Karim Rashid is quite a talented designer and he has an enticing manifesto that reflects the work he does. His manifesto is composed of 10 (public) different short rules to live by.
The one segment that stood out to me, and that I would actually like to put into my own manifesto, is this:
-Experience is the most important part of living, and the exchange of ideas and human contact is all life really is. Space and objects can encourage increased experiences or distract from our experiences.
I don't think I could have explained the concept of 'experience' any better myself. I cherish the experience of anything in life; I see them as opportunities to realize the potential of life. Most of my friends wouldn't participate in a conversation about controversial or provocative topics with people they don't know, and I'm not saying that they or you should, but... know that there is a valuable experience that comes from any discussion and exchange of ideas. Even an argument makes the place a smarter world.
I can't really see this specific rule being applied in his work, I think it's more of a lifestyle thing for Karim Rashid. I do see a correlation between his work and a some other of his manifesto rules, such as Normal is not good and Consume experiences, not things. These ideas, I believe, really drive his creativity in designing new products or packaging. He tries to create a new experience out of the same old routines and consumer products.
I don't know if right here, right now, at Alden Library, I'm suited to write out my own manifesto. I know I will, I absolutely want to, but I can't right now. I will contemplate what really needs to be in my manifesto, and write it out on a warm sunny day while sitting in the grass under a tree.
Cuz then you know it's legit.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Respone to FREAK FACTOR - changethis.com
David Rendall's "FREAK FACTOR: Discovering Uniqueness by Flaunting Weakness"
I just read the article linked above, "FREAK FACTOR", on changethis.com (such an excellent website) written by David Rendall, a speaker, author, consultant, and entrepreneur. Reading the excerpt about his life and his bio found on his web page, I learned that he is a true "freak", in that he grew up knowing he wasn't average or normal in many different aspects. He is dyslexic and hyperactive, and as child he was told it was a disadvantage and needed to be cured or worked on. He turned that boat right around and created quite a life for himself focusing on helping others redefine what weaknesses and strengths really are.
Here are three excerpts of advice that I really felt for:
2. What's My Problem?
What's My Problem takes all the labels of weaknesses that has been pinned on him by his teachers, parents, managers, friends, and wife, and then he does something that I should have thought about a long, long time ago. David Rendall took these labels of weakness and say them as clues to his inherent and natural strengths. Now his "hyperactivity" is a highly appreciated and employed attribute in his job where he gets to stand up and talk. It's not necessarily a flaw as a whole, you see, it has a place somewhere in some form.
This makes me wanna compile a list of my weaknesses and see what strengths they link to. Then I can stop being so frustrated at the thought of these inherent inabilities and see where they become an inherent ability. Maybe even a super ability if I happen to have a huge weakness. It's all about seeing the other side, and changing your perspective about yourself. Ya dig?
3. Flawless: There is Nothing Wrong with You
This is the next step in the process that I've created for myself after reading Rendall's article. In Flawless, David states that every characteristic, strength or weakness, acts as a double-edge sword. What he means is that any strength can also be a weakness in a sense, and vice versa. He says that "unfortunately, instead of seeing a weakness as natural and unavoidable consequence of its corre- sponding strength, we see weakness as a problem to be eliminated." Strengths are weaknesses, weaknesses are strengths, the two are inseparable. If I'm a very flexible person (not like physically flexible, I can barely touch my toes) it also means that I'm inconsistent. I can't have a flexible schedule and also be consistent with my schedule. Or at least not completely one or the other. You can find a balance.
This is where I take a look at my weaknesses, and even my strengths, and see what advantages and disadvantages each characteristic truly holds. And you know what, after that I am going to re-label my weak characteristics as a positive ones and then perform the next and final step.
5. Foundation: Build on Strengths
This section is the final step in the my personal process. I have to apply all my strengths (and new strengths) in areas where they satisfy and the ball starts rolling from there. David says that "your strengths are patterns of passion and proficiency. They are what you love to do. They are what you do well." I don't see why I should waste much of my time trying to "correct" my "weaknesses" when I know that I have strengths that not everyone else has, some strengths being exceptional, and they can be put into practice NOW!
Don't sit around and sob about the lack of some of your abilities, and don't try to work on those that you know are inherent and are too difficult to change, like dyslexia or hyperactivity. Most importantly, don't try to change qualities that provide a great strength that can be applied (referring to #3).
Rinse, repeat as necessary.
I just read the article linked above, "FREAK FACTOR", on changethis.com (such an excellent website) written by David Rendall, a speaker, author, consultant, and entrepreneur. Reading the excerpt about his life and his bio found on his web page, I learned that he is a true "freak", in that he grew up knowing he wasn't average or normal in many different aspects. He is dyslexic and hyperactive, and as child he was told it was a disadvantage and needed to be cured or worked on. He turned that boat right around and created quite a life for himself focusing on helping others redefine what weaknesses and strengths really are.
Here are three excerpts of advice that I really felt for:
2. What's My Problem?
What's My Problem takes all the labels of weaknesses that has been pinned on him by his teachers, parents, managers, friends, and wife, and then he does something that I should have thought about a long, long time ago. David Rendall took these labels of weakness and say them as clues to his inherent and natural strengths. Now his "hyperactivity" is a highly appreciated and employed attribute in his job where he gets to stand up and talk. It's not necessarily a flaw as a whole, you see, it has a place somewhere in some form.
This makes me wanna compile a list of my weaknesses and see what strengths they link to. Then I can stop being so frustrated at the thought of these inherent inabilities and see where they become an inherent ability. Maybe even a super ability if I happen to have a huge weakness. It's all about seeing the other side, and changing your perspective about yourself. Ya dig?
3. Flawless: There is Nothing Wrong with You
This is the next step in the process that I've created for myself after reading Rendall's article. In Flawless, David states that every characteristic, strength or weakness, acts as a double-edge sword. What he means is that any strength can also be a weakness in a sense, and vice versa. He says that "unfortunately, instead of seeing a weakness as natural and unavoidable consequence of its corre- sponding strength, we see weakness as a problem to be eliminated." Strengths are weaknesses, weaknesses are strengths, the two are inseparable. If I'm a very flexible person (not like physically flexible, I can barely touch my toes) it also means that I'm inconsistent. I can't have a flexible schedule and also be consistent with my schedule. Or at least not completely one or the other. You can find a balance.
This is where I take a look at my weaknesses, and even my strengths, and see what advantages and disadvantages each characteristic truly holds. And you know what, after that I am going to re-label my weak characteristics as a positive ones and then perform the next and final step.
5. Foundation: Build on Strengths
This section is the final step in the my personal process. I have to apply all my strengths (and new strengths) in areas where they satisfy and the ball starts rolling from there. David says that "your strengths are patterns of passion and proficiency. They are what you love to do. They are what you do well." I don't see why I should waste much of my time trying to "correct" my "weaknesses" when I know that I have strengths that not everyone else has, some strengths being exceptional, and they can be put into practice NOW!
Don't sit around and sob about the lack of some of your abilities, and don't try to work on those that you know are inherent and are too difficult to change, like dyslexia or hyperactivity. Most importantly, don't try to change qualities that provide a great strength that can be applied (referring to #3).
Rinse, repeat as necessary.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Video Game Presentations
We gave our video game presentation last Friday during lab, and I think it went very well. Though our project is a simple concept of a internet game, it has a lot of different components that make it fun to play and inviting to investors. We tried our hardest to give an example of every situation which would show the audience all the different aspects of the game. Of course, our presentation could not be perfect and we forgot to mention a few things, or some ideas were simply not received by the audience.
The first thing that we had trouble getting across to the audience is the concept of health in OU Adventure. At first we tried to come up with a way to incorporate food into the video game, because the 'drunk food' scene on many campuses, especially ours, is a large part of a bar-goer's night. We decided first that Beer in the game would be the player's health, and when he lost health in fights he would drink more beer to regain life. But then we decided that it was kind of a dumb concept, and then we put grub into the game for the health aspect, changing the beer items in the game so that they instead fuel your 'mana', or in this case, beer muscles.
Another factor of the game that was difficult to get across was the different course of gameplay. At first, when first conceiving the idea for the game, we thought that the game should be linear in playability, like many level/mission based side-scrollers. We figured it would make the most sense if it played out like a normal night for a fratstar, starting at a house party, then accidentally finding himself in a townie bar, then ending up at The Crystal for last call (boosting hi-score), then finally battling the notorious elements of Court Street past 2 in the morning, trying to get home safe and sound (and without a broken phone or missing credit card). But then we played with the idea of making the level selection up to the players. We wanted more freedom in the game, so that players got a sense of control and possibly more enjoyment because of that.
The easiest element to explain to the audience would have to be the mechanics. Our controls are so simple, you can do it with one hand on the keyboard. Of course, you can always purchase our frat-tastic usb controller. For the most part, the controls include the movement feature, a jump button, an action button, and a punch (attack) button. These concepts were the easiest to explain to the class, and set the tone for clear understanding throughout the presentation.
We were very enthusiastic about this game design, it was more than a class assignment to us.
The first thing that we had trouble getting across to the audience is the concept of health in OU Adventure. At first we tried to come up with a way to incorporate food into the video game, because the 'drunk food' scene on many campuses, especially ours, is a large part of a bar-goer's night. We decided first that Beer in the game would be the player's health, and when he lost health in fights he would drink more beer to regain life. But then we decided that it was kind of a dumb concept, and then we put grub into the game for the health aspect, changing the beer items in the game so that they instead fuel your 'mana', or in this case, beer muscles.
Another factor of the game that was difficult to get across was the different course of gameplay. At first, when first conceiving the idea for the game, we thought that the game should be linear in playability, like many level/mission based side-scrollers. We figured it would make the most sense if it played out like a normal night for a fratstar, starting at a house party, then accidentally finding himself in a townie bar, then ending up at The Crystal for last call (boosting hi-score), then finally battling the notorious elements of Court Street past 2 in the morning, trying to get home safe and sound (and without a broken phone or missing credit card). But then we played with the idea of making the level selection up to the players. We wanted more freedom in the game, so that players got a sense of control and possibly more enjoyment because of that.
The easiest element to explain to the audience would have to be the mechanics. Our controls are so simple, you can do it with one hand on the keyboard. Of course, you can always purchase our frat-tastic usb controller. For the most part, the controls include the movement feature, a jump button, an action button, and a punch (attack) button. These concepts were the easiest to explain to the class, and set the tone for clear understanding throughout the presentation.
We were very enthusiastic about this game design, it was more than a class assignment to us.
Reflection of My Classmates Heroes and Villains
Unfortunately, the only classmate whose Hero and Villain I could review is Arielle Busch and her partner's.
Red Bullet and Stevie are a funny duo, Red Bullet being the oversized, jacked up, high school jock, and Stevie being the nerdy student who is always picked on... just a classic conflict in every high school across the world.
Let's take a look at what separates these two characters into their different genres by their appearance. The lighting between the two drawings is most significant to their motivation and their evil or good perception by the audience...
Stevie is bright colors, which is a symbolism of purity and innocence. They drew a ceiling florescent light directly above Stevie to shine down on him and reveal his complete characteristics.
Red Bullet takes up a large amount of space, and we know this not only because of the background setting but the shadow that he casts. The shadows, which aren't present in Stevie's portrait, denote a bully appearance immediately. Also, the dark hue of red in his jersey and the eyeblack strips under his eyes set a darker mood, revealing less of his actual personality and more of his intentions.
Stevie has a lack of color, he is almost completely white. We know that if anything, Stevie can be close to harmless, and possibly very intelligent. The colors and shape formed for Red Bullet can tell us that he is potentially very harmful and probably uses his body more than his mind.
Red Bullet and Stevie are a funny duo, Red Bullet being the oversized, jacked up, high school jock, and Stevie being the nerdy student who is always picked on... just a classic conflict in every high school across the world.
Let's take a look at what separates these two characters into their different genres by their appearance. The lighting between the two drawings is most significant to their motivation and their evil or good perception by the audience...
Stevie is bright colors, which is a symbolism of purity and innocence. They drew a ceiling florescent light directly above Stevie to shine down on him and reveal his complete characteristics.
Red Bullet takes up a large amount of space, and we know this not only because of the background setting but the shadow that he casts. The shadows, which aren't present in Stevie's portrait, denote a bully appearance immediately. Also, the dark hue of red in his jersey and the eyeblack strips under his eyes set a darker mood, revealing less of his actual personality and more of his intentions.
Stevie has a lack of color, he is almost completely white. We know that if anything, Stevie can be close to harmless, and possibly very intelligent. The colors and shape formed for Red Bullet can tell us that he is potentially very harmful and probably uses his body more than his mind.
Monday, February 28, 2011
This American Life Audio Response
Here is a link to the Superpowers podcast, the 178th episode of This American Life from WBEZ. I listened to this radio snippet to get an idea of the realm of super powers, a large creative entity. This podcast puts the decision of your superpower into a conflicted perspective, seriously take a listen to at least the first act (first 20 minutes or so) in which John Hodgman conducts an informal survey on an age old supernatural ability decision.
Here's an mp3 of my thoughts on Flight vs. Invisibility, in it I also talk about my current favorite hero, Adrian Veidt from The Watchmen.
With a name like Adrian you can't go wrong, come on.
Here's an mp3 of my thoughts on Flight vs. Invisibility, in it I also talk about my current favorite hero, Adrian Veidt from The Watchmen.
 |
| Adrian Veidt in the recent Watchmen feature film and in the comic series. |
Hero vs Villain Animation
Here are the images of me and my partner's drawings and our animations for the Hero and Villain class assignment.
And here is my animation below:
Here is James Watson's
"Tea Time Out" vs. "Trouble in the Kitchen"
This is a comparative reflection of two short videos I helped create, "Tea Time Out" and "Trouble in the Kitchen". If you haven't seen either of these videos, you should check them out in my previous blog post. Also, here are the links for Tea Time Out and Trouble in the Kitchen on Youtube.
When we wrote up the scripts for the two videos, we had to abide by one guideline: they both had to be based from the same joke. So we had to decide on two different genres/approaches for our joke. What we came up with is two coming of age stories, one being set in the late 40's and one being modern day. We also used contrasting cinematography for each video to create a subtext for the approaches to this same joke.
The first big difference between the two videos cinematography-wise is the depth, or space, of the scenes. In "Tea Time Out", all of the shots done by Yuxi were intended to be up close and personal with Megan as the girl character to give an enclosed feel to the audience. It is supposed to make you feel like you are in this other world which Megan's mind is in when she has pretend tea parties. Also, all of the points of interest are within the boundaries of her "world" so that the audience doesn't realize they are in such a small box.
The next big difference between the videos is the element of movement. Although we were allowed no camera movements, even zoom, we were able to create dynamic movement between the two videos within the frames and sequences through object movement and point of interest. In "Trouble in the Kitchen", we even started the video with alternating points of interest in the establishing shot. The shot is divided up into four parts by the window frame, from which you focus on using the rule of thirds. Throughout the scenes, you can see how much more complex the movements are within the frames compared to "Tea Time Out". This are just two of the different focuses we had when producing these short films.
When we wrote up the scripts for the two videos, we had to abide by one guideline: they both had to be based from the same joke. So we had to decide on two different genres/approaches for our joke. What we came up with is two coming of age stories, one being set in the late 40's and one being modern day. We also used contrasting cinematography for each video to create a subtext for the approaches to this same joke.
The first big difference between the two videos cinematography-wise is the depth, or space, of the scenes. In "Tea Time Out", all of the shots done by Yuxi were intended to be up close and personal with Megan as the girl character to give an enclosed feel to the audience. It is supposed to make you feel like you are in this other world which Megan's mind is in when she has pretend tea parties. Also, all of the points of interest are within the boundaries of her "world" so that the audience doesn't realize they are in such a small box.
The next big difference between the videos is the element of movement. Although we were allowed no camera movements, even zoom, we were able to create dynamic movement between the two videos within the frames and sequences through object movement and point of interest. In "Trouble in the Kitchen", we even started the video with alternating points of interest in the establishing shot. The shot is divided up into four parts by the window frame, from which you focus on using the rule of thirds. Throughout the scenes, you can see how much more complex the movements are within the frames compared to "Tea Time Out". This are just two of the different focuses we had when producing these short films.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)