Thursday, March 10, 2011
Creative Manifesto
Inspired by Karim Rashid's Creative Manifesto, I came up with 10 points of my own:
1. Be versatile in your life. You draw from what you know, so the more you've experienced, the more you have to draw from.
2. Don't dismiss anyone. You can learn a lot from others, and if you're too pretentious to listen, you'll miss out.
3. Always be alert for inspiration and ideas around you.
4. Don't force creativity, chances are it won't really be creative if you do.
5. Different is good, but don't do things differently just for the sake of being different. That's almost as bad as conforming for conformity's sake.
6. Keep a record of any ideas you come up with. If you don't have the resources or time available to do it then, it'll be there for you when you do.
7. Also be versatile in the media you consume. If you regularly watch/listen to/read/play/view film, video games, novels, music, graphic novels, websites, artwork etc. you can draw from all of them to be more creative.
8. Pay attention to advice from people you admire.
9. Never be content. This will hurt your incentive to continue getting better.
10. Consider what it is about a particular film, game, song, etc. that makes you like it. This will help you know what works, and what doesn't (granted this is very much subject to opinion).
1. Be versatile in your life. You draw from what you know, so the more you've experienced, the more you have to draw from.
2. Don't dismiss anyone. You can learn a lot from others, and if you're too pretentious to listen, you'll miss out.
3. Always be alert for inspiration and ideas around you.
4. Don't force creativity, chances are it won't really be creative if you do.
5. Different is good, but don't do things differently just for the sake of being different. That's almost as bad as conforming for conformity's sake.
6. Keep a record of any ideas you come up with. If you don't have the resources or time available to do it then, it'll be there for you when you do.
7. Also be versatile in the media you consume. If you regularly watch/listen to/read/play/view film, video games, novels, music, graphic novels, websites, artwork etc. you can draw from all of them to be more creative.
8. Pay attention to advice from people you admire.
9. Never be content. This will hurt your incentive to continue getting better.
10. Consider what it is about a particular film, game, song, etc. that makes you like it. This will help you know what works, and what doesn't (granted this is very much subject to opinion).
Freak Factor
You can read the article I talk about here
I want to be witty and just put: "I agree with this guy's tip 9. One part of this step says 'Instead of procrastinating from activities that you don't like, just stop doing them altogether' And I agree full-heartedly. I feel like sleep is more relavent to my interests. Good night (: "
But, I'm ironically going to go against this article and continue this blog post because I want to conform and get a good grade! But seriously, I agree with this point to a certain extent, but he should probably specify the kind of activities that are acceptable to completely give up. For example, I would not be a happy camper if my roommate didn't like to take showers, and decided to "engage in permanent procrastination" from taking a shower. This obviously wouldn't be beneficial to her life either because people obviously wouldn't treat her very kindly. There are certainly obligatory things you need to do in our society (such as this homework), in order to succeed, but other than that, I suppose this point makes sense.
I would be wrong to not talk about the other points of tip 9. The other points basically map out ways to use your weakness/strength characteristics to your advantage. For the most part, I do agree with this. It basically is a pitch for the fact that you're simply going to do your best if you find your niche, and find others to occupy their correct niches in the positions around you.
This essentially sums up the whole article. Everyone's a freak. Deal with it.
No, but really, the article asserts that a freak is someone who is unique because of a natural positive obsession. It says that we should embrace our flaws because our flaws come with a strength. You can't have one without the other. This is another point that I'm inclined to agree with. He cites creative as being a strength to the weakness of unorganized, and dedicated as a strength that goes with stubbornness. There are others on the chart there, that I've found to be pretty reflective of the traits of people I know (or even myself). So logically, in attempting to fix one of these flaws, you would also be nullifying one of the corresponding strengths. This makes sense, because if you take a "boring" person, chances are they are "boring" because they aren't very spontaneous, instead they're responsible. So, if you try to make this "boring" person more "fun" by making them forego a homework assignment to go to a party or something, this makes them less responsible. This article urges you to play to your strengths in order to succeed. As with most things of this nature, although these traits in the chart match up fairly well with each other, there will always be people who are exceptions.
I like point number 8, where it talks about "The Power of Uniqueness". I feel like he could have used a better example than the leaning tower of Pisa, like talk about an actual person, but it still drives home the point. If everyone was the same, there would never be any progress. We would all think the same thoughts, and basically be the same person. Without any differences, the evolutionary process can't even take place, and this is arguably the starting point of progress. The people who have really made a difference in our world (for better or worse...) and who appear in our history text books are those people who are unique enough to do something impactful.
So, even if I don't agree with little parts here or there of this article, I agree with the overall message. (even if I don't want to in a sense, because like most other people, I wish I could get rid of my weaknesses) So, you should check it out, it's pretty sweet.
I want to be witty and just put: "I agree with this guy's tip 9. One part of this step says 'Instead of procrastinating from activities that you don't like, just stop doing them altogether' And I agree full-heartedly. I feel like sleep is more relavent to my interests. Good night (: "
But, I'm ironically going to go against this article and continue this blog post because I want to conform and get a good grade! But seriously, I agree with this point to a certain extent, but he should probably specify the kind of activities that are acceptable to completely give up. For example, I would not be a happy camper if my roommate didn't like to take showers, and decided to "engage in permanent procrastination" from taking a shower. This obviously wouldn't be beneficial to her life either because people obviously wouldn't treat her very kindly. There are certainly obligatory things you need to do in our society (such as this homework), in order to succeed, but other than that, I suppose this point makes sense.
I would be wrong to not talk about the other points of tip 9. The other points basically map out ways to use your weakness/strength characteristics to your advantage. For the most part, I do agree with this. It basically is a pitch for the fact that you're simply going to do your best if you find your niche, and find others to occupy their correct niches in the positions around you.
This essentially sums up the whole article. Everyone's a freak. Deal with it.
 |
| Animated gifs don't work on Blogger? That's thoroughly disappointing. |
No, but really, the article asserts that a freak is someone who is unique because of a natural positive obsession. It says that we should embrace our flaws because our flaws come with a strength. You can't have one without the other. This is another point that I'm inclined to agree with. He cites creative as being a strength to the weakness of unorganized, and dedicated as a strength that goes with stubbornness. There are others on the chart there, that I've found to be pretty reflective of the traits of people I know (or even myself). So logically, in attempting to fix one of these flaws, you would also be nullifying one of the corresponding strengths. This makes sense, because if you take a "boring" person, chances are they are "boring" because they aren't very spontaneous, instead they're responsible. So, if you try to make this "boring" person more "fun" by making them forego a homework assignment to go to a party or something, this makes them less responsible. This article urges you to play to your strengths in order to succeed. As with most things of this nature, although these traits in the chart match up fairly well with each other, there will always be people who are exceptions.
I like point number 8, where it talks about "The Power of Uniqueness". I feel like he could have used a better example than the leaning tower of Pisa, like talk about an actual person, but it still drives home the point. If everyone was the same, there would never be any progress. We would all think the same thoughts, and basically be the same person. Without any differences, the evolutionary process can't even take place, and this is arguably the starting point of progress. The people who have really made a difference in our world (for better or worse...) and who appear in our history text books are those people who are unique enough to do something impactful.
So, even if I don't agree with little parts here or there of this article, I agree with the overall message. (even if I don't want to in a sense, because like most other people, I wish I could get rid of my weaknesses) So, you should check it out, it's pretty sweet.
Reflections on Gaming Presentation
The two things that we didn’t do a good job of explaining was the storyline that we had fleshed out for our particular video game, Gestalt Principle. (If we were making an actual game, we obviously wouldn’t go with this title, we were contemplating Tabula Rasa and something else)
Here’s a quick refresher on what our game proposal was. It would be a survival horror game that appears to take place in a jungle that has all these monsters. Your only defense against the monsters would be this lantern that you would constantly have to find oil to refill. The more your character is in the dark, the more damage is done to his sanity meter. The player would try and figure out what is going on while trying to remain alive.
We actually spent a good deal of time discussing what we wanted the story of the game to be. The other major thing that we didn’t cover well in our presentation, which goes along with the story, is the character design and development. Did we ever say anything about how we wanted the player to discover clues along the way that would narrate about the history of the place he woke up in? I don’t believe we did. We also wanted to include a part where we trick the player into drinking contaminated water. (You can raise sanity meter by performing actions such as eating and sleeping) This water would have made the character hallucinate, and perpetuate the idea that there’s a larger force at work against the player here, not just nature. The reason we never really included a part to explain the story was because I guess we never really decided what we were going to do with the story exactly since the presentation didn’t call for any plot summation. So I guess I can’t even decisively say “This is the story we planned.” But I can tell you some of the great ideas we came up with.
Christina had a really good idea that went somewhat along the lines of once the character reached the edge of the jungle, he just found a wall, with a door. When he opens the door he finds himself in a completely different setting with different obstacles. (And he goes through a series of “rooms” which could be constituted as levels) And then Eric had a really good idea as well where, after all the hard work of fighting off death and insanity, when you find yourself at the end of the jungle, there’s this huge sheet of glass that blocks his escape. He starts running alongside the glass to try and find a door or hole or anything, but he just finds that he goes in a complete circle. He’s trapped indefinitely. Since these ideas conflict with each other, it was kind of easier not to decide on one since we didn’t have to. (although it would have been very beneficial to our pitch if we did)
We also discussed what kind of character we would want to have in our game. Since our character is completely disoriented and doesn’t know what’s going on at the beginning, doesn’t even know who he is, we wouldn’t give the player any information either. We contemplated whether we should just leave him as an ambiguous character to allow the player to better insert themselves into the game.
These two points were obviously very weak in our presentation because they were virtually non-existent. Even though it wasn’t a requirement, we should have included them because they could have been the strong point of our game.
Now I apologize if anything I said above conflicts with something one of my groupmates say. Although old school games didn’t have much more of a story other than “Save the princess”, it’s important for most next gen games to at least attempt a story line. (Unfortunately a lot of games seem to have stories that seem like afterthoughts after creating half the game already)
I would say that video game mechanics would be the hardest to describe orally. This is simply because the easiest way to understand game mechanics would be to experience them. And considering the ambiguous “others” of this question, they might very likely be people who haven’t played a wide array of games, so you wouldn’t be able to effectively give examples. If you were the person who designed Katamari Damarcy, I imagine it would be hard for a person to understand how fun the game is from a description of the game mechanics: “you roll a ball around and pick up stuff. As the ball gets bigger, you can pick up larger stuff.” It’s simply easier to hand the controller to the person and say “go for it”. The video game medium is an interactive one, and since game mechanics dictate the interaction that the player experiences, it’s more difficult to describe.
Reflection on Hero/Villain Assignment
You can view Emily and Adam's super hero/villian here
I believe that they contrasted the lighting for their characters pretty well. The villain is placed in a very dark city which gives it an ominous mood. There are lights, but they don't seem to emanate all that much light on the scene. It's nighttime which is a fitting for a villain, and the moon being placed behind the character makes her stand out from the background more, since if she was set against the night sky she wouldn't have. I think the moon being placed behind her almost makes her look more powerful in a sense.
This is contrasted with Hipsterman who has no apparent backdrop. However, I get the impression that it's more lit up than the dark city the villain is in, considering there's a shadow behind him. The glow that emanates from him symbolizes his heroism and that he is the good guy of this narrative. There isn't much affinity between these characters, which shows how they don't get along.
Here is Christina and her partner's hero/villain
I thought that they used good colors to contrast their hero and villain. While the hero has a very powerful hue, red, that calls for your attention, the villain actually lacks a hue, as gray is not a color. The saturation of the hero is very high, as it is a very bold kind of red and orange. The value chosen for the red is a fairly bright one, while the villain has a fairly dark one. I like that the hero is comprised of warm colors, which is contrasted with the villain. Although the villain does not have "cool colors", we have come to see grays and blacks as an opposite of sorts to bright, warm colors. I like that they have great affinity in their shape and how their drawn, so the major difference between the characters is their color. This emphasizes the color of the characters. Also the inclusion of the cape for the hero sets him apart from the villain as well. Considering the background for the hero is just black darkness, and his powers involve the making of fire, this infers that he'll lighten up the darkness. This simple inclusion depicts him as the hero pretty well, while the villain appears to control lighting, in a very dismal setting. Lightning is a very destructive force and so it is fitting for this villain to have it as a power. So I think they did a great job in designing both the hero and villain overall.
Here is Chad and his partner's hero/villain project
What immediately comes to mind when looking at the hero here is the contrast of colors because they are complimentary, the yellow of his body with the purple of his cape. So, this is an aesthetically pleasing combination of colors. These are heavily saturated colors, and he brightens them up in some parts in order to show depth. There are also complimentary colors present in the villain, with the red and green, however it's more subtle since the green is just in a small strip and in the eyes. The dark value of the red with the black in the cape and arms and legs makes it obvious that he is the villain. The jagged, and sharp edges of the villain is contrasted with the smooth curves of the hero, which further sets them apart. The choices on colors and design lead for a very evident hero and villain, seeing as there really isn't much affinity at all between them aside from the fact that they're both fruit. This affinity is good, because it shows that they are part of the same show or comic book. But this is a weak similarity in terms of showing similarity in terms of personality. I mean, there is that phrase that you can't compare apples and oranges in order to describe two completely different things.
I believe that they contrasted the lighting for their characters pretty well. The villain is placed in a very dark city which gives it an ominous mood. There are lights, but they don't seem to emanate all that much light on the scene. It's nighttime which is a fitting for a villain, and the moon being placed behind the character makes her stand out from the background more, since if she was set against the night sky she wouldn't have. I think the moon being placed behind her almost makes her look more powerful in a sense.
This is contrasted with Hipsterman who has no apparent backdrop. However, I get the impression that it's more lit up than the dark city the villain is in, considering there's a shadow behind him. The glow that emanates from him symbolizes his heroism and that he is the good guy of this narrative. There isn't much affinity between these characters, which shows how they don't get along.
Here is Christina and her partner's hero/villain
I thought that they used good colors to contrast their hero and villain. While the hero has a very powerful hue, red, that calls for your attention, the villain actually lacks a hue, as gray is not a color. The saturation of the hero is very high, as it is a very bold kind of red and orange. The value chosen for the red is a fairly bright one, while the villain has a fairly dark one. I like that the hero is comprised of warm colors, which is contrasted with the villain. Although the villain does not have "cool colors", we have come to see grays and blacks as an opposite of sorts to bright, warm colors. I like that they have great affinity in their shape and how their drawn, so the major difference between the characters is their color. This emphasizes the color of the characters. Also the inclusion of the cape for the hero sets him apart from the villain as well. Considering the background for the hero is just black darkness, and his powers involve the making of fire, this infers that he'll lighten up the darkness. This simple inclusion depicts him as the hero pretty well, while the villain appears to control lighting, in a very dismal setting. Lightning is a very destructive force and so it is fitting for this villain to have it as a power. So I think they did a great job in designing both the hero and villain overall.
Here is Chad and his partner's hero/villain project
What immediately comes to mind when looking at the hero here is the contrast of colors because they are complimentary, the yellow of his body with the purple of his cape. So, this is an aesthetically pleasing combination of colors. These are heavily saturated colors, and he brightens them up in some parts in order to show depth. There are also complimentary colors present in the villain, with the red and green, however it's more subtle since the green is just in a small strip and in the eyes. The dark value of the red with the black in the cape and arms and legs makes it obvious that he is the villain. The jagged, and sharp edges of the villain is contrasted with the smooth curves of the hero, which further sets them apart. The choices on colors and design lead for a very evident hero and villain, seeing as there really isn't much affinity at all between them aside from the fact that they're both fruit. This affinity is good, because it shows that they are part of the same show or comic book. But this is a weak similarity in terms of showing similarity in terms of personality. I mean, there is that phrase that you can't compare apples and oranges in order to describe two completely different things.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Joke Video Reflection
Here are our joke videos:
Numero Uno
Numero Dos
The major difference that we approached our joke videos with was that the 1st one was going to be a fairly straight forward representation of the joke while the 2nd video was going to be a parody of the video game Mortal Kombat. This contrast lent themselves to the visual differences of the two videos, while the major affinity between the two videos was the joke itself.
Although space was explored in both videos, it is emphasized a whole lot more in the 1st video. The 2nd video is largely comprised of a static shot of flat space aside from when Adam walks towards the camera. When he sits down this creates a limited shot. The 1st video prominently features its limited shot (when Chelsea is cleaning the cup and Adam is playing with the train in the background) and also has the dynamic shots of Adam walking to and from the camera. I believe the 1st video exhibits an exploration of space better because these shots feel emphasized from the cuts that surround them.
We tried to emphasize the movement in the 2nd video. Since there could be no camera movement, we figured the best way to do this would be to have very little cuts which would force the viewers to focus on the characters movements.
We contrasted the line shape and rhythm of the visuals by having two completely different settings for the videos.
In order to illicit tension and release in viewers we used build-ups in both music tracks. In the 1st video, the bagpipes come in while Adam is plotting in his room, and in the 2nd video the music builds up while Adam is walking back to the “arena”. This is typical practice of a lot of movies and tv shows because it is effective.
As I said previously, the main difference of these two videos is the style we took when approaching them. This lead to the other differences.
Numero Uno
Numero Dos
The major difference that we approached our joke videos with was that the 1st one was going to be a fairly straight forward representation of the joke while the 2nd video was going to be a parody of the video game Mortal Kombat. This contrast lent themselves to the visual differences of the two videos, while the major affinity between the two videos was the joke itself.
Although space was explored in both videos, it is emphasized a whole lot more in the 1st video. The 2nd video is largely comprised of a static shot of flat space aside from when Adam walks towards the camera. When he sits down this creates a limited shot. The 1st video prominently features its limited shot (when Chelsea is cleaning the cup and Adam is playing with the train in the background) and also has the dynamic shots of Adam walking to and from the camera. I believe the 1st video exhibits an exploration of space better because these shots feel emphasized from the cuts that surround them.
We tried to emphasize the movement in the 2nd video. Since there could be no camera movement, we figured the best way to do this would be to have very little cuts which would force the viewers to focus on the characters movements.
We contrasted the line shape and rhythm of the visuals by having two completely different settings for the videos.
In order to illicit tension and release in viewers we used build-ups in both music tracks. In the 1st video, the bagpipes come in while Adam is plotting in his room, and in the 2nd video the music builds up while Adam is walking back to the “arena”. This is typical practice of a lot of movies and tv shows because it is effective.
As I said previously, the main difference of these two videos is the style we took when approaching them. This lead to the other differences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)