visual:design:scholarship

Research Journal of the Australian Graphic Design Association

Before and After the Computer: The Role of Drawing in Graphic Design
Pam Schenk Volume 1, Number 2, 2005, pp.11-20
This paper is based on some of the key findings from a research programme conducted over 20 years, and charts significant adaptations to the professional practice of graphic designers and changes in a traditional, largely paper-based design process to one extensively facilitated by a digital working environment. Prompted by a belief that graphic designers need to develop drawing abilities to support a wide range of tasks during the design process, a detailed investigation was conducted over a five-year period in the mid-eighties. Since that time, changes have been monitored during a period that has seen the introduction, spread, and now ubiquitous usage of computer aided systems. Recent findings from the study indicate a very different professional life for todays graphic designers and, specifically, a very different use of drawing to that found in the early part of the study.

AGDA
Copyright You may download a copy of this paper for your own personal use. This paper must not be published elsewhere (to mailing lists, bulletin boards, etc.) without the author's explicit permission. If you do copy this paper you must include this copyright note. Please observe the usual academic conventions of quotation and citation. Citation Schenk, P. (2005) Before and After the Computer: The Role of Drawing in Graphic Design, visual:design:scholarship, Vol.1, No.2, pp.11-20, online at: http://www.agda.com.au/vds/vds010202.pdf

ISSN 1833-2226

Before and After the Computer: The Role of Drawing in Graphic Design
Pam Schenk
School of Art, Design and Media Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

This paper is based on some of the key findings from a research programme conducted over 20 years, and charts significant adaptations to the professional practice of graphic designers and changes in a traditional, largely paper-based design process to one extensively facilitated by a digital working environment. Prompted by a belief that graphic designers need to develop drawing abilities to support a wide range of tasks during the design process, a detailed investigation was conducted over a five-year period in the mideighties. Since that time, changes have been monitored during a period that has seen the introduction, spread, and now ubiquitous usage of computer aided systems. Recent findings from the study indicate a very different professional life for todays graphic designers and, specifically, a very different use of drawing to that found in the early part of the study. 2005 Published by AGDA Keywords: Drawing ability, Design process, Digital studio

his paper looks at the ways in which graphic

designers use drawing, and specifically at the way that usage has changed due to the introduction of the computer to the studio environment. Based on some of the key findings from a research programme conducted over 20 years, the paper charts significant adaptations to the professional practice of graphic designers and changes in a traditional, largely paper-based design process to one extensively facilitated by a digital working environment. The research programme was originally based on an understanding that graphic designers need to develop key drawing abilities to support a wide range of tasks during the design process, and a detailed investigation was conducted over a five-year period in the mid-eighties. The findings are described in full in a doctoral thesis (Schenk, 1989), and are summarised in a journal paper (Schenk, 1991). This early research identified the uses of drawing and types of drawing produced for each design procedure throughout the design process, and a taxonomy was devised to set out the types of drawings produced in relation to each individual, identifiable task in the design process (Schenk, 1993; 1992). The research then continued through the late eighties, nineties (Schenk, 1998) and into the current decade with more recent findings being summarised here. Developments in the graphic design industry and the changes in the professional role of graphic designers have been

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

11

monitored during this period, which has seen the introduction, spread, and now ubiquitous usage of computer aided systems. A review of recent findings from the study indicates a very different professional life for todays graphic designers and, specifically, a very different use of drawing to that found in the early part of the study. The research has been conducted by several research methods including structured and focused interviews, observation of studio practice, and case study analysis of design consultancies. In addition, some of the major focuses of investigation have been the analysis of the drawn record of design projects, but the availability of this drawn record has changed substantially over the period of the study as described below. The vast majority of the research has been conducted in London (UK), although respondents in Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow have also been included. Respondents have been representative of the graphic design profession in terms of specialist expertise, encompassing publishing, packaging, corporate identity, design for television and interactive media, etc. The design organisations investigated ranged from small groups of associates through to major design consultancies and publishing organisations. Both public and private organisations were included. For example, the in-house design offices of BBC Television in Manchester and London, the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Geographical Museum, London Zoo, the Post Office, The Open University, British Rail and W.H. Smith. Both well-established and up-and-coming private companies were also reviewed, including Wolfe Olins, Allied International, CYB, Lloyd Northover, Fitch, The Chase, Pentagram, The Partners, Michael Peters, Minale Tattersfield, Trickett and Web, Ken Garland Associates, Assorted Images, Peter Saville Associates, Tomato, and Imagine (in London), and The Chase, Flying Colours and Royds Advertising Agency (in Greater Manchester). Publishing was represented by art editors and designers at magazines like for example, The Radio Times, The Face, Which, Vogue and Elle, and publishing houses and groups like, for example, Mitchel Beazley, Penguin Books, Readers Digest, Collins, and Random House (titles of organisations represent those used at the time of interview). Respondents have been selected to be representative of levels of seniority ranging from senior partners, art editors and designer directors to studiobased staff of various degrees of experience. Of the total of over eighty respondents, given the length of time during which the study has been conducted, it has been possible to interview ten on at least two, sometime three separate occasions, over a twenty-year period. The research programme continues and data on the views of a range of practitioners is currently been elicited in Singapore. A related study with senior art and design academics in the UK, investigating attitudes to the role of drawing tuition on the undergraduate design curriculum, has also recently been completed, endorsing many of the views expressed by practitioners (Schenk, 2005). To aid comparative analysis, where possible, the same questions have been retained for interviews throughout the research programme, supplemented as appropriate for different types and nuances of investigation. Questions have

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

12

ranged from open-ended queries on how, for example, respondents would summarise drawing ability, to scaled responses on its relative importance. Questions also targeted each phase and aspect of design and, as the initial stages of the research progressed, it became possible to devise a very comprehensive model of the graphic design process that comprised over 30 distinct tasks. In addition, specific tasks performed by designers when managing a design team or for their own personal development were also identified, and the types of drawing used to perform these tasks were also recorded. The findings from this detailed work and the production of the taxonomy that was devised to present them are described in the doctoral thesis (Schenk, 1989), along with the systematic establishment of terminology used in the taxonomy. In an initial literature search conducted in the mid 1980s it was found that, while research by architects and industrial designers had made significant contributions to characterising the role of drawing in creative thinking (for example, Lockard, 1973; Laseau, 1980; and Lawson, 1980), little research had been done to investigate the use of drawing in the graphic design process per se. Such texts as were available, with the notable exception of Abraham Games Over my shoulder (1960), were illustrated by material specifically produced for each book, lacking the indeterminate quality of real designers drawings. Subsequently, notable contributions have been made to the role of drawing in creative processes by researchers like Tovey (1989), Garner (1990) and Temple (1994), and to the understanding of the creative behaviour of designers, including the role of drawing, as characterised in the work of Cross (1990), Goel (1995), and Archer (1997). The search for helpful computer tools for sketching in the early phases of design has also led to extensive contributions by researchers like Verstijen and Hennessey (1998). An invaluable review of this literature is given by Garner (1999). However, the detailed analysis of practice as conducted by the current author has yet to be replicated for either conventional graphic design or new media interpretations.

Findings From the Early Study: The Pre Digital Studio Environment
This section describes the role of drawing in the design process as identified in the mid-eighties. At the beginning of the research programme, the fact that paper-based drawing was extensively used throughout the graphic design process was readily verifiable because both individual designers and the big design consultancies kept the drawn record of their jobs. By analysing this record in addition to interviewing designers and observing studio practice, a detailed account of typical designerly practice was made. It was found that drawing was used as a tool to help designers perform managerial tasks, achieve creative output and control production. It was also the key vehicle for essential communications about design issues with a variety of people, including other members of the design team, printers and clients. The graphic designers interviewed were asked to describe their use of drawing during the procedures of accepting and passing on briefs, collecting reference material, the analysis of a design problem and development of first ideas, the synthesis and development of design solutions, the presentation, visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005 13

evaluation and review of design solutions, the commissioning of artwork, and the preparation for production. From the ways in which they described their work it was clear that, while specific procedures could be separately identified, they were nevertheless very closely interrelated. In practice, it was very difficult to separate completely certain procedures from others. It was generally agreed by respondents that, when commencing work on a project, a sound understanding of both the clients needs and of the particular nature of their design problem had to be achieved. In many cases only representatives of the design team would be present at briefing sessions and the passing on of information received during briefing had to be effective. Over 50% of the respondents indicated that they made important, albeit cautious, use of drawing during client briefings. This use included the making of visual notes as reminders of information passed on at the meeting, or to remind themselves of any ideas stimulated by the discussion or any design decisions made at the meeting. Respondents also indicated that, during a clients briefing, their use of drawing was greatly influenced by a number of factors. While some described enjoying the freedom to draw while freely exchanging ideas with clients with whom they had developed a relationship of trust, others expressed concern that a casual use of drawing could make the design process look too easy. It was also seen to be a problem that a client could make an ill-considered choice of a design solution based on a designers quickly drawn ideas during a briefing and, thereby, limit choice for the design team at a later stage in the design process. It was when passing on the information gained during briefing sessions to other members of the design team that the importance of a designers capacity to use drawing effectively was found to be particularly crucial. If senior designers, who had attended the briefing, produced over-prescriptive drawings at this stage they could limit the creative input more junior team members felt able to make. A strategic approach to drawing was indicated, where a broad policy towards the development of a design solution was indicated while avoiding any directives on visual style. Indeed it should be noted here, that this finding about the development of a strategic approach to drawing usage became a significant issue in the research programme. It was rather surprising to find that less than half of the respondents said they used drawing during the collection of visual reference material, most preferring to use images from their own or from their employers collection of visual data. Many found that shortage of time meant that this stage of the design process would often have to be completed very quickly, so reference material had to be readily available. Some designers recalled instances when they worked from observation to collect visual reference, but most described copying and tracing from a reference source. The majority of respondents expressed the belief that it was essential for graphic designers to have a well-developed knowledge of visual style, thereby allowing them to propose a variety of visual concepts without specifically collecting reference material, and that they should be able to reproduce these styles with relative ease. This type of cognitive ability was also described as

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

14

necessary when confirming the relevance and accuracy of visual images, and agrees with Garners (1990) findings on a relationship between graphic ability and cognitive development. The keeping of sketchbooks and notebooks was described by several respondents as being the means of developing this essential kind of visual background. The majority of respondents agreed that developing and maintaining their visual literacy was an essential part of their professional responsibility, although, of necessity, often to be achieved independently of specific design projects. The exception to this was the case when the design team was involved in an extensive project, particularly a corporate identity programme, when time would be costed for and allocated to the important aspect of researching and identifying appropriate visual imagery and stylistic influences, and the strategic use of drawing in the process. It is also interesting to note that most respondents said that the experience of observing the drawings of other designers played a part in developing their own visual literacy. Indeed, it was by working in an environment where drawings were produced, as well as through their own use of drawing, that they developed their visual understanding. However, there were also respondents who were not confident draughters, and who found that it was perfectly possible for them to function with minimal use of drawing. These respondents believed that the development of their visual literacy was unimpaired by their own scant use of drawing. It was in the use of drawing when analysing a design problem and developing their ideas that the majority of respondents were in agreement that drawing played a major role. Drawing was found to help designers assemble their first thoughts. A fluid, free-ranging drawing style enabled a designer to explore a greater number of ideas quickly, with an economy of effort. As Tovey (1989) has indicated The existence of drawing permits the designer to consider several alternative design ideas simultaneously. Some respondents described how they used a combination of words and rough visual notes to work out and test ideas on paper. Indeed, observation of designers working in the later stages of a design job showed that they reverted to this rapid notational form of drawing when new elements were introduced or revision was required. Senior designers confirmed that it was during the initial analysis of a job, namely when the approach to a design problem was being developed, that they did the majority of their drawing. They said that the pressure of other duties obliged them to leave the more time-consuming and detailed kinds of drawing associated with the later stages of the design process to more junior staff. From the descriptions given by the majority of designers interviewed, it was clear that a greater degree of drawing skill, in the conventional sense, became necessary for the performance of tasks involved in the more detailed synthesis and development of design solutions than in the earlier phases of the design process. As a creative director of a large design company commented at that time Drawing is the key to relating all the elements together. At this point drawing was no longer used only as a quick notation for ideas but also for combining and modifying visual elements, and for exploring subtle variations in composition and form. The designers need to

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

15

resolve a visual idea in more detail was found to prompt a change of pace and style of drawing activity. A shift of attention from concept to format could be seen to take place. It was also quite common for designers to start to work same-size, using permanent media like paint as opposed to the markers and pencils used during analysis and idea formulation, and often colour would be introduced for the first time. Some respondents, particularly in magazine design, said that it was only when they were able to combine the various visual elements of a design (such as photographs and display typography) that they felt confident to make significant decisions about layout and format. Several even described the sense of control they experienced with the introduction of these real elements, and their combination and juxtaposition through a mixture of drawing, cutting and collage. One magazine designer said he was only able to start even planning a layout when all the elements were assembled before him. You have to work with the real thing he said, while describing moving the elements about on a full-size page grid and assembling them in the manner of a collage. It should be noted here that he was a very influential designer, one responsible for the major re-design of international periodicals. In addition to their own personal evaluation of their designs, which they described as taking place throughout the design process, respondents described the use of drawing in both in-house and client presentation. In fact, the majority of respondents described the visual presentation of an idea so that it could be properly evaluated as one of the tasks within the graphic design process where the use of drawing was most vital. Another interesting use of drawing linked to presentation and evaluation, was found to be for the revision of design solutions during evaluation procedures. Here drawings produced for client presentation were amended with scribbles of ideas for revision. These revisions are stylistically very similar to the drawings produced during analysis and idea generation, indicating a return to the similarly free and speedily produced drawing type that facilitates the consideration of new ideas. It was also found that evaluation involved progressively more formal procedures, and it was the view of many respondents that this resulted in the use of drawing itself becoming correspondingly more formal. Most agreed that drawings were the main forms of presentation in the early meetings, and still played a significant part in the later demonstrations to clients, although alternative methods (such as photography and even computer-generated proofs) could be used. However, at the time, the expense of these forms would only be merited once the majority of design decisions had been made and the necessity to imitate print for the benefit of a client had become essential. In those days, computer generated material was for presentation purposes alone and was not seen as part of a fluid, design thinking process. Because of the cost and time-consuming aspect of highly finished client presentation pieces, many respondents indicated that they preferred to complete the presentation process with hand-rendered, paper-based drawing whenever possible. Indeed, it was claimed that it was virtually impossible to give a true representation of a design solution without actually taking it into

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

16

print. This situation was found to cause problems with clients who were not experienced in visualising the changes in quality that occurred between drawn and printed solutions. Characteristic uses of drawing were also identified in the procedures controlling production. Many respondents indicated that by the time a design was ready to go into production, even though most of the creative decisions had been taken, the quality of the final result depended greatly on the ability of the designer or design team to maintain control over the various aspects of production and over the actions of the various other people who would be engaged in that production. In numerous instances, drawing was used for maintaining such control. For example, drawing was used in the commissioning of the specialists, such as illustrators, photographers and model makers, whose skills were harnessed in the production of various elements of the design during production. These specialists had to be briefed differently depending on their own requirements, i.e. perspective drawings were required for model makers. Several respondents involved in packaging indicated that, when needing a predictable result to contribute to a wellresearched solution, they produced a carefully rendered visual of both the layout and the style of the illustration that was to be commissioned. Even in the production of the camera-ready artwork and paste-up that was generally produced in the mid-eighties, designers were required to be involved in drawing to some extent. However, over two thirds of the designers interviewed thought that the most efficient production of artwork required specialist skills continually practised and it was generally felt that a different kind of drawing was needed for artwork. At that time many design organisations employed several specialists in the drawing-up and paste-up of camera-ready copy. Indeed in the larger consultancies, entire floors housing equipment and personnel would be given over to this aspect of the design process. It was soon after the conclusion of the first phase of the research that the introduction of the computer and its effects on the studio-based phases of the design process led to the closure of these facilities and the major shifts in design procedures and attendant changes in the use of drawing described below.

The Introduction of the Digital Studio Environment and its Impact on the Role of Drawing
This section describes the role of drawing in the design process identified in the most recent research. In this later aspect of the study, the majority of respondents agreed that they were likely to use drawing in a briefing session with a client, although those working in publishing and multimedia applications said that they tended to be briefed by senior editors rather than clients as such. I cant talk without drawing was one revealing comment made. As in the earlier study, designers indicated that they would tend to draw more freely and openly with clients they knew well. Again respondents said they would draw when collecting reference material although this would mainly be to adapt imagery for their purpose from original visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005 17

sources. The production of images that could then be scanned into a computer and modified was frequently mentioned, although (as in the case the original group of respondents) it was agreed that an extensive collection of readily available visual material was needed for reference. Only 30 per cent of respondents said they kept a sketchbook in comparison with over 50 per cent in the original group. However, when asked about their use of drawing in the analysis and generation of ideas, all the respondents stressed the significance of drawing at this stage and the use of drawing was linked to the development of fresh, new ideas. This was described in terms such as the sort of drawing I do for myself, getting a handle on ideas and drawing with others to share ideas. The types of drawing produced were described as a thumbnail sketch, quick roughs or diagrammatic sketches. Specific examples of these diagrammatic drawings, what Goodman (1976) refers to as being independent of resemblance, are the bubble diagrams, flow charts and hypermaps of multimedia and website designers. There were some few examples of a schematic kind of drawing evident in the original study, notably imposition sheets for magazine designers, but such examples were ubiquitous by the time of the later research. Designers also described taking some of their early rapid drawings and scanning them as a basis for working on digitally, as they began to synthesise the various aspects of the design solution into more resolved formats. However, research on the later stages of the graphic design process revealed that, not only synthesis, but also revision, in-house and client presentation were invariably conducted within a computer-assisted environment. Thus one of the fundamental changes in the role of drawing has proved to be that paper-based drawings are no longer produced in anything like the quantity found in the original study. This in itself was a significant finding, and has necessitated major changes in the focus of the research programme. It became much more difficult to recreate the history and progression of design projects in the later period of the research because the drawn record was no longer retained by designers. Indeed, a drawn record was now hardly ever kept, as such, in the relatively seamless development typified by the digital environment. As indicated above, designers working in the paper-based studio did not see the production of artwork as being typically part of their remit. Conversely, those interviewed who now were operating in a digital environment, expressed satisfaction that in key instances they could maintain control of a design solution throughout its progress. Designers enjoyed the ease with which changes and adaptations could be made and adjustments made to all the elements including type, letterform and imagery. Even those designers who did not possess the capacity to render imagery and type accurately by drawing, were now able to achieve convincing qualities of finish to persuade clients of the effectiveness of their design.

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

18

The use of computers is generally agreed by all the respondents in the study to be very advantageous, increasing both the efficiency and control of designers. However, respondents were adamant that there was no over reliance on formulaic and limited software-based solutions. All respondents involved with logo and letterform design said that they always started with hand-drawn sketches. Similarly, all those involved with the design of threedimensional structures said that is was far easier and more descriptive to work through drawing rather than three-dimensional modelling systems in order to resolve the appearance of packaging and interiors.

Conclusions
In his seminal paper Discovering Design Ability, Cross (1990) describes the use of drawings and other modelling media as means of problem solving as one of the major aspects that characterises what designers do, part of the designerly ways of knowing, thinking and doing. As indicated above, the role of drawing in the graphic design process has been found to have been greatly changed by the introduction of the computer in the design studio environment. However, while the digital environment facilitates other forms of modelling than paper-based drawings, the ease and spontaneity of the traditional drawing systems are described by most respondents as still being valuable, if not vital, in the early planning stages of a design project. Graphic designers were found to enjoy the control that the use of computers gives in the procedures of developing and refining design solutions and in preparing the finished designs, first for presentation and then for production. Indeed, respondents were in agreement that a weakness in traditional drawing skills could be compensated for satisfactorily by working in a digital environment when presenting ideas and preparing for production. It is more difficult to determine the effects of a decreasing engagement in drawing on the development of visual literacy and creativity in graphic designers. Throughout the research, both senior and junior designers have been consistent in their assertion that graphic designers must continue to draw to improve their sensitivity to visual qualities and understanding of visual style. Moreover, the findings from a series of interviews that the author recently conducted with senior academics in the UK (Schenk, 2005), eliciting their views on the place and nature of drawing tuition in higher education for designers, indicate a similar anxiety as that found in many design practitioners that inadequate experience of drawing will affect the creative potential of todays students.

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

19

References
Archer L. B., 1997, Drawing as a tool for designers, in T. Moscovitch (ed), The Future of Drawing in Design Conference, UK: Huddersfield University, pp.39-42. Cross, N., 1995, Discovering Design Ability, in R. Buchanan and V. Margolin, (eds), Discovering Design: Explorations in Design Studies, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp.105-120. Games, A., 1960, Over My Shoulder, London: Studio Books. Garner, S., 1990, Drawing and designing: the case for reappraisal, Journal of Art and Design Education, Vol.9, No.1, pp.39-55. Goel, V., 1995, Sketches of Thought, USA: The MIT Press. Goodman, N. 1976, Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company. Laseau, P., 1980, Graphic Thinking For Architects and Designers, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. Lawson, B., 1980, How Designers Think, London: The Architectural Press. Lockard, K., 1973, Design Drawing, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company. Schenk, P., 1989, The nature of the graphic design process within the commercial environment, with particular regard to the role of drawing, PhD Thesis (unpublished), Manchester Polytechnic, UK. Schenk, P., 1991, The role of drawing in the graphic design process, Design Studies, Vol.12, No.3, pp.168-181. Schenk, P., 1993, Drawing research a case study, Proceedings of IDATER 93 International Conference, UK: Loughborough University, pp.1316. Schenk, P., 1997, The role of drawing in graphic design and the implications for curriculum planning, Journal of Art and Design Education, Vol.16, No.1, pp.73-82. Schenk, P., 1998, Drawing for design: the impact of computer-assisted design on the role of drawing for communication designers in commercial practice, The Design Journal, Vol.1, No.3, pp.44-50. Schenk, P., 2005, The why and how of drawing: a 20 year shift in design procedures and priorities, Proceedings of European Academy of Design Conference, Bremen, Germany, Section 080, pp.1-11 (CD from conference). Temple, S., 1994, Thought made visible the value of sketching, co-design, Oct-Dec 1994, Vol.1, pp.16-25. Tovey, M.J., 1989, Drawing and CAD in industrial design, Design Studies, Vol.10, No.1, pp.24-34. Verstijen, I.M. and Hennessey, J.M., 1998, Sketching and creative discovery, Design Studies, Vol.19, No.4, pp.519-546. ---oo0oo---

visual:design:scholarship, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

20

visual:design:scholarship
Research Journal of the Australian Graphic Design Association
visual:design:scholarship is a fully refereed, online journal that aims to stimulate, support and disseminate design research with a focus on visual communication design in the Australasian context. The journal seeks particularly to encourage contributions that speak to, and on behalf of, the visual communication design industry in Australasia. The aim is to include contributions from students, practitioners and academics. A range of research approaches, methods and forms of presentation is anticipated. visual:design:scholarship is published online continuously, as articles become available. All of the articles in any given calendar year will comprise a separate volume. Special editions will be published as additional numbers within each volume. Managing Editors Mark Roxburgh Sidney Newton University of Technology Sydney University of New South Wales email: journal.editor@agda.com.au ISSN: 1833-2226

Types of Contribution Refereed Articles (minimum 3,000-5,000 words or equivalent, no maximum). Original and previously unpublished scholarship in visual communication design of a research or developmental nature, including: case studies, student dissertations, minor theses, research reports, new methodologies, substantial position statements, reflective analyses, critical reviews, visual essays, experimental practice and curriculum developments. This is an opportunity to have a scholarly work internationally blind refereed for academic publication. Format Requirements We are interested in a variety of formats for refereed articles. All submissions require the following: x a separate page indicating a Title for the article/statement/review, the Full Name for each Author with their current affiliations, a Contact Address listing email and telephone details. Please avoid the identification of authors within the manuscript. x an abstract or short summary of 100-200 words x 3-6 keywords that identify the main issues for the readership. x the main document should be clearly organised with a hierarchy of headings and subheadings that structure the presentation. The style should be clear and concise, presented for an Australian graphic design audience. In general, please avoid the use of footnotes and endnotes. Referencing should follow the Harvard Style (reference in the text by author name and date, cited at the end in alphabetical order), and all tables and figures should have descriptive captions (including source information). A short (100-200 word) biography of each author for reader information would be appreciated. We also encourage authors to submit examples of their own practice, student work or other examples that generally illustrate and support the tenor of the article. Such examples of work will be published along with the biographies. Submission Submissions should be emailed to the Editors in Word (.doc) format only. For other submission possibilities, please contact the editors. Email: journal.editor@agda.com.au