Whichever language you choose, we have been tasked with sketching six tables, in position – using the ergonomics sketches from previous – all of a different design and in keeping with the Orangebox / BBC way.
Sticking with the techniques I have been using this term, I kept with the digital sketching. I don’t find it easier than pen and paper – in fact I find both hard, but the unnatural feeling of the graphics tablet is difficult to learn – but find the ability to keep the sketches digital, quick tracing of a desired design and an unlimited source of colours is a big bonus. I will persist with this.
As can be seen, I went for more than 6 designs. Many are sketches of shapes or mechanics of how the product would work. Almost all are in side-on position, with some placed in-position over the earlier ergonomics outlines.
Which do I favour? None? Maybe.
With the designs in hand, we were to present these to a group of 5 other peers to discuss our designs, citing positives and negatives; with the final goal being to find a group consensus for two favoured designs. The group gave me some positive responses to my designs – they are a kind group – but clearly focused one in particular and elements of others.
This task has been tricky for me. Sketching is not my forte, nor is impartiality. If I find a design I like, I am all too quick to dispose of previous ideas and think this the best. Until the next one comes along, and then I think this is the best in the world. I need to be more open to criticism, both from myself and others. I am all too quick to decide this is the best design, that it cannot be improved and my job is done. I think I have exhausted all modifications to the design and I am a genius, drop mic, walk off. Having the group choose a design certainly helped to overcome this, but what happens when they choose my favourite? If I step away from the design and look at something else entirely, and then return a while later, hopefully this change of perspective will help.