思考的基礎設計－造形感知養成訓練

Design Basic with Form Training-Be Familiar with 3D Shapes

黃格崇(Jalin K. Huang) ； 陳呈容(Cheng-Rung Chen)

《文化創意產業研究學報》 2卷4期 (2012/12) Pp. 403-415

https://doi.org/10.6639/JCCIR.201212_2(4).0005

摘要

從一個教授基礎設計課程教師觀點，目前台灣在大學的設計基本訓練，已經不再像以前的嚴格。表現產出教學成果趨勢下，基本設計無論在學生或老師間，都不是熱門受歡迎的科目。曾經被忽視的這種基礎能力養成，在欠缺不足情形裡，伴隨著電腦工具發達的掩護中，學生因此在基礎架空下成長。誤以為工具操作熟練等同於設計能力的增加。本研究依據造形立體養成之歷程成果，提出思考與操作相輔的學習訓練。透過理性講解、智性思考、感性表達，輔以修改再修改的過程，循序漸進地累積這些未來設計師的感知與執行力。或許基本設計課程不能產出令人驚訝作品；我們卻堅決相信嚴謹要求的態度，將是未來精彩設計作品之永續根基。

關鍵字

設計學習 ； 造形訓練 ； 基礎設計

並列摘要

The essential lessons for students in design program seem become less important than it's used to be in the current school environments in Taiwan. From the perspective of a teacher, we believe that we should return to basic training procedures along with traditional hands-on methods in the field of design. For all intended designers, it is necessary to keep the careful tasks and tedious labors in training. In this paper, we report a particular instance indicating the situation which conveyed some discipline insights as to what we expect of preparing the design fundamentals. In this study, we have also found the vivid facts that the students have benefit themselves learning 3D shapes with an easy and concrete method.

並列關鍵字

Design Learning ； Form Training ； Design Basic

參考文獻

Grear, M.(1993).Inside/Outside: From the Basics to the Practice of Design.NY:Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Hannah, G.G.(2002).Elements of Design: Rowena Reed Kostellow and the Structure of Visual Relationships.NY:Princeton Architectural Press.

Hurlburt, A.(1981).The Design Concept.NY:Watson-Guptill Publications.

Landa, Robin(2000).Graphic Design Solutions.USA:Cengage Learning.

王無邪(1974)。平面設計原理。台北:雄獅圖書股份有限公司。