Wow. What a book!
I can’t say that I have ‘read’ this and to be honest I don’t think I ever will.  I don’t even think it’s meant to be read, in fact in a way I’m tempted not to read it just so I can flick through to a new page to be excited and surprised. It is an awesome and inspiring book, full of quotes, photos, pictures and passages to make you think as well as give you a design prod.  If you’re ever stuck for inspiration just flick through to a random page or two.

As it says this is the New Basics.

Firstly, it really is the basics, but those basics are the starting points for all designers; point, line, colour etc.

The Basics – I have read about, practiced all these topics before (in various art and design courses) but I’ve never had them all together in a design text book, which is good for reference before.  I found reviewing them again useful, and they were well presented with nice and varied examples which helps provide inspiration.

The New – The New bit refers to some additions which have been made to the ‘usual’ basics which includes looking at; transparency, animation and computer generated images.  This was nice to see as they are the new basics.

What I liked the most was that it was teaching the underlying concepts not the software (except a bit of Processing in places), it is the basics and some of the exercises seemed to be implied rather than stated, it’s not just a reading book, if you want to become a designer you have to read, look at the examples and then go off and design your own, I didn’t think that was stated explicitly enoug8h.

Well again another well titled book, it really does tell you how to design and produce your own book!  Not only that but it does it in an inspiring and motivating way, by the time you’ve finished reading it you’ll be wanting to create a book, whether it’s a couple of pages which you bind yourself or a full on novel.

What I really liked was how the book explained how to do things in an enthusiastic ‘go try it’ way without sounding pushy, whilst still explaining how difficult some steps may be.  It was nice that they gave other people examples and their own examples showed that they really have done it themselves and you feel like you’re really learning from their experience.

This is a great read for, whether you’re an artist wanting to make a portfolio or a wanna be author (or just interested, or maybe because one day you might want to!).

Does exactly what it says in the title.  It is a great primer and will get you started on the right path, but you will have to look elsewhere to fill in the detail.  It is a useful book to get you started and it does help bring together ideas which you may have thought about in isolation (if you’ve ever done any art or design before).

In my photography I usually take what I see, there is an argument there that I’m not being creative, I’m merely a technician capturing a scene but that’s another story.  But now I think I need to go and do some more experimentation with lighting, I haven’t actually set up studio lighting (properly) for 10 years now and back then it was more for functional rather than aesthetic reasons.

Personally I’m a fan of regeneration, like they have done in Park Hill Sheffield and what Urban Splash have done in Salford, taking cheap terrace houses which were going to be obliterated and revamping them. It’s recycling at its best! I certainly don’t agree with leaving them as they are, they are far removed from the architects intended utopia.

Why did British architects get these blocks so wrong? Hulme Crescents, Park Hill, ‘fort’ Ardwick and many many others. I think using an analogy from Joel on Software Don’t let Architect Astronauts scare you my reading of this boils down to – people learn the wrong thing from a lesson (and yes I may well have read the wrong thing into his article…). Back to the 60′s architecture. Le Corbusier designed Unité d’Habitation in the late 40′s early 50′s and this was the inspiration for many architects in the 60′s but I think they looked at the building and said, wow high-rise living how cool. but. Le Corbusier designed from a human perspective he started with people and designed how to make a living space for them, not with the idea high-rise would solve all the problems what can we do. which is why I believe a lot of these British designs fail.

I still think that the structure and the community living there should be given help with regeneration and improvement but don’t destroy it because you don’t like it. Learn from it keep it as a lesson (in regeneration) all old buildings have history, they all evolve non of our ‘Historic buildings’ are as they were first built up until the end of the second world war they were constantly evolving. it’s only since then that they have stood still.

An article on Robin Hood Gardens.  http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=3106948

I don’t think I’m ever going to make a living through selling stock I’d need to be a lot better and much more prolific to do that, and that was never my intention, but still a sale in my first week, I’m pleased.

What I’m not sure about though is the etiquette, people have rated my pictures which again is brilliant, but I’m slightly confused, how do I thank them? should I? they have great pictures too (this is one of them; portishead1) but I feel guilty rating their pictures now like it’s just because they rated me…. Although that may be more telling about me!

I also need to make sure I don’t get carried away trying to take pictures that I think will sell. I take pictures I like and I need to keep it that way. I realise that might sound a bit arrogant, but for me its more about taking the picture, if I smile after I’ve pressed the shutter then its a good picture, frequently not worth showing anyone though.

I mean I’ve thought about it, I wear glasses (sometimes) and my left eye is stronger but I just assumed everyone did it, and cameras were poorly designed with winders (old school) or the LCD in the wrong place, in fact it’s just me being right handed and left eyed. It wasn’t until I had this realisation (a couple of days ago now) and got everyone else in the office to shoot off a few frames so I could see how they did it that people did it differently.

obviously a quick web search brings up loads of people who figured this out a while ago.
PhotoEthanography
Science Daily
Left Eyed Right Handed Blog

And Science Made Simple says is that left eyed people would have to shoot left handed. I am right handed and shoot right handed (not very often mind) but when I used to do archery, I would usually shoot right handed right eyed, but when tired would (accidentally) switch to my left, at the range we were working at (not very far!) changing eyes made a huge difference, but in fact seemed to be just about right to move me one target over, so i would still do pretty well just on the wrong target.

Anyway back on the photography side, I reckon it makes little difference to the picture as the camera is monocular, but I’ll never know if the camera is easier to use right eyed, i just can’t seem to do it.