1

IntroJoined Forces

PHASE #1

Show & TellSite VisitsInterviews

PHASE #2

The ListsEgo WrestlingOpinionator

PHASE #3

Methods & AnalogiesInspiration

PHASE #4

The Birth Of The Mark Making ShowIdentityEpisode 1Process AnalysisFeedbackSummary

CONTENTS44

778

111213-14

1718

212225252628

2

3

INTROWelcome to the Personal Project Process Journal of Vana Coleman. This document forms a part of a Competition Brief submission for the GSA 2012 and is intended to be read in conjunction with the Research Journal and the Development Journal. The latter two summarise the different stages of a team project by Vana Coleman and Philip Blaikie.

In this journal you will find a personal point of view analysis of the project stages and a rationale for the labour division.

JOINT FORCESDuring the selection of a suitable competition to answer both Philip and I found we shared an interest in the brief Make Your Mark that was set by the D&AD. The original brief asked the applicants to pick an audience (their dream employer) and to highlight their skills accordingly, standing out in a group of recent graduates in the creative industry.

We agreed that the literal ‘bells and whistles’ interpretation of the brief would simply be an indulgent exercise and instead the brief could be looked at from the point of view of a ‘bigger player’.

The brief had caught my eye after several discussions evolving around the annual GSA Degree Show and the way The Product Design Department exhibits itself; how does an individual stand out in a group, while still being part of it? How does that group get exhibited to the outside world and how do the various narratives within get expressed?

4

5

PHASE #1

6

SHOW & TELL

SITE VISITS

After agreeing to start the project with an intense phase of joint research into exhibition design and its narratives, we set up a tumblr.com blog to collect the main aspects of our findings. This platform did not so much act as a place to exchange material with each other but more as a collection of curated points in order to better explain our background.

This became especially useful after contacting various people involved within the industry of exhibition design as it allowed them to ‘check us out’ before agreeing to spend time meeting us face to face.

The first phase of ‘field’ research was carried out by visiting some of Glasgow’s best know exhibition spaces and museums. We met on location and proceeded to go through the exhibitions as ‘normal visitors’. At the end of the day we would sit and reflect on our visits comparing different venues in their successes and failings of guiding the visitors through the narrative of the space. Our main areas of interest at that point were static displays, interactive displays, interactive activities, lighting, seating and feedback systems.

I became particularly curious about the set up of feedback collection (if any) and the availability of reflection areas.As we proceeded from site visits to arranged meetings with people behind the set up of exhibitions, this area remained of special interesting to me and it was fascinating to compare the responses of professionals from very different backgrounds.

7

INTERVIEWSWe were very successful in managing to arrange interviews with people from very varied backgrounds, even though working in a similar creative field.

By the time it came to meeting our contacts we had not only agreed on who would discuss what parts of the prepared topics but also developed areas of specific personal interest.As mentioned before, audience feedback and the way that was gathered was an area I was particularly fascinated in.

The Riverside Museum turned out to be the most surprising in the way they approached this topic. Paul Watson and Julie Taylor explained in great detail how each exhibit had a specific feedback system and how the audience were directly influencing the development of future exhibition changes.When, however, I enquired about the connection of the café/restaurant to the rest of the exhibition space, the answer was rather dismissive. I found this highly surprising in a space that was custom planned and built specifically for its purpose.

Why not include every single part of the establishment, especially when feedback and reflection systems are so pronounced everywhere else?

This lead me back to thinking about the GSA Degree Show and the set up of the space within the Product Design Department. Could we (for the first time?) introduce an engaging feedback system and how could the lounge area be better incorporated into the whole exhibition experience?

#6SCIENCE CENTRE

#5MATTHEW DARBYSHIRE

Finally we met Jenny Templeman the Exhibit Development Co-ordinator for Glasgow Science Centre. It was very interesting to discuss how the Science Centre tryed to maintain scientific integrity whilst creating exhibitions which spoke to diverse audience groups often including young children as well as adults. Jenny described honestly the Science Centre’s successes and failings and openly discussed the lifespan of exhibits which were overused and under maintained. In her role she hopes to create exhibits which engage audiences with new media. We were intrigued to see how she intended to future proof these and create exhibitions which would still be relevant when implemented in several years time.

We had the pleasure of meeting artist Matthew Darbyshire at the opening of his recent exhibition at Tramway. It was great to see how Matthew responded to such a vast space with his work T-Rooms. We were particularly interested in how he combined different media and collaborated with other artists and writers in the creation of the exhibtion. It is particularly interesting to consider the difference between art and design based exhibitions and the expectation each place on their audience to have prior knowledge.

8

9

PHASE #2

10

IDEATIONIDEAGENERATIONa.k.a. THE LISTSAfter summarising Phase 1 research and coming to a conclusion that we wanted to showcase ‘our kind’ of design to the general public without the bullshit lingo we entered Phase 2 with the main tasks of identifying an audience, a topic to address and an appropriate communication method.

This proved to be a lot harder and more time consuming than we ever expected. We have the lists to prove it.

11

From visual inspiration to ‘name all the things you like in 2 minutes’ The Lists concluded in the slight madness that is The Layer Cake; an attempt to visualise our goals as an infographic.It makes perfect sense to us but that’s as far as it goes.

This phase of the project was immensely good fun on the surface, especially as the rest of the year is spent in solitary confinement with you own brain, but had the lingering, nagging undertone of ‘this is not really getting us anywhere’.

Conclusion: reassess tactics.

THE EGO WRESTLEAn interestingly difficult conclusion to a difficult phase.

Vanity - 0‘Greater good’ - 1

Q: ‘Should we keep working together?’A: ‘Aye, let’s keep going for now and see how it goes.’

12

OPINIONATOR

ANALYSIS

An engagement tool perhaps a bit more obscure than intended, however, I stand by the opinion that the general public are reluctant to discuss the topic of DESIGN and it would be even more difficult and awkward doing so face to face.

Overall the outcome of asking ‘What is design?’ was relatively predictable and confirmed our thoughts that the general understanding of contemporary design practices and thinking is fairly limited and dated.

In terms of labour division this phase was more like an extended discussion on design over a cup of coffee, rather than ‘you do this and I do that’. Taking turns in leading the conversations happened naturally and if at the end of the day it was decided that both need to come in the next morning with some individually derived fresh ideas then equal delivery effort could be counted on.

At the end of our research phase we came to a unanimous decision to keep working on the project together, at least until the competition deadline for the D&AD, 9th of March 2012.

Equally unanimous was the conclusion to ‘exhibit’ the GSA method of design to the general public in order to create a more informed and critical discussion around the topic.

13

14

15

16

PHASE #3

17

ANALOGIES

Nigella Lawson

From looking at public engagement methods we moved onto considering what topics are already thought of as popular and are presented in a way that capture the attention of a wide audience.

For example, could we present design thinking and processes as an analogy to cooking? Or football?

METHODSIn order to start thinking about design in a way that would be engaging to a wider audience we considered various methods of communication that could be used to encourage a public discussion.

These were inspired by a varied selection of different mediums, from small scale interventions within public spaces to large scale public installations.

An intervention/info gathering method based on this example for Glasgow could be a voting system for smoking corners and outside spaces. Cigarette stubs could be extinguished or collected/discarded in a way that visually creates a statement or opens up a discussion.

Light installations offer the ability to create eye catching visuals on a large scale and once set up, running costs are insignificant compared to printing same scale billboards.Using projections would facilitate the introduction of a narrative through changing visuals. In terms of geographical location, Glasgow not only has a vast selection of well visited public spaces but also (in this case) benefits from frequent dull weather, aiding the visibility of light projections.

METHODS &ANALOGIESWith a new goal in mind we started to discuss different methods of creating interest in a topic that one might not be familiar with. In terms of Glasgow’s geographic specificity I became particularly interested in using big scale public lighting installations as the weather is often dull and projected imagery would often also be seen during the day.

This direction, however, brought us back to the (potentially) projected material itself and trying to pick topics that big groups of people could relate to.

Until one day, on my way to the studio I started thinking back to the amount of time we had spent talking about food.

Could an analysis of a contemporary design project be shown as a recipe on Saturday Kitchen? Well..yes, but it’s maybe not the most appropriate solution.

We quickly moved on from trying to shoe horn Dementia Dog into a soufflé recipe and started thinking about the possibility of using actual ‘middle men’ to aid deliver our message, instead of a metaphor.

ARE WENEWSWORTHY?Previous examples of communication methods would rely heavily on the message creator (in this case us) to deliver it through a chosen medium.

It was at this point that we started to consider existing channels of news media acting as a middle man.

How could we make design newsworthy?Could we play to existing media interest? How does the message change depending on the medium?

VOTE BDPBETTER DESIGN PARTY

18

ARE WE NEWSWORTHY?

INSPIRATION

Yes.Now how do we convince the journalists of that?

At this point Philip became slightly too excited about the prospect of hitting the front pages of daily newspapers by presenting design through a political party. Luckily this phase passed in a week or so and we were able to continue developing our ideas through looking at campaigning that wasn’t necessarily directly related to politics.

Enter old friend Food: featuring friends of Food Mr Oliver and Mr Whittingstall. Get over food. Get back to work.

***We compared the successes of social campaigns to existing internet and TV shows that managed to take a complex topic and make it approachable to the general public. What they all had in common was an infectious enthusiasm for their topic and a creative passion to share it.

For me it was obvious, filming our message was the way forward. Especially, since sharing it initially online would need the least amount of funding and also considering that the competition submission for the D&AD needed to in the form of a short movie. Philip took some convincing but we got there in the end.

19

20

PHASE #4

THE BIRTH OF THE MARK MAKING SHOWThe birth of the concept for a mini-series of our very own was to be the last push in terms of writing lists and trying to find the ‘hook’.

We came up with a series of requirements that an episode of The -at this point still nameless- Show would have: >Most people must be able to relate to the topic through first hand personal experience. >It should celebrate overlooked innovations and expose failings of systems that should be better. >It should highlight the importance of design in noticing opportunities and acting upon them.

The main inspiration for The Show came from 1950s futurism and the phrase: ‘We were promised jetpacks, and all we got was...’ as this was widely used and could be played upon in order to introduce different topics. It also provided a fun challenge of creating fictional print material and playing around with ideas for teaser trailers.

But does anyone actually care?

Before jumping in head first and wasting a lot of time we decided it was worth doing a reality check and see if our initial proposal would be of any interest to our potential audience. For this purpose we arranged some skype meetings with older relatives who were in no way in the ‘design bubble’ and quizzed them on their interest on the topic and if they would watch it if it would be presented in the form of a TV show.

The feedback was very positive and encouraging, which is exactly what we needed to move forward with the proposal.

21

IDENTITYWe were very precious about the naming process as we both strongly believe that a name can either make or brake a project. After an agonising few days we settled on Philip’s suggestion of a name: The Mark Making Show. This was derived from the original brief as well as being a synonym for a design process. At this point Philip developed a habit of entering a room with the exclamation: ‘Hi! I’m Mr Mark Making!’ which in turn very quickly developed into the tag line for the show.

We are Mark Making. You will be too.

Up until now our roles within the project had been fairly similar and had never needed any particular division. Our different skill sets and interests came more into play as we moved into evidencing our work and producing material for the show.

Philip’s main strengths and passions lie within visual representation of data in a meaningful way. This was particularly clear on the afternoon we spent arguing over the semantics of the shade of yellow we were going to use. Please note, Philip is colour blind.

For me context and content take priority over visual communication.

As we were moving closer to the D&AD hand in deadline, the natural division of work that followed was perfect. We compiled a script and after gathering all necessary film material I was more in charge of editing it all together, while Philip set up necessary web based platforms. This is not to say we worked in solitude, as we still consulted each other, but that we trusted the other to do the job without constant supervision and guidance.

22

23

24

THE MARK MAKING SHOW

From submitting The Pitch to the D&AD we rapidly moved onto thinking about the first episode of The Mark Making Show. We had agreed a long time before that the topic of the pilot episode would be transport. We hadn’t, however decided if the episode was going to focus on a specific part of transport or discuss the topic in general.

Looking back at our whole body of research we decided that if anything, we needed to be able to show our knowledge and design methods through curating different examples of work. We split up for one final push of intense research, which we then presented back to each other and picked out the most relevant and interesting examples in order to create an engaging narrative.

Feeling confident in our chosen examples of work and also lead by a desire to save time, we skipped writing a script and jumped straight into filming.

In hindsight this was not perhaps the wisest of choices as our novice show presenter roles became obvious on film very quickly. Time however was not on our side, therefore having to go with what we had and make the most of it. The downside of the scriptless filming became even more evident when editing the material together.

Future note to self: Not scripting does not equal time win.

We had planned and scheduled the remaining couple of weeks to allow for individual interventions in trying different avenues for distributing the episode but unfortunately the extra editing time rendered that goal unachievable. Therefore we proceeded directly into a choreographed method of ‘user testing’.

EPISODE 1

PROCESS ANALYSIS

..well, maybe it’s a bit too fast ‘cause I would like to know a bit more about some of the things..but I suppose I can go to the website afterwards.

Emma - Principal Engineer at Atkins LtdAndrew - Astro phycicist, Co-Founger of AMEE and Counting Thoughts

Emma and Andrew are both from Glasgow and are married with 2 kids.

Both of them found the episode interesting because it talked about design examples that they hadn’t heard of before, although Andrew thought the bit about the shoes was completely pointless.

For future episodes they suggested topics like food and communication.

I hadn’t considered design in everyday transport before but you’ve made me realise how important it is.

Rosie - Retired primary school teadher

She is originally from Cumbernauld, now lives and does occasional supply work in Oban.

“Just want to say, I read through all the information about transport design and watched all the videos - fascinating stuff!”

Overall, even after reading the extra material online, she felt she would like more info about some examples in show itself.She has already shared it with her friends by emailing them the link, but only the ones she thinks

Figo says she “just liked pretty things” so she supposes the video did make her appreciate design considerations behind things more.

Dan - works for his family company making blinds

He is 21 and lives in Castle Douglas

Dan watched the pilot episode with his girlfiend Figo and even though their webcam wasn’t working properly, they sent us live feedback by email.

They thought the topic was well presented and researched. The interviews with people made it more professional looking. They would most likely share it by posting the link on Facebook or tell their friends about specific parts of the show.

25

In order to really see the reactions of our ‘test subjects’ we compiled a step by step guide for them to film themselves watching the episode.

Great plan in theory, however what we forgot about was that not everyone has access to a laptop armed with a webcam. Nevertheless the amount of people getting back to us was high and if unable to send us a video, we got feedback through emails and social media.

FEEDBACK ..Yeah I liked it, cause it made you think about like, how design influences everything and how it’s so significant.

Gillespie - Highschool student

Gillespie is 16 years old and lives in Edinburgh.

He enjoyed the episode the most because it made him think of things he had not considered before.

It would be ideal to have as features on TV Shows like The One Show etc.

Kay - Health Visitor

Lives and works in Edinburgh.

She thoroughly enjoyed the video and thought it highlighted the topic of design very well.

“People just don’t think about how all the stuff they use everyday got to be there, they only notice when it doesn’t work.”

Honestly there’s some very good work there, just needs a little tweaking to be awesome!

Stephen - Freelance 3D animator and a drummer

He is 31, lives and works in Glasgow.

Stephen’s feedback was especially valuable as he broke the episode down into parts and took time to comment on each section.

He was also constructively critical of the scrips, set up and our presentation style, pointing out that the whole pace needs to be snappier. Overall, though, he liked the idea and would not only wathc it, but tell his friends about it.

..well, maybe it’s a bit too fast ‘cause I would like to know a bit more about some of the things..but I suppose I can go to the website afterwards.

Emma - Principal Engineer at Atkins LtdAndrew - Astro phycicist, Co-Founger of AMEE and Counting Thoughts

Emma and Andrew are both from Glasgow and are married with 2 kids.

Both of them found the episode interesting because it talked about design examples that they hadn’t heard of before, although Andrew thought the bit about the shoes was completely pointless.

For future episodes they suggested topics like food and communication.

I hadn’t considered design in everyday transport before but you’ve made me realise how important it is.

Rosie - Retired primary school teadher

She is originally from Cumbernauld, now lives and does occasional supply work in Oban.

“Just want to say, I read through all the information about transport design and watched all the videos - fascinating stuff!”

Overall, even after reading the extra material online, she felt she would like more info about some examples in show itself.She has already shared it with her friends by emailing them the link, but only the ones she thinks

Figo says she “just liked pretty things” so she supposes the video did make her appreciate design considerations behind things more.

Dan - works for his family company making blinds

He is 21 and lives in Castle Douglas

Dan watched the pilot episode with his girlfiend Figo and even though their webcam wasn’t working properly, they sent us live feedback by email.

They thought the topic was well presented and researched. The interviews with people made it more professional looking. They would most likely share it by posting the link on Facebook or tell their friends about specific parts of the show.

26

27

The Make Our Mark project has been extremely interesting, especially because the outcome is very different from what we are usually involved with at GSA.

It has pushed my personal limits in terms of working with new mediums and time managing work while not only responsible for my own outcome.

As with any project there are ups and downs, especially when working in a group and this project was no different. However, in this case what stands out most for me in the end is the way our individual working methods and ethics played off each other and encouraged us to really push through and find something worth while doing.

There are several problems with Episode 1, which would need to be resolved in case of further development, however overall I’d say well done us. I am Mark Making.

SUMMARY

28