ppti.info Lifestyle Character Design From The Ground Up Pdf

CHARACTER DESIGN FROM THE GROUND UP PDF

Friday, February 7, 2020


Read "Character Design from the Ground Up Make Your Sketches Come to Life" by Kevin Crossley available from Rakuten Kobo. Sign up today and get $5 off. Character design has become a distinct discipline in the entertainment industry, and character designers are employed by film and game companies across the globe to bring life to scripts and ideas. In this book, illustrator and character designer Kevin Crossley provides a complete. Download Download Character Design From the Ground Up | PDF books PDF Online Download Here.


Author:AUDREY ZELASKO
Language:English, Spanish, French
Country:Haiti
Genre:Science & Research
Pages:632
Published (Last):29.10.2015
ISBN:561-4-18042-897-8
ePub File Size:23.84 MB
PDF File Size:15.54 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Downloads:25662
Uploaded by: LANA

Character Design from the Ground Up: Make Your Sketches Come to Life EPub/ PDF Book by Kevin Crossley. JK4kmlsa - Download and read Kevin. Download PDF Character Design From the Ground Up, by Kevin Crossley. Find out the technique of doing something from several sources. Read online or download ebook Character Design from the Ground Up pdf, All stories have characters, and whether its a film, game, book, or comic.

Full Name Comment goes here. Are you sure you want to Yes No. Be the first to like this. No Downloads. Views Total views. Actions Shares.

Embeds 0 No embeds. No notes for slide. Book Details Author: Paperback Brand: Notice Message: Trying to get property of non-object Filename: If you want to download this book, click link in the next page 5. Thank You For Visiting.

You just clipped your first slide! Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later. Now customize the name of a clipboard to store your clips. Visibility Others can see my Clipboard.

15 Incredible Character Design Books on the Market

Cancel Save. Deep approaches do not merely seek to include one or two philosophers from under-represented groups; rather, they work to render the very structure of the course, conference, etc. It is of course very common for junior scholars to begin by adopting the approaches of their own teachers and their senior colleagues. As their careers proceed, some scholars become attuned to the equity issues that I have sketched here and seek in response to change their practices.

The most accessible way for a philosopher to begin to do this is to make small changes here and there. Such small changes might include adding a reading or two on feminist epistemology to an introductory course, or working with a professional association to make sure at least one speaker on a panel organized by the association is a member of an under-represented group. While small, surface changes like these are insufficient to correct the long history of exclusion in the discipline, it is often better to promote surface diversity than to promote no diversity at all.

Indeed, the conditions under which many philosophers work makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for them to support inclusiveness in the discipline in a deeper way. We will briefly discuss this in Part 5.

Among the various possible starting points for deeper approaches to inclusiveness in the discipline, course design can be a great choice. Philosophy courses are usually more or less self-contained, making them a sensible sandbox for experimentation; many philosophers have considerable freedom to make course design choices; course design innovations can have fairly immediate benefits for students in the courses; and course design innovations are often transferrable to other courses or even scalable to whole curricula.

Further, as I will argue in Parts 4 and 6, course design innovations can and should have effects on our scholarship and indeed our discipline as a whole.

Intentional course design 28My own work on inclusive course design started with the goal of making my courses more accessible for disabled students. This path took me to Universal Design for Learning udl , and then beyond it, to what I now call intentional design.

Before we get to intentional design, it would be helpful to consider the three broad pedagogical models that are available for supporting disabled students: No support; Accommodations sometimes called reasonable adjustment ; Universal Design sometimes called Universal Design for Instruction, Universal Design for Learning, etc. I will therefore not rehearse here the reasons to reject that approach.

That office identifies which special accommodations to existing assessments, learning activities, courses and curricula the student requires in order to compensate for their disability, and makes arrangements with instructors and other academic and support units to ensure that the accommodations are provided.

While the Accommodations model is superior to providing disabled students with no supports at all, it is far from ideal. The processes at the heart of the model impose time, energy, financial and other costs on disabled students. They must make appointments with counselors, provide medical documentation often at their own cost , provide private information about themselves to university staff, etc. In addition, we provide appropriate accommodations for members of the disabled minority ill-served by the course default.

By contrast, the Universal Design model understands learners to vary widely in their embodiment and their experiences, and indeed understands these things to change over time for individual learners. Universal Design architecture seeks to make spaces accessible and usable by a wide range of users Curb cuts — breaks in curbs allowing stepless access to sidewalks at street corners — are often used as examples of Universal Design. A curb cut serves not only disabled people with limited mobility, but also caregivers pushing baby carriages, shoppers or vendors pulling carts, children on bicycles or skateboards, etc.

Some examples of udl course design choices include making course materials accessible in a range of modalities print, screen-readable pdf, podcast, etc.

The mechanisms I have just listed are not just good pedagogy for disabled students; they are good pedagogy tout court.

Welcome To The From The Ground Up Forum

In addition to supporting excellent pedagogy, udl reduces the time, energy and financial costs borne by disabled students. Instead, it sends the clear message that learners are welcome regardless of their embodiment, background or experience. Some learners simply need different supports. People with some visual conditions find black text on white background easier to read; others do better with muted colours. While some neuro-atypical learners may benefit from less social interaction with others and fewer distractions, other learners in the same course may best flourish in busy groups moving quickly between various tasks.

No one design, no matter how thoughtful, will serve all of these learners. Further, there is a risk that instructors who have designed their courses etc.

However, I work to do so through an ongoing process of reflective equilibrium rather than under the totalizing and empirically implausible rubric of universality.

To design is to be intentional. However, too often pedagogues replace the design of courses and course components with cut-and-paste from other scholars and from their own earlier work. To be truly intentional in our design — that is, to actually design — is to design course components, courses, and curricula around the objectives the instructor hopes to achieve rather than around conventions. Intentional design is Why-oriented.

And why in this way?

In inviting the instructor continually to reflect on the kind of capacities she wishes to cultivate in her students, on the kind of graduates she envisions for her department, and on the kind of values she wishes her discipline to embody, it is also potentially revolutionary. Pluralistic canons 37While my path to intentional design started with a concern to better support disabled learners, as should be clear, I no longer demarcate between disabled and non-disabled learners or not, at least, for the purposes of pedagogy.

In particular, I now start the design of all of my courses with a fundamental goal of teaching a diverse array of philosophers not just the usual White male canon and topics not just substance ontology but also Black Lives Matter.

Indeed, I now maintain that if cultivating an inclusive discipline is our goal and — for the reasons that I laid out in Section 2 — I think it should be one of our goals , we should start the design of our courses with that goal in mind. We need to start with diversity. In classic pragmatism courses, the philosophers who are usually covered are Peirce, James, Dewey, etc. If any non-White male philosopher is included, it is typically Jane Addams.

Determined to teach a more pluralistic canon, I started my new syllabus as follows: In this seminar, we will survey classic pragmatism, a distinctively American philosophical movement that spanned about to the s. We will read and discuss representative works by central figures in the movement and by other authors working in a similar idiom in the period.

What is pragmatism? Put differently: What features mark a thinker as a pragmatist, in the sense we are using here? What have historically been the grounds for inclusion into or exclusion from the canon of classic pragmatism?

What, if anything, is distinctively American about classic pragmatism? We covered the figures in chronological order.

Join Kobo & start eReading today

As we did, we had ongoing, active discussions about how best to characterize pragmatism and whether or not the figure we were looking at that day was a pragmatist. This inquiry-style approach made the students active co-researchers in a kind of history of philosophy fieldwork expedition.

And, of course, students may get to spend less time on major figures than they would otherwise.

While it is indeed a great deal of work to teach a new canon, as instructors learn about new-to-them figures in order to teach them, their research domain expands. While teaching in an area in which one has limited expertize takes a bit of a leap of faith, instructor lack of expertize provides incentive for the instructor to support student-centred inquiry, which is in any event often better pedagogy than instructor-centred transmission models.

Finally, with respect to coverage of the canon, what students lose in in-depth study of major figures, they gain in historiographical sophistication. I think that students learn more about pragmatism by developing their own characterization of that philosophy through ongoing examination of figures from the period than they do from a professor telling them what pragmatism is.

Further, students in the course I have just described develop sophisticated meta-philosophical ideas about canonicity, genealogy, and demarcation — ideas that apply well beyond the history of philosophy. By the time an instructor has decided on these topics they are of course mostly the names of philosophers, not really topics at all for a course, they have given the game away.

The most obvious way to bring women philosophers and philosophers racialized as non-White into a course like this is to draw on more recent scholars who either interpret or apply the historical theories the instructor has built his course around. Designing courses in which the only women or racialized authors assigned seem secondary reinforces harmful myths about who belongs in philosophy, and risks triggering stereotype threat among non-White male learners.

But, imagine if he taught only half of his initial list of topics, and replaced with other half with some of the following topics and associated figures: Personhood Mary Midgely, Judith Jarvis Thompson Meta-philosophy Charles Mills, Kristie Dotson Race W.

Who counts as a person and why does it matter? Is race real? How does racism operate? What is it to be gendered? To be racialized? To be disabled? Am I blameworthy for bad judgment if I was denied access to education? The resulting course would both ground students in important historical figures and concepts, and awaken them to the relevance of philosophy to the conduct of our lives today, in a world that is often confusing, unjust, and complex.

Now is the time for us to affix such a sticker to disciplinary deep pluralism and intentional design. I am able to work on many of the kinds of things I have commended to you in this article because I am a tenured professor with a relatively light teaching load and relatively small classes in a country where university professors are typically provided with quite good compensation and support for their work.

Your mileage may vary. Try aiming for greater pluralism by using intentional design on just one unit rather than a whole course. Or, keep the units internally the same but rearrange the order to allow more time and energy for more marginal figures.

Many introductory courses start with metaphyics and epistemology before moving on to ethics and politics, in which latter subdisciplines it is often easier to identify authors who are women or racialized as non-White.

Hey! You made it all the way to the bottom!

When we leave those units to the end, they are the ones for which we run out of time. Flip the course and start with those units. You not only allow for a more leisurely coverage of those authors; you also shift the entire tenor of the course, sending the clear message from the start that philosophy is concerned about and matters for the conduct of life.

From diversity to pluralism: Scholarship and professional practices 49I began this article by talking about pluralism, but through much of it I have focused on diversity.

They are of course closely related terms. The extensions of the two terms are a bit different too. All diversity is a kind of pluralism, but not all pluralism is a kind of diversity. Like Peirce, I think that we do our best inquiry — our best philosophizing — when we are open to alternative methods, perspectives and hypotheses.We appreciate your feedback.

Upon this first, and in one sense this sole, rule of reason, that in order to learn you must desire to learn, and in so desiring not be satisfied with what you already incline to think, there follows one corollary which itself deserves to be inscribed upon every wall of the city of philosophy: Do not block the way of inquiry 5. Ai Weiwei Speaks: Masterful Marks: Kevin Crossley Pages: It is not only for you to be success in particular life; you can be effective in everything.

Continue shopping Checkout Continue shopping. View publication stats Related Papers. Vernon McGee.

SHENIKA from Montana
I enjoy exploring ePub and PDF books brightly . Browse my other articles. I have always been a very creative person and find it relaxing to indulge in mcmap.