Thumbnail Stage 1 - Simple
Began with the aim of figuring out proportions. This aim got lost later on a little as I got stuck in to details. Perhaps it would help to remind myself to stick with the aim of the current task?
I also found that I spent too much time not knowing exactly what I was doing - what my plan was for this particular task. Another reminder to set out a clear guide for what I want to accomplish in this particular stage of design, and stick to that!
Generated the following image. We can see the excessive detail and tidiness that we don't need in this early stage.
 |
| Click image for large view |
Selected the five that I thought showed the greatest diversity of shape and were beginning to fit the requirement I set of being big, bulky and non-ergonomic. I selected designs with shorter stocks and larger bows to de-emphasise accuracy and range and emphasise brute power and general inaccuracy. It's more about delivering power to whatever's in front of Detritus than picking off small targets.
Some I removed for practical reasons - a wider stock, for instance, severely limits the amount of bend that the bow can perform, therefore the amount of energy it can provide to the projectile.
So lets bring the focus back to the overall big shapes. Detailing can be done later on!
Now we can more easily see the big shapes and get a sense of the 'work' being done by these big shapes. The main focus is on scale PROPORTIONS of the two main elements (the stock and the bow) and how they effect the apparant weight, power, etc of the thing, as well as the shape of the stock and how it affects the perception of handheld ergonomics.
Here we've got five different shapes.
Discussion and analysis:
- Smaller bow and vertically thinner stock. Makes stock appear longer. Overall less weight, less bulk. Feels like a more conventional crossbow, and definitely has power. Forward motion and sense of speed-of-projectile visually emphasised by pointed nose. The way the bow bulks near the center adds a bit of weight too, implies slightly more force. Somewhat non-ergonomic stock looks difficult to hold, but also slightly rounded nearer the back.
- Less bulk to the bow, slightly less force. Definitely slightly shorter stock reduces sense of long-range and accuracy. Visual sense of forward motion reduced due to lack of a pointed nose, but perhaps this also reduces sense of accuracy and range, which is good. Due to a lesser defined sense of direction? Fewer lines along which the viewer can sight the direction of the weapon = perception of less accuracy? More boxy stock gives a less ergonomic, more large-scale-utility look. Good.
- Recurve-style bow feels a bit too flamboyant for a troll-carried weapon. The slight s-curve feels a little too feminine.
- Stretched the bow upwards vertically to create a much heavier and imposing form. Stock feels shorter. The bow is the provider of power in this object and by making it larger, I feel we increase the sense of power. Shorter stock = less accurate (as length often reflects accuracy, as in sniper rifles vs sub-machine guns). Concern about the practicalities of such a tall bow though - wind resistance would realistically inhibit speed of the bow (and therefore speed given to the arrow). Speed = power? Maybe the power provided by such a huge bow would be more beneficial to such a big and heavy bolt than speed provided by a slimmer bow. What if the bow tapered a little towards the edges?
This variation has a bow/stock height ratio with the bow taller than the stock. Sudden stop of bow edge at center feels wrong very unstable and structurally unsound (which may be desired?) Could taper inwards to fix?
- More structurally solid. Bulked out entire stock to make same height as bow. Looks quite non-ergonomic with the unusual projections out the side of the stock, and the general weight and shape of the thing makes it look impractical for human use. From a practical standpoint this tall bow also feels like a defensive thing. Like curved castle walls or a shield, it would defend as well as attack.
In all the above I feel the box at the back of the stock serves quite well to balance the bow at the front - however, it doesn't serve any purpose now, given that Detritus removed the windlass from it. Could he have repurposed it to do something else? Loop for fabric for shoulder holster, holding something precious, a list of things to remember (salute gently! etc)? These are things we can consider for detailing to add subtle nuance of character.
In all of them but 4, the bow clearly passes through the mass of the body. I imagine this would give extra structural strength in relation to the huge stresses placed on the crossbow under tension and firing.
My selection = 5
Due to the aspects mentioned in the above discussion/analysis being appropriate for a troll-carried siege crossbow.
The bow is obviously more exaggerated than it would be in real life. I also found from
this link that the bow tends to curve upwards at the edges and also be set into the stock at an upwards angle to eliminate friction between the string and the stock during firing. Due to the obvious difference between the vertical center of the bow and the top edge of the stock, we need to take this into consideration.
Thumbnail Stage 2
Create variations on the selected thumbnail to try to express the attributes described in the previous blog entry. Do some experimenting with the issue of string friction and tension in the bow as well.
Narrow down to five and colour.
After that: We'll pick one to carry on with and take to a final.
Listed below for ease:
Adjectives to look at reflecting in the design:
Already expressed through the overall proportions:
- Huge - at least 6 feet long
- Oversized in relation to humans
- Powerful
- Destructive
To be explored now:
- Unsafe in hands of Detritus
- Apparantly physically unreliable
- Self-modified - by Detritus - maybe troll cultural influence
- Character of Detritus - friendly, honourable, dutiful, will use violence if necessary
Research - looked briefly at stone worship for ideas - not helpful.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/idr/idr24.htm
Looked instead at Warhammer figurines for ideas, specifically trolls, giants and goblins, due to their more primal nature (thus more use of rocks, rock weapons, etc).
Link to site that I looked at here , pinned a lot of images from this site to my pinterest board for this design,
link here.
Stuck for ideas on how to progress.
Try brainstorming
what could I add to give a sense of belonging to detritus
Watch insignia or imagery
badge
text - carved, painted
Troll culture imagery
stones attached to stock
stone decorated quiver, strap
angular forms?
Signs of wear, tear, instability
cracks
breaks
chips
splinters
Function
spare bolts
signs of previous job as mounted weapon
Other
Detritus name
What if area in front is the 'front piece' that looks proper and respectable, and the area behind is where Detritus allows it to be a bit messier and more personal
Material brainstorm
Wood
Metals
Stone
Paint
Burning
Carving
Stamping
Pinning or nailing fabric
Ropes
Hanging
Wrapping
Tying, knotting
Wedging
Learning Note: Remembering that certain lines, etc, can be created through other means than just differing materials - sometimes we can attack a problem (creating a certain character or style) visually first, then solve the practicalities of that later on. Eg, creating a certain shape or detail or visual element and then LATER ON thinking about how we can make that a reality physically - whether through paint, material, etc.
EG crossbow bow - wanted to add detail to make it not a blank shape - didn't want to add wrong kind of detail because I knew there were practicalities that made adding vertical chunks of wood to the bow impractical. But we could create those vertical lines with paint instead! Maybe material brainstorm before drawing too! See directly above for example for this project.
Next
Colour - Many variations using blue and white (general police colours), brown wood and various metals. Materials - bow itself ought to be metal, so any exposed wood on bow should be changed to a metal for the final.
Looking for a darker, grittier, crossbow, feels heavy, feels powerful, feels somewhat official at the front.
Blue surrounding white frames the front nicely, brings the white into prominence and draws the eye to the text and the badge nicely.
Gold vs grey metals. Gold feels more decorative and less functional, maybe more ceremonial. Grey feels more practical and solid (the general difference in hardness/softness between, for instance, steel and copper).
Grey studs more appropriate. Metal bands - what colour? Do the bands serve a structural purpose? There doesn't seem to be any functional use for them, so realistically their material isn't so important. But I think they will appear to be functional to uninformed viewers.
1C - light wood too light-weight, combined with gold gives a really light and soft feel.
Grey metal seems more appropriate for the bands too. We can use gold to pick out the badge to bring it into some more prominence and show it as the centerpiece of the object.
Grey metal stock feels quite light - if we use this then go darker.
Layout for presentation - want to show the front and overall form, as well as the detail of the back side of the bow - quite a fun area where I want to put some intimate detail.
Used Google Sketchup to create a quick model that I can use to get an accurate angle, and also later use to generate side views.
Questions to ask at the start - are we trying to generate a
variety of ideas and approaches to tackle the subject matter for the
client, or do we have a clear brief and guidelines where the client has
already defined a bunch of stuff?
