lornamatic

Faceography.

We really miss you, over here across the pond.

From news.com, a startling new expose on the decline of classic drawing skills due to the prevalence of design software.

Uhhmm.

So the basic idea is that design students can’t draw anymore, and it’s all the fault of those gdurned newfangled computers, see?

Except.

Starting somewhere around 1997, this amazing thing happened. Webpages started getting designed in Photoshop, instead of Pico (remember Pico?). Technology embraced design, enabled design, and finally, technology required design.

It’s always been a given that draftsmen and designers must have a solid understanding of their tools. Once, that meant you needed to know how to use pen and ink, how to use a Linotype, how to measure points-inches-picas for pasteup, how to get last minute stains out of a layout that was ready to go to film. Even before that, if you were an artist, you blended your own pigment. You stretched your own canvas. Throughout time, if you were a designer, you worked with materials, in the physical world, and necessarily you were a master of chemistry, of typography, of the hundred odd types of physical interactions between ink and substrate.

It’s not so different today. We have new technology - the mastery of tools has expanded. Some things are simpler. Lots of things aren’t. These days, you need to be a master of information technology, subtractive and additive color, color calibration, digital photography, of the hundred odd types of virtual interactions between different file formats and compression and what each one does to your work. And that’s long before you ever get to the ink and substrate.

You have to deal with saving things, Windows networking, running out of disk space, and backing up your work. You must be a master at machines and technology, and if you’re not, well, you’re at an extreme disadvantage. The truth underlying the article above is not that technology destroys drawing ability, but rather that technology still requires that designers focus their ability on becoming proficient in technology, not design.

To me, the worst thing about designing in Photoshop is it’s missing the tactile satisfaction of tearing off a used sheet of paper, something that didn’t work out, something you’ve been frustrated by, crumpling it up, making a lot of noise and thrashing all around, only to find a pristine, perfect fresh as a snowstorm brand new page underneath. All sins forgiven. Born again design. In Photoshop, all you get is CTRL+A, DELETE. There’s no ceremony. I’m not entirely sure the tradeoff was worth it, not even for unlimited undo.

So the world’s not as physical anymore. Communication is instant and virtual, digital photography is everywhere, and mastery of physical objects is less important to success. Moreover, the skill that allows someone to be a designer today is singularly this: the ability to successfully cope with technology - it’s a subset of patience with machines, an inclination towards engineering, a fearlessness and a willingness to forever put up with relearning tools. You want to get into design, you must sign a contract that says you will keep your brain plastic, you will keep relearning keyboard shortcuts with every new UI designer Photoshop goes through.

(Is it a coincidence that this same generation that’s grown up during daily exponential advances in technology is now confusing the previous understanding of what it means for a generation to grow up? What it even means to be a generation? From here on out, we have plastic generations, and that’s really wonderful. We were born into a time that requires we keep learning, that we keep open to change. We might be in our 30s, but still we expose ourselves to new experiences, new music, new styles, right alongside the 20-somethings.)

Anyway. Back to the point. I’ve been drawing ever since I could first hold a crayon. I’ve been working in software since before it was cool to work in software. I’ve been messing around with modems since the first time Reagan was in the Oval Office, so technically I should be a dinosaur. But: I was born to the Generation of Plasticity. I am addicted to the intersection of the material world and the virtual world. This year, I’ve been doing all the digital things that theoretically destroy drawing ability, and never before have I enjoyed so much crossover between the physical world of paint and charcoal dust, and the shadow-world of packets and pixels.

The truth is that I’ve learned more about good design from smushing burned-up grapevines around on mashed-up, dried-out wood pulp from one single figure drawing class with a really good teacher than I have learned in all the classes about form, function and how to lay things out. Photoshop doesn’t destroy drawing skills any more than having drawing skill destroys Photoshop ability.

I’ve learned so much design from old fashioned drawing, but it goes both ways - in Photoshop, I catch myself doing the same things I do while drawing, only subconsciously - add a slight gradient to dull an otherwise sharp point leading the eye off the page, manipulate contrast to suggest other shapes and forms. While drawing, I am confident in line and composition because of the hours I’ve spent playing in Photoshop. And the most important crossover point is to iterate, iterate, iterate - before you settle on that final layout, throw out at least 20 thumbnail sketches. Extra points if you do them on paper, crumple them up and play rough draft basketball with your trashcan. You sit on a computer at a desk all day, you need the excercise anyway!

Audi engineers spend a lot of time listening to sound. They make sure that doors close right, that locks sound secure, that the clicking of your turn signals are ever just so slightly randomized to prevent you from either driving for 12 miles down the freeway with your left blinker on (a la old guy in a Cadillac), or from music school flashbacks, finding yourself sitting in the left turn lane singing scales (see Ford Metronome, aka Ford Focus).

So I think there’s a similar phenomenon happening over at Epson. It works like this: designers love Radiohead. Epson loves designers. So magically, my scanner and printer seem to be calibrated to sound great with Radiohead. Don’t believe me? Print some high quality stuff (best photo) on an Epson r1800. It is TUNED to the Pyramid Song.

Just a couple minutes later, Mike was scanning some things on the 4180, when You And Whose Army hit. The 300DPI scan was perfectly in tune. With every chord change, the scanner did something subtle and new, but it always fit the music. That’s not really the weird thing, though. The weirdest part is, that scan finished at the exact moment the song ended, on key.
Could there be an iTunes tie-in here?

This has to be exactly how it felt when that first weirdo decided to watch the Wizard of Oz while listening to Dark Side of the Moon. I don’t really want to even speculate how that one was discovered.

Really I just want that new Radiohead album to hurry up and come out. Because for sure that means a whole NEW set of Epson technology is on the way!

So every so often, you get a severe urge to do some polaroid emulsion transfers.

Once in a while, the urge strikes at 10PM at night, and there are no more yard sales and the photography stores are all closed, and even if you bid on the ENDING SOONEST items on ebay, it isn’t going to come fast enough. Exactly what are you supposed to do then?

Well, Walgreen’s was open tonight. They had Polaroid 600 cameras for sale, not the right kind for emulsion transfers. Instant gratification dies hard. We bought one anyway.

So, now you’ve a Polaroid 600, some film packs, and all the art paper in the world. But you’ve still got the wrong kind of Polaroid to use with an emulsion transfer, and you’ve still got that instant gratification problem. What to do?

We did all the same things you’d do, as if we had all the right equipment for the transfer. See, Mike and I are stubborn people, and we have spent years honing our craft on each other. When we both get the same idea in mind, not all that much that can stop us.

So, on the off chance that you find yourself stuck in similar straits, here’s how to fake a reasonably cool looking polaroid transfer in Photoshop CS2.

Prep:
Get scissors and paper. Keep them nearby. We used Strathmore Bristol Board, Smooth finish.

Step 1:
Take a picture with the Polaroid, and quickly cut the two sides and bottom off the developing photo. Leave as much border as you can - this will make your frame more interesting.

Step 2:
Peel the sides apart and press the icky side firmly down on your paper. (Warning, yucky chemicals here, and they’re probably not good to get on your skin, so be careful or something!)

Step 3:
Let the film sit for about 2 minutes, then peel off the plastic. The image itself won’t transfer, but all the emulsion yuck will. Let the paper dry for a few minutes: this is what you’re going to scan.

Step 4:
Scan in the dry emulsion, and open the file in Photoshop.

Step 5:
In Photoshop, create a new layer in the emulsion scan file. Paste your source image (I used a picture of a yellow rose) into the new layer.

Step 6:
Set the layer effect for the source image to Overlay. You should see something that is starting to look a lot like a real emulsion transfer.

Step 7:
Use your favorite technique to erase the boundaries of your source image, so that it fits on the emulsion scan. I used the eraser tool, changed opacity several times, and used different brush shapes to allow the grunge of the emulsion to show through.

That’s it! Here’s what I came up with:

a nice weekend up in San Francisco, lots of old friends and some new ones too, big loud and benevolent f-18 hornets zooming overhead (photos!). Four new boxes of letraset markers. in pantone colors! color calibrated markers! chemistry is beautiful.

Lots of rumors, lots of rumors. I like the nanopods, and while video is awesome and everything, I’m really hoping Apple will be announcing their brand new ipod line will also be coming in pantone colors.

yup yup. that would be too good for words.