Extended Practice Tutorial
I had a super useful one 2 one tutorial session with Harriet, which really helped my clarify some important things regarding my project. I made a bunch of notes. See below.
We began by reviewing my initial research questions, which was…
“Experiment with methods of type design practice that engage two or more sense”
As much earlier established. This is too brief. After more recent readings I had identified a much more precise motive…
“How can the portrayal of alphabets be transformed to create an intentional change in identity?”
Though much clearer, it was suggested that I can still work to develop and alter the language to make it even more specific. I’ll need to refer back to Transforming Type by Barbara Brownie to source more appropriate terminology.
Harriet recommended going through the book and making a list of various relevant vocabulary on an excel spreadsheet.
Before the meet up, I ventured up a floor to seek some support regarding motion graphics (and hopefully) some web animation, cinema4d advice too.
Steve said this new bloke George is running the AE workshops this year, so I popped in and he said he’s running support sessions on:
Wednesday afternoons at 1330 until 1630.
There are also support sessions on:
Tuesdays 0930 – 1230 and 1330 – 1630 which could also be useful. Not sure who they are with though.
Back to 1-2-1. General notes:
Going back to the 1-2-1 with Harriet I’ve got more notes. Bullet pointed in different categories below.
Who are/is the audience of the Type Cube and my work in general? I think my work is currently a little selfish as its very much for myself but with a complete Type Cube piece I could decipher its audience much easier.
Is it an educational tool?
Is it purely an intriguing user experience?
It’s purpose could simply be for the experiment itself (referring back to research question, how far can this be pushed?).
This research could also lead to further practical investigation.
An experiment or insight into how typography on a 3-dimensional platform can be manipulated.
Does it have to be painted? As mentioned in my 3d printing consultation with Andy, painting the letters would cause issues with how they fit. But, if the most important thing regarding the Type Cube is the physical interaction then is it essential that the letters are even painted?
The Type Cube could solely (at this stage) exist as a prototype. Perhaps, this project could be continue beyond the course.
With the Type Cube completed in a quicker way, this would allow for me to test the most important thing. What it’s like to touch and play with. How it feels to hold in my hand etc.
I was reminded to keep exploring my practice, surrounding this project and to keep researching contexual information. I.e. what other people have done. Below I’ve got a few more things that are worth exploring:
Polystyrene 3d letter tests. Making little cubes and stacking them to create the 3d letters.
Could a sequence of letters make a word?
Consider more simple outcomes. (Quicker tests etc.)
Try combining 1 or 2 letters digitally and also physically first.
Finally, general notes from tutorial:
Analyse my work! After each stage or test. Has it another angle of exploration? And what have I learnt from this?
Could I contact similar practitioners for a meet-up when im in London?
Also, to book onto the Olafur Eliasson exhibition at the Tate (to look out for his sensory experiences and also to check out his prototypes cupboard for primary research).
All this has now been transferred onto a pretty huge to-do list so I’ve got a clear idea of what I’m doing. Though it would be quite handy to jot this down into a calender or timeline or something actually.