An open question was left at a former post : Reading Facts. which I wish to revisit. When knowledge is not valued over its ability to be fast or slow what does is become? The issue with fast or slow knowledge rests on the delivery form factor, ie through computation (kindle, ipad internet) or not. The ability for the message to be lost due to the form factor it becomes delivered through has change dramatically due to technology in the past 10 years. Marshall Mcluhan said “the medium is the message” This statement has become widely accepted when discussing media theory especially print material. We are acutely aware of how content delivery changes between tabloid news, newspaper news, and news Television, and that is only taking into account a line of similar content. As content types diversify the ability of the medium to affect the message is compounded. There is a lively debate in academia as to how new media devices are affecting education and to that extent society. The level of pervasiveness within technologies like the internet, smart phones, computation and the like are having on sectors of society across all economic positions remains a huge challenge from both a standard of living access point but also a society & educated populace stand point. Because of that, education is on the head of the technology spear. The ubiquitous nature of information technologies has forced the systems of education to reevaluate their methodologies for better or worse. However I believe there is a massive gaping hole in the collective thinking process of education when it comes to communication technologies. Ubiquitous computation is seen as a barrier to teaching methodologies due to the nature and speed at which computational devices alter and change and access of content especially the content that is attempting to be taught through the teacher. The 19th century education model still dominates a vast majority of theory of education system especially k-9.
I don’t teach in k-9 but I would imagine it would be super difficult to dish out lessons, mandated curriculum and dated textbooks when a majority of that content can be accessed, parsed and delivered at the touch of a mouse. I am not saying that the speed of the information age is a bad thing, I can only imagine how it throws a wrench in to the teaching methodologies of countless classrooms. Similarly I am not suggesting that there should be a free fore all on the Internets access and ubiquitous nature. Many have discussed the difficult bind to which education is in and me rambling on about it is not really the point especially when there are writers & educators like Sr. Ken Robinson. But education has to find a what to establish what it means to be educated in our modern times. Is this going to be based on the old model of memorization and specialization or will it me more the ability to ask the right question and be endlessly curious with the ability to use technology to not only find the answer but contribute back to how the questions are asked?
I do believe that the ubiquitous nature and speed of our current technology has had a profound impact on our ability to tell stories. It is arguable that we have more stories then ever before and I would agree with that, however, it is purely an outcome of access not quality. The saying quality over quantity has never been more appropriate than when speaking about the internet and the amount of content that is added to it knowledge bank daily (to which I am adding with this blog). Therefore I believe that a fundamental piece that is missing in education is truly great storytelling skills, conceptual thinking and lateral thinking methodologies and subsequent devices to assist those skills. The ubiquitous catch all nature of computers is, in my opinion, having a detrimental impact on thinking out side the computer and impacting the skills of students, designers, teachers, and businesses.
I recently took place with the generosity of the AIGA Los Angeles Organization in the Student Portfolio day as a reviewer. Although I did not review hundreds of portfolios, one thing that I was immensely disappointed in was the lack of storytelling when in came to presenting visual ideas and solutions. Students seemed to have a prescribed set of things in their somewhat unimpressive collections of work. It made me sit back and think about what it is that a designer does? In the 5 portfolios I looked at it felt as if I was looking at a predetermined script. It went something like this. 1 to 2 logos with 1 of those logos as a letterhead business card etc, 1 to 3 print posters (just the solutions no context), 1 to 4 ad campaigns (non of them a systems of ads just a single advertisement), 1 to 3 editorial spreads (no context), 1 package (a cd jewel case, no context), and 2 to 3 misc illustrations, photographs, or typography pieces (again no context). Each having between 12 and 15 pieces. Only one person had even the hint of digital competency with an overwhelmingly simple html site but I gave her some slack because she was only a sophomore as USC and I appreciated the gusto to get evaluated at such a early stage in her schooling. However the predicted procedural nature of the portfolios made me stand back for a second and say wait? Is this really how education views the role of designers? Has the system of curriculum’s and dated industrial needs reflected so poorly on the skill sets of designers? Can we as visual professionals be so quickly summed up. My frustration with the lack of story telling lead me to be quite harsh on my last review of the day. I told my student. “Yes you have the required 15 pieces of work that has some how been determined this makes you a designer, however I know nothing about you! You have not told me a single story or lead me along any thinking path that has convinced me that your visual solutions are the correct ones.” I followed it up with “a logo and business card are the baseline of designer however if you can not tell me a story or show me that you have a making and thinking methodology then I really don’t care about your work. Period. I want to know if you draw, how many images you collected how many versions you did, why you chose to do this the question you asked the things you were looking at and thinking about when you made it. If I was going to hire you which I am not, I would want you. Not a prescribed set of 5 to 8 baseline skills, yes they are necessary but not unteachable in industry. If I were you I would find a way to let your portfolio be a mirror of your passion and your ability to think and think as a designer not the curriculum of your design education” After going a bit of a rant I said I was sorry for being overly harsh but without it all the work becomes useless to which he disappointingly agreed.
After all the reviews were over the reviewers and educators gathered as a recap of the day. During the discussion a number of reviewers shared the same frustration with a lack of personality and passion and storytelling in their students work. I am convinced that this lack of story telling is based in the narrow minded approach most educational systems are equating to design. Design rather than a thinking approach is a determined set of skills. However the collection of design professionals siting in the room were disgusted with the lack of understanding of what industry is looking for out of our design education systems. It seemed to me the design education systems were looking to teach predetermined skills where industry was looking for creative visual thinkers. Somewhere there is a missing element in the teaching of skills to designers. I believe that skill is storytelling. Design is not making a logo, the logo is the culmination of visual problem solving that requires a huge set of skills including design research, anthropology, biology, visual taxonomy, system thinking, business, drawing, computer skills, history etc etc.
“Design is that area of human experience, skill and knowledge which is concerned with man’s ability to mould his environment to suit his material and spiritual needs.” _archer, B
This lack of story telling could be a vision problem of education to design or it could be something more systemic as I had mentioned at the beginning of this post. Regardless of the root of misbegotten storytelling, I think that until we as educators, designers, professionals, and thinkers articulate the importance of media specific storytelling methodologies and start charting changes in the education delivery systems to meet these new changes, our society will start to see the growing effects and missed opportunities from not teaching and learning from profound stories and storytelling processes.
User Experience design has been a contested title for those designers who already think they accomplish these tasks as graphic designer / art directors. User experience is a title that is vague on purpose. What is the roll of a designer in a system or product. For 100′s of years designers have taken visual language and communication skill and applied them to the purposes of commerce and business. Graphic design is the use of art to sell. How ever in an ever changing technological world the ideas of usability and engagement have confronted the business world and created a void for which graphic designers need to fill. For some industries like the music industry there unwillingness to adapt to the changing music experience allowed other companies more versed in the experience of new technologies to take the legs from their business models, ie apple. User experience is vague for the reason that it can encompass so many facets of the business cycle from strategy of a product launch to the specific of how a user logs in. The spectrum of experience is the importance of the role of a UX designer not just the specific of a swatch color. Tweet
A line needs to be drawn in the sand for the values of static media. The expectation and belief that that dynamic content is the wave of the future needs to be reconsidered. Motion pictures are great incredible informative and interesting and have changed the way we see and respond to the world, but do we want every bit of content the we engage with to be moving or worse reactive. Media content has variety and in my opinion more value should be placed on the ability of somethings to be still and other things to move.
The expectation that readers of Outside will want to want motion images assumes that the current model of photography is incomplete to the user and what is the answer, a screen. A world of screens is not one that I hope will exist.
Apple is selling record numbers of downloadable games for the iPhone and iPod Touch. This is attracting publishers because the lack of physical media is better economically for both consumers and video game creators (November 12)
Microsoft is set to open up the XBox 360 to user-generated games on November 19, all of which will only be available via download – there will be no DVDs (October 30)
The bullet list is a few examples of technologies and media delivery platforms that currently or will in the future deminish print media’s market share or potentially eliminate it all together. Print Media platformes of books, magazines, posters, etc etc are talked about in term of being Tangible Media.
The description of tangible is defined as capable of being perceived especially by the sense of touch.
The materiality of paper and ink in all is variety from newsprint to gompy has earned print media the use of that terminology with in its description. Media delivery devices like the kindle, the iphone etc are tangible. To suggest that they are not assumes that the ability to touch a screen ie a pixel is not equal with that of prior physical object (artifacts) like books for instance.
The reasoning behind referencing print material as “Tangible Media” and technologies like the Kindle as being something different is really located with in the process of experience. Tangible when describing a book is referencing the experience a user has engage with that media type for the time they were a child to current interactions. Paper has texture, color, smell, it can be flooded and imprinted or debossed the list goes on and on. Tangible becomes a catch all for the experience of turning pages in a seqential artifact and emcompasses the notions of age, use and variety. When tangible is used for the iPhone, Kindle or technologies, it is used more as a description of functionality of the interface. Because a screen is just pixels that can be anything, the experience of that tangible experience is fundimentally different then that of the experience with print media, and rightly so!
The issue is then the expectation that a book can be on a screen and contain the same experience? There is a compromise when “tangible media” is traded for “tangible pixel”, the experience of the can only be mimicked or hinted at through acknologment in either direction. The ability to have animated turning pages in a pdf is an example of a media type not sure how to accept its “pixel” nature because a pixel can never be a piece of paper.
As technology become more and more ubiquitous, instances of technological over hauls should not be a process that should shock and awe. There has not been a revolt from the users of land line telephone into cell phones, or slide ruler calculator users to digital calculators, but still when I hear about the replacement of libraries with digital e-readers it makes me cringe. I want to stand up and revolt. The notion that a digital e-reader can replace the library in my opinion is in accurate. After hearing a story on NPR about schools and universities decisions to replace their libraries with internet cafe’s and Kindles made me very sad for the quality of learning. Technology has the ability to make incredible advances in knowledge space and context but to say that a networked screen is a more effective alternative to quantifiable, tangible, and accessible knowledge contained in a library is completely wrong. The internet is not a big library and a library is not the internet. They work and operate at different levels.
The affordance of a library is one that has impacted knowledge gathering for centuries and is something that intrinsically contained with in a architectural space. An e-reader has the infinite space of the internet where connected can be adhock and the quality of the linked material is maintained souly by a computer algorithm. Since a library utilizes space, the ability to reference books to the left right and behind a particular search allows for much more access to serendipitous connections where as on the internet and networked experience the knowledge is only as good as the question poised to the search engine. The spacial and tangible nature of books is the aspect that I think is completely ignored by the universities, schools, and institutes that think printed knowledge is on its way out. A kindle is not a table in a library nor it is a shelf with spacial hierarchy it is data Zeros and Ones transmitted over wireless signals.
While doing research I may have to opportunity at a library to have multiple sources on a table at once and have the opportunity to make connections between content purely due to the spacial juxtaposition. Try and accomplish this on a kindle or a web browser or wikipedia and the limitations will astonish the user.
I believe the movement to contain library data with in a e-reader illuminates the spacial aspect of learning and reference material. The idea that the e-reader and the library are in opposition is in my opinion faulty thinking and fails to consider the unique affordances of library use and of e-reader use. The two are not equal and therefore should not be the replacement for the other.
“It’s just stuff on a piece of paper, or canvas” – Tony Zepeda.
My Printmaking teacher Tony Zepeda likes to explain that ink, paint, chemicals, materials etc is all just stuff the interest is where that stuff makes meaning. The artist and designers role is to use the materiality, ink, image, typography, and meaning space.
Ink is just stuff, it can become a paint, or a printer ink, or a screenprinting ink, or a pen ink, or a drawing ink the final form outcome is less import than the fact that it possesses a new and unique quality that before in making and design inks have otherwise not and that is the ability to conduct and be linked and connected to its technological brethren.
The intent of using and experimenting with conductive materials and inks was not to create a new ink, rather it is giving me the space and advantage of working with stuff to might make new meaning where other wise there hasn’t been. I see the potential of thinking about paper and the ink that gives it meaning a larger breath of influence. Paper has been divided from its digital counterpart but what if we starting to mold them together?
1) Noninteractive – when a message is not related to previous messages;
2.)Reactive – when a message is related only to one immediately previous message
3.) Interactive – when a message is related to a number of previous messages and to the relationship between them.
(Liu, Yuping and L. J. Shrum (2002), “What is Interactivity and is it Always Such a Good Thing? Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Advertising, 31 (4), p. 53-64. http://www.yupingliu.com/files/papers/liu_shrum_interactivity.pdf.)
The parsing out of the definition and use of the word interactive has become a process of necessity as computational affordance have moved into virtually every products, service, and systems. Interactivity could be considered a byproduct of web based media and computational programming, but “everything is interface (interaction) design” as quoted by Benjamin Bratton media theorist (http://bratton.info/). On a whole when one says I am building an interactive project they are speaking in the realm of computers, interfaces, and programs.
The example of the “interactive” poster series that applies an interaction to communicate the ideas contained with in the imagery can be more directly associated with “reaction”. Although it poses the question of does interaction require computation? Can physicality and reaction with users become the meaning space. Interaction implies that a user has a certain level of control. These options allow for multiple levels of meaning and connection. Depending on the granularity at which anyone looks at a experience everything is accomplished through interaction. Memory, history, content, context, ideas are all inter related.
Since interaction is starting to be parsed out as “related to a number of previous messages and to the relationship between them” then interaction could be defined at the making of meaning. Interaction requires the learned outcomes pulling from context possessed and learned by the user. Interaction can occur with in static media or with in dynamic either way. The goal of interaction is then place in the in between space of information being conveyed and the connections that are produced.
Multimedia: media and content that uses a combination of different content forms. The term can be used as a noun (a medium with multiple content forms) or as an adjective describing a medium as having multiple content forms. The term is used in contrast to media which only use traditional forms of printed or hand-produced material. Multimedia includes a combination of text, audio, still images, animation, video, and interactive content forms.
Multimedia has become a popularized notion for aspect of what designers make. The nomenclature for our craft exists in the many rather then the specific. A designer who applies their craft to a variety of mediums may it be print and animation, photography and interaction, etc etc. could be considered a multimedia designer. The ability for a designer to call themselves multimedia was a distinguishing aspect at one time, this distinction has now become less relevant in a world of ubiquitous computing and homogenized tools for design and media making. A designers ability to use the tools, not the it is not important, becomes background chatter in the face of design thinking, methodology, and creative problem solving. Multimedia has then been wrapped up in design and the distinction of the new role of designer is left open. The question is: what is a designer when everyone knows how to use Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign, Quark, AfterEffects, Final Cut, etc?
Ubiquitous computing and the rise of the personal computer has dropped the level of entry for design so low that anyone who can buy a computer and software can say they are designers. The creation of the distention of a multimedia designer was to emphasize the ability to perform on multiple platforms of making. The new designer has to be able to move beyond the aspects of designs current roles and place their thinking and process in new and innovative aspects. Designer as curator?, Designer as futurist?, Designer as hybrid-maker? Designer as Creative? Designer as Systems thinker? maybe there isn’t a distinction yet but if multimedia designers continue to see their value as the tools they can access and use they will relegate their role to the spit and polish of industry rather then the innovator of new forms of media and design.
