OUIL501 Evaluation

This year I took my COP module in a very different direction than 401. Whereas I focused primarily on illustration and image making in my level 4 essay, this year the topics of my research were much more in the realms of culture and society, with the illustrative investigation element coming primarily from my own practical work. There were a number of obstacles that came with this decision, but it is something I feel I have definitely learnt from.

One of the issues that arose with this route of research was that I felt a little like I was starting from scratch. Last year a large portion of my essay was deduced from the analysis of visual illustration, but this year it was largely through theory. Though that wasn’t a problem in itself, there were times I wondered about the relevance of what I was discussing to my course, and the completely new area of focus was a little daunting. I think one of the things I have struggled with in this module is the referencing of appropriate sources. While I feel towards the end of the module in particular, my researching had been extensive; I felt as though maybe I wasn’t translating the things I was learning and deducing as succinctly as I could have done within my essay. This is something I definitely want to address and get better at going into COP3, I think to continually revise my essay, and source material, every few weeks would have been extremely beneficial and ensured the consistency in appropriate and focused content. It would have also left time at the end to tweak things I feel I simply didn’t allow for time to do. The essay needs frequent and considered evaluation throughout the process of writing, rather than patchy revisions over a long period of time.

Another point I feel I could have improved in my submission was the way in which I documented my research. Rather than chipping away and blogging sources as I came across them, I left a lot of it until the end, resulting in a poorer quality of clear research. Though I responded to each of my sources through annotation and contemplation of degree of relevance, I feel I didn’t show this as successfully as I could have done if I’d have done it as I went along.

Something I have learnt and to take away positively from this module however, was the relationship between practical and theoretical research. I feel like my essay did benefit a lot more once my practical investigation was underway, and allowed for a more focused examination of my subject matter. I’m also pleased with how I pushed my practical research to represent something with depth rather than going for something that I felt just illustrated my essay. While I knew I wanted to produce something of relevance and depth, I initially found this very difficult to do. But through a combination of persistent theoretical AND practical research, I was able to delve deeper and make work that was focused and well informed. The practical side of this project could never have developed as well as it did without the theoretical input. And in a similar way, I felt a lot better informed going back to my essay after I’d undergone further research for my publication. This duality between theory and research is something that will become integral in the summer work I produce in response to COP3 and I must remember to uphold both methods of examination consistently.

Although I’ve struggled at times with this module, it is one I’ve found to be very rewarding. I relished the practical side of this task and getting some in depth content in my work is something I really enjoy. Focusing on something that didn’t necessarily involve the arts world was a challenge, but I feel as though my creative practice has benefited from it contextually! I’d like to bring elements of this into my COP3 submission and really get to grips with how the relationship between the visual arts and the cultural world around it work in synergy.

OUIL 503 Evaluation

Responsive as a whole has been an extremely beneficial module. Not only has it shown that my illustrative work can exist out in the real world, but it has also opened my eyes to a range of new techniques, medias, contexts and functions of my work. It has come with it’s difficulties however, and though I’m proud of a lot of the work I have produced, I have had little success in terms of winning briefs.

Starting with the individual briefs I feel I covered a range of formats and contexts for my work to sit in, and while some of these briefs felts as though they benefited me more than others I’m glad to have completed all of them. In instances I feel I could have pushed my work further rather than doing something I felt comfortable with, this module was an opportunity to try out new things and push my work in new directions and I feel that primarily for studio brief one I didn’t take full advantage of that. I also feel there were times I replied heavily on digital manipulations of my work as I felt that was what judges were looking for, rather than just doing what I enjoy doing and creating looser analogue illustrations. 

The collaborative part of this brief however is something I really feel my practice has, and will, benefit from. Before starting the brief I was apprehensive on how it would progress and how my work would fit with someone else’s. Though I enjoy the work I create I was a little worried it wouldn’t fit with another creatives way of working and that I would perhaps feel a little useless in a group role. This couldn’t have been further from the truth!

Working with Izzie Glazzard was one of the saving graces of this module. After hearing the horror stories some of my peers have had with their groups I’ve realised the importance in working with someone who you not only benefit from in a technical sense, but someone you can have a good working relationship with too. Our practices are quite different in the way that we work, and though at the start I was worried our styles just wouldn’t work together, it has had such a positive impact on our project as a whole. Given our differing skill sets it was easier to assign roles within the grouping, and working with just the two of us allowed us to bounce ideas around quickly with the same focus. Time wasn’t wasted in our project ensuring everyone knew their roles or ironing out crease and crossed wires in intention and concept. 

When it came to both technical and conceptual aspects of this brief I feel we both had different things to offer which allowed our project to grow in ways it wouldn’t have been able to do if we had been working on the project independently. Time wise it also allowed us to work at maximum productivity, being safe in the knowledge that we would both complete the work required of us also saved us from a lot of chasing around.

Towards the end of this brief I feel we did lack a little on time management, meaning that some of the tasks we would have liked to have completed such as trying out different stocks or net designs couldn’t occur, and the final filming and editing of our video submission was completed to a tight deadline. This aside however I’m very proud of the work we created and would happily collaborate with Izzie again!

As with the last module hand in, on a personal level, time keeping is something I have to work on in regards to blogging. On the practical side of this module I completed each brief before the deadline and feel I could have pushed myself to take on more briefs BUT was unable to do this as I had a backlogging of blogging to catch up on. I must remember to blog as I go as it will really benefit me for future hand ins and achieving my top potential in each module.