business of Costume Design for Film and Television Business. California: Studio City
MOTELY, 1992. Designing and Making Stage Costume. 2nd ed. London: The Herbert Press Ltd.
