Dear Terry,
Your post was addressed to Gunnar but since this is a public forum I will
address some of your points. The subject interests me because I’m both a
graphic designer and a design teacher.
You said:
"Think of any graphic design as a combination of elements, each with
properties.
In theory(!), there is an infinite solution space from which any of these
elements and properties can be sourced.
Graphic design can be seen as an activity as searching (consciously or
unconsciously) in this solution space for the right combinations of
elements and properties for a particular solution."
But Terry, wouldn’t this be the same as searching in a dictionary (the
solution space) for the right combinations of words to write a novel (a
particular solution)?
Of course, you expand when you say:
"The search is made easier and simpler by design guidelines. These include
for example the traditional graphic design guidelines for example for,
typology, color combinations and use, gestalt arrangement, white space
management, information architectures, readability, legibility, (and, in
the old days, printability), style. They also include items from designers'
theft books of other peoples' design
The effect of the above is as filters and boundaries that massively reduce
the solutions search space."
Indeed they do. The elements and guidelines you enumerated form what can be
described as graphic design domain knowledge. If we are talking about
knowledge – and not merely information – then we need to address the issue
of how do students come to embody design knowledge. Information about
colour and typography can be stored in a hard-drive; but knowledge must be
experienced and constructed. In other words, students need to integrate
information (about colour, for instance) into their current knowledge
schemas, when the integration is successful the knowledge structure of the
student is transformed. Fundamental to this integration is the idea of
experience, students learn when they have a meaningful experience (Dewey,
1998); therefore, how do we design a learning situation that guarantees
students will have the sort of experience that results in them knowing more
about graphic design? From my experience, it is not sufficient to provide
students with information and instruct them to search for a solution in
that solution space.
The final point I wanted to address is:
"In parallel, for those using computer software that in part automates
design solutions (e.g. photoshop/Indesign on a Mac) also works to search
and make selections through AI-based algorithms acting to filter the
elements and properties of solution space and weight ght the solutions to
proffer optimised possibilities."
If only Indesign or Photoshop would automate design solutions... they way I
use them, these pieces of software no more automate my design solutions as
a hammer automates putting up a shelf.
I apologize if I meddled in the middle of an ongoing conversation. This is
my second and final post.
'best,
João
Dewey, J. (1998). Experience and Education. Indianapolis: Kappa Delta Pi.*
*1st Edition published in 1938.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|