crafted futures: a craft/technology collaboration using textile craft processes and digital print as...

GASTON

©2017TheAuthors.PublishedbyLoughboroughUniversity.ThisisanopenaccessarticleundertheCCBY-NClicense(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

1

CraftedFutures:acraft/technologycollaboration

DrElizabethGaston1

1. UniversityofLeeds

ThisitemwassubmittedtotheproceedingsoftheLoughboroughUniversityTextileDesignResearchGroupINTERSECTIONSConference2017byDrElizabethGaston.Citation:Gaston,E.(2017)CraftedFutures:acraft/technologycollaboration.InProceedingsofIntersections:CollaborationsinTextileDesignResearchConference,13September2017,LoughboroughUniversityLondon,U.K.Availablefromwww.lboro.ac.uk/textile-research/intersections.Publisher:LoughboroughUniversity(©TheAuthors)Rights:ThisworkismadeavailableaccordingtotheconditionsoftheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0International(CCBY-NC4.0)licence.Fulldetailsofthislicenceareavailableat:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/PLEASECITETHEPUBLISHEDVERSION.

GASTON


2

Abstract: Crafted Futures is a craft/technology visual response to William Gott’s Dyehouse Pattern Book produced in 1815 whilst Gott was an apprentice in his father’s woolen mill. The work utilised craft practice to explore theories of colour contrast, assimilation and optical mixing in colour production. In collaboration with print technologist Muriel Rigout, applied craft thinking was employed in the development of the work, tacit knowledge of materials and skill were employed with formal colour theory, using textile craft processes and digital print as a modelling tool. The project was important as an example of a craft/technology collaboration, identified as a driver for commercial growth. The success of the project was discussed in terms of individual research outcomes, the success of the visual response and the success of the collaborative process. The work was exhibited at Leeds Industrial Museum, Armley Mills, Leeds, 14th October to 27th November, 2016. Keywords:Collaboration;craft;digitaltechnology;colour,IntroductionThispaperwilldiscussCraftedFutures,acollaborativecraft/technologyprojectfromthepointofviewofadesignerusingcraftpracticeinthedesignprocess.Ithighlightstheimportanceofcollaborativepracticeinadesignmethodologyandsituatestheprojectwithincontemporaryeconomicstrategies.

Figure1.WilliamGott’sDyehousePatternBookSource:https://library.leeds.ac.uk/special-collections-explore/57697/

Crafted Futures is a collaborative craft/technology investigation of colour production developed as aresponsetohistoric representationofcolour research. Itconsideredanoriginal, jointoutcomethatwasthe result of two separate research projects. The commission was originally proposed as part of theYorkshire Year of the Textile, an Arts Council England funded project at the University of Leeds whichaimed to highlight textile history and contemporary textile research from across the county in anydiscipline through public art collaborations. Many of the rich textile collections housed in Yorkshiremuseumsprovided initial inspiration.WilliamGott’sDyehousePatternBook (figure1)produced in1815whilstGottwas an apprentice in his father’swoollenmill in Leeds andondisplay in thenewlyopenedTreasuresoftheBrothertonGalleryattheUniversityofLeedswasakeyfocusoftheyearofcelebration.Itwascentraltooneofthefirstcommissionsoftheyearlongproject,apoetryresponsetothebookbypoetLindaFrance(2016).ElizabethGastontextiledesignerandresearcherandMurielRigout,lecturerinprinttechnology and researcher, both in the School of Design, University of Leeds were approached by the

GASTON


3

organising committee toproduceavisual response toGott’spatternbook tobedisplayedat the LeedsIndustrialMuseum at ArmleyMills, Leeds, a partner in the Yorkshire Year of the Textile. ArmleyMillsalready had an associationwithWilliamGott and had hosted an exhibition of dye experiments by theHeritageDyersGroupbasedatthemuseum.ThegrouphadreproducedGott’soriginalrecipestoachieveawidegamutofcolouronavarietyofsubstrates.ProjectAimsIt was recognised that the short lead time between commission and exhibition would preclude thedevelopmentofanewproject,uniquetotheYorkshireYearoftheTextilecommission.Thelimitedtimeavailableresultedintheintegrationoftwoongoingprojectsthatwouldbeunitedthroughthepublicartproject.CraftedFutureswasaprecursortofurtherresearchfrombothparticipantsandacommunicationtoolforresearchalreadyundertaken.Though colleagues, Gaston and Rigout had not worked together previously, however their commonresearchaimsexploredtheextensionofcolourgamutintheirpreferredmedium;forGastontextilesandforRigoutprint.Thecollaborationframedthetwodisciplineswithinthesameresearchquestion;howcancolourgamutbeextendedthroughmanipulationofanarrowspectrumofmaterials?Gaston’spreviousstitchcommissionwasatextileresponsetotheresearchofstructuralbiologistMichaelLevitt the inaugural speaker in the Astbury Conversation, a biennial biological sciences researchsymposium. This work explored her doctoral findings on colour and pattern manipulation in knittedfabrics through stitch. The Astbury commission utilised craft practice to explore the theories of colourcontrast, assimilationandopticalmixing in colourproduction. Layered stitchof varying sizeanddensitywasusedtocreateawidegamutofcolourfromalimitedpaletteofthreads.ThispracticeechoedGott’snineteenthcenturycolourmixingexperimentswithdyesandwasanaturalvehicleforexploringhiswork.Print technologistRigout sought to investigate thebreadthof colourgamutavailable indigitallyprintednaturaldyesusingmadderandindigo.ThedyeswerebasedonGott’soriginalrecipesandprintedusingaFujifilmDimatixMaterialsPrinterwhichenabledadiverserangeofmaterialstobeprintedonavarietyofunconventional substrates. This allowed Rigout to produce innovative digital printing inks from naturalsources.Thefinalworkincorporatedfurthercolourmanipulationthroughstitchoverdigitalprint.Theimportanceofacraft/technologycollaborationAcraft/technologycollaborationwastimely.Craftasanotionhasromanticconnotationsofapastruralidyll, of lone artisanpractitioners, producingbespoke items that are far removed from ideasofmassproductionandlowcost;craftastheantithesisofprogress(Adamson,2010;Frayling,2001).Sincetheadventof industrialisation,which introducedthedivisionbetweendesignandmaking,thecurrencyofcraftshaslostitswidespreadvalueasacommercialnecessityintheproductionoffunctionalproductsand has become a niche commodity accessible to a few (Dudley and Mealing, 2000). However asFrayling(2001)identifies,thereismoretocraftvalue.Here-readstheBauhausmanifestoof“returntocraft”,suggestingthatcraftismoreimportantthanindustry,as“turntocraft”,emphasisingthepositionof craftasaplanningormodelling tool in industrialproduction.Theconceptof craftasa catalyst forcommercial growth is currently being explored by the Crafts Council who commissioned “Innovationthrough craft: Opportunities for growth” (KPMG, 2016). The report identified craft/technologycollaborationasaprimedriverforeconomicdevelopment.DigitalcraftThetechnologystrandofCraftedFutureswassituatedwithindigitallyprintedtextiles.Asearlyas1996,McCulloughhadcounter-intuitivelyidentifieddigitaltechnologyasacraftprocessontwolevels.Firstly,

GASTON


4

herecognisedthattousedigitalprocesseseffectivelyrequiredskillandcreativity;thatadigitalinterfaceisessentiallyatool,withnodistinctionfromaneedleintextilecraftsorahammerinmetalworking.Itstillrequireshumaninteraction.Secondly,theuseofadigitalinterfacemayalsoenablesmallproducersto competewith largemanufacturerswhohaveaneconomyof scalewithin their productionprocess(McCullough,1996).ThisuseofcraftandtechnologyforcommercialgrowthisexemplifiedbyUnmadewho use the latest Shima Seiki Wholegarment© knitting machines to produce individual bespokegarmentsforindividualsandshortproductionrunsforsmallbusinesses.Thecollaborativeuseoftechnology incraftundertaken inCraftedFuturesdifferedfromMcCullough’sviewthattheuseofdigitaltechnologyisacraftinitself.Insteadtraditionalconceptsofcraftlocatedinmaterials andprocess utilised technology for innovative production. Collaboration in craft is not newdespitethepervadingviewofthecraftsmanaslonepractitioner.Historicallycraftsmenwereorganisedinto guilds, sharing knowledge and marketing. Contemporarily the production of a bespoke couturefashionrequiresarangeofskilledcraftspeople,cutters,beaders,embroiderers,etc.allworkingonthesame piece and contributing individual expertise. Crafted Futures was collaboration betweenparticipantsfromindependentspecialistareas,eachcontributingdifferentbutequallyvalidexpertise,ina similar approach to commercial designpractice (Eckert and Stacey, 2000). FurthermoreGastonandRigout were not directly concerned with the same outcomes; each was investigating a specific butdifferentoutcomeinthesameprocesssobothhadcontroloftheirownpractice.Appliedthinking;craftasamethodologyPerhapsthemostinterestingaspectofCraftedFutureswasitsuseofcraftasamethodologyfordesign.TheCraftsCouncilviewofcraftasacatalysttoeconomicchangenegatesthetraditionalviewofcraftasan historic practice and situates craft in the future, positioning it as a tool for applied thinking andproblem solving. This articulateswhat has long since beenunderstoodby craft practitioners. In 1970Hepworthdescribedher left hand as her thinkinghand as opposed to themotor actionsof her righthand,intimatingthatdecisionsmadeduringthephysicalmakingofherworkwasinherentintheoveralldesign of her sculpture (Hepworth, 1970, p79). This echoed the design practice in Crafted Futures,where a deep understanding of theory and processwas used tacitly in the production of each visualrepresentation.Whilstthetacitknowledgedevelopedthroughexperimentationanditerationinmakinghasgreat importance in thegenerationofnew ideas,personal tacit knowledge isnotoriouslyhard toarticulatewhichcanbehugelydetrimentaltothesuccessofcollaboration(BarretandBolt,2010,p3).The lack of common language as a bar to the success of a collaborative project is recognised by theCraftsCouncil(2016),buttheydonotofferasolution.MethodologyThereispotentialduringacraft/technologycollaborationformisunderstandingnotonlyinthedifferentlanguage used by participants but also in the methodology used for problem solving. Technologytraditionally sits in a positivist paradigmwhere a defined question can be verified or falsifiedwith asingleanswerthatisrevealedthroughdeductivereasoningandcanbearticulatedverbally.Crafthasaninherently broader approach to research and development, using divergent thought processes andabductivereasoning;resultsareoftencommunicatedthroughproductorexhibition.ThedominanceofPositivism as a problem solving strategy in western research has led to a devaluing of alternativestrategies and this can act as a bar to successful collaboration between practitioners using differenttypesofresearchmethodology.This was not problematic during Crafted Futures as both partners in the project acknowledged theexpertise of the other in their field of practice and respected the different problem solvingmethodologies and modes of communication used. This occurred naturally as the two strands ofpractice remained separate and that each participant completed their element of the projectindependently. Whilst this was a successful solution in this project considering time restrictions, itshouldbeacknowledgedthatgreaterunderstandingcanbedevelopedwhere there isanexchangeof

GASTON


5

practicewitheachcontributorand if thisoccurssuccessfully,collaborationresults inanoutcomethatwouldnotbepossibleindividually.Thisisexemplifiedbythetrans-disciplinarycraft/danceprojectSideby Side (Carnac and Diallo, 2012) where artist Helen Carnac and dancer Laila Diallo explored eachother’s practice to extend their own, echoing the modernist ideas of Elsie Fogerty (1937) whoquestionedwhetheranartistinonemediumcanextendthepracticeofanartistinanother.Inareviewof theprojectbothGastonandRigoutexpressedadesire tocollaborateagainbutwithamore trans-disciplinaryapproachwhichhasthepotentialtoproducewiderandmoreunexpectedoutcomes.CommunicationFoggerty (1937) also recognised the importance of clear communication and shared language in asuccessful collaboration. Differing communication channels were identified as one of the maindifferencesbetweenpositivist and craftbased research (Gaston,2016)and thiswasevidenced in theearlystagesoftheproject,wheretheinitialprojectdiscussionandwasframedaroundanexchangeofpractice. Gaston took a visual approach, consistent with a craft methodology, showing a variety ofprevious work, whereas Rigout used a verbal approach, consistent with a positivist methodology, toexplainherpractice.Anynegativeeffectscausedbyadifferenceincommunicationstyleswasreducedbytheclarityoftheaimsoftheprojectarticulatedthroughaclearresearchquestion.Phaseone:separateprojectsInspirationBoth participants had undertaken individual research on the Gott pattern book and again bothparticipantshadapproachedthisdifferently.WhilstRigoutwasinterestedintherecipesincludedinthebook (averbalapproach),Gastonapproached theworkvisuallyandwasparticularly interested in thematerialityandthreedimensionalityofthebook.AnonlineresourceprovidedbyTheTreasuresoftheBrothertonGalleryattheUniversityofLeeds,whichpresentedadigitalimageofeachpageofthebook,wasimportanttoeachpractitioner(figure1).Theoriginalmanuscriptiscurrentlyondisplayunderglassandsoonlyonepageisavailableconcurrently.ThedigitisationofGott’soriginalworkenabledRigouttostudy each recipe but perhaps the greatest impact of the digital images was on Gaston’s work. Thearrangement of thumbnail images of each page on screen allowed the whole book to be seensimultaneouslyinawaythatwouldhavebeenunimaginabletoGott.Thisglobalviewofthebookwasinfluentialintheformofeachpiece.MaterialuseThe two strands of the project were linked through material use referencing the Yorkshire woollenindustry.TheprojectwaskindlysponsoredbyA.W.HainsworthbasedinPudsey,WestYorkshire,whohavebeenmanufacturingsince1783,andthereforecontemporariesofGott.Duringavisittothemill,Gaston and Rigout selected a range of fabric weights to experiment with. They selected an undyedmelton (100%merinowool, plainweave, 275gsm),with off-cuts ofHainsworth’s finerweightmerinocavalrytwill(100%merinowool)inairforceblueandaheavierweightmelton(100%merinowool,plainweave,340gsm)inscarlet,referencingHainsworth’shistoryofsupplyingmilitaryuniformfabrics.ColourGaston’s previous colour research was predominantly situated in knitted fabric, more specificallyinvestigatingtheinter-relationshipofcolour,formandtheknittedstitchintheperceptionofpatterninFairIsleknittedfabrics.Ofparticularinterestwastheinstabilityofcontiguouscolourproducedthroughmechanisms such as contrast, assimilation and optical mixing. This work had employed a tacitknowledgeofmaterialsandprocesswithformalcolourandpatterntheory,usingtextilecraftprocessesas a modelling tool. The outcomes were communicated in exhibition and performance as well as atraditionalwrittenthesis(Gaston,2016).ThissuccessfulmethodologywasemployedduringthecreativepracticeofCraftedFutures.

GASTON


6

Figure2.ColourpalettecreatedbyopticalmixingSource:PhotographElizabethGaston

Figure3.BlendoforiginalthreadcolourSource:PhotographElizabethGaston

Figure4.Testswatchdemonstratingassimilationofcolour.Source:PhotographElizabethGaston

GASTON


7

The creation of the colour gamut used in the work was evolutionary. Previous work in stitch hadidentified the ability to exploit opticalmixingwhich is commonly used in textiles (figure 2). The newwork produced for Crafted Futures furthered this work through a wider exploration of the effect ofstitchdensityandassimilationoncolourperceptionofopticallymixedcolourbasedonalimitedintuitivepalette(figure3).Initialtestsusingadenseseedstitchoveracolouredbackgroundcreatedconditionsthatpromotedassimilationratherthancontrasteffects(figure4).Thiscausedthecolourofthestitchtobecome more similar to the background, for example the yellow appeared “yellower” and the pinkbecame“pinker”whenthethreadandbackgroundcolourweresimilarintermsofhueandsaturation.This occurred less in the final pieces where a more saturated colour was used in the backgroundhowever using the scarlet background emphasised the variation in hue modification that could beachieved through varying the stitch density (figure 5). An unexpected visual effect thatwas achievedwas the appearanceof illusorybrightness in areasof negative space in the stitch. This effect causesbackground areaswith a low spatial frequency (no stitch) to appear brighter than the background inareaswithahigherspatialfrequency(densestitch)(Kanizsa,1979)(figure6).

Figure5.OpticalmixingaffectedbystitchdensitySource:PhotographElizabethGaston

Figure6.Illusorybrightnesscausedbydifferingspatialfrequencyofstitch

Source:PhotographElizabethGaston

Rigoutfocusedondevelopingarangeofprimarycolourinksstartingwithredusingmadderasadyeandblueusingindigoasadye(figure7).Thesedyeswereselectedfortheirwidespreadavailability.Theinksproducedwerediluteintermspigmentcontentandwereprintedatfourstrengths,thestrongestbeing100% ink at 65 DPI. Both colourswere printed on pre-mordanted un-dyedmelton. Alum (potassiumaluminium sulphate) was used as the mordant for the madder and sulphuric acid was used as themordantfortheindigo.Pre-mordantingthefabricwasproblematicintermsofthefinishedprintinthat

GASTON


8

dryingthepre-mordantedfabricbeforeprintingwouldaffecttheeffectivenessofthemordant.Duetotimeconstraints therewasa threemonthbreakbetweenapplying themordantand the finalprintingwhichallowedmildewtoformonthefabriccausingdiscolouration.Tocreateastrongerdepthofcolourthetestsampleswereoverprinted.Twotestpieceswereproduced,oneredandoneblue.FormThe form of each piece of Gaston’s work was informed by the layout of pages in Gott’s originalmanuscript.Thiswasrevealedwhendigitalimagesoftheseparatepageswereviewedconcurrentlyonscreen.The formof thepageswasexplored initially inpaperusingmarkmakingand intercutting inavarietyofmedia.Thefinalformwasn’tadirectrepresentationofaparticularpagebutanamalgamationofideasfromseveralpages.ThecolourusedreferencedboththecolourinGott’soriginalworkandthecolourusedintheexploratorypaperresearch.InmanycasestheformofthefabricswatchesinGott’spatternbookappearedasnegativespaceinthepaperworkandconsequentlyinthefinalworks.Rigoutuseda formalarrangementof testsquaresarranged in fourrowsof fivesquares, thecolour ineachrowbeingprogressivelystronger(figure7).MaterialityGaston’s initial interest inGott’spatternbookhadbeen inthethree-dimensionalityofthebook.Eachpagehad swatchesof dyed fabric attached to itwhichhad addedbulk to thebook and causedpagedistortion. In someareas the swatcheshad fallenout and left only an imprintof the fabric. Thiswasreferencedinoneofthefinalpieces.Allofthestitchworkwasproducedusingundyedmeltonfabric.The areas of stitch changed the materiality of the fabric, adding structure and reducing flexibility.Further three-dimensionality was created through the use of appliqué using the finer weight cavalrytwillandtheheaviermelton.LimitationsDuring the production stage of the commission the two projects separated and there was littlecommunication between the partners about the development of the individual strands ofwork. Thiswasnotproblematicinthatthetwodefinedprojectshadseparateaimsandcoulddevelopconcurrently.Themajor drawback to the separateness of the projectswas a difference in time expectation. HandstitchisaninherentlyslowprocessandassuchforGastontobeabletoworkwithRigout’sexperimentstheyneededtobecompletedmuchearlierintheprocess.UnfortunatelyduetopriorcommitmentsandaseriesofunavoidabletechnicaldelaysRigoutwasnotabletocompleteasmuchworkasanticipatedbefore Gaston started developing the final work for exhibition. This was a result of poorly definedplanning at the start of the project in terms of communication of timescales required for the craftproduction.Howeverasappliedcraftthinkingwasemployedinthedevelopmentofthework,withtheoutcomesdeterminedbythecraftprocess,thefinaloutcomewasnotknownatthestartoftheprojectreducing the ability to produce a defined timeline. The result of this oversightwas thatmuch of theearlyworkintheprojectwascompletedusingGaston’sworkonitsown.OutcomesInitiallyfivepieceswereproducedandwereexhibitedattheStanleyandAudreyBurtonGallery,Leeds(4thMay-17thSeptember2016). The first iterationofCraftedFuturesdidnot includeanyofRigout’sexperiments.Theworkwasreceivedwellcriticallyandwasconsideredvisuallysuccessful.Phase2:integrationofpracticeDuringthefirstexhibitionperiodRigout’sinitialprintexperimentswerecompleted,allowingGastontoproduceanintegratedoutcome.Thelatenessoftheprintresearchresultedinnofurtherdevelopmentof the layoutof theprint. Thediscolourationof theprinted fabrics causedbymildew resulted in the

GASTON


9

needtocroptheprintsandapplythemtocleanmeltonechoingtheappliquéusedinphaseoneoftheproject.ColourmanipulationThetonal levelsoftheprintapproximatedthatoftheinitialtestpiecesthathadclearlydemonstratedassimilationsotheseexperimentswereextendedbyoverstitchingatonalrangeofyellowthreadsatavarietyofstitchdensities.AgaintheformoftheworkwasinspiredbythelayoutofGott’spatternbook.The work demonstrated optical mixing in areas of high spatial frequency (high density stitch) butassimilationinareasof lowerspatialfrequency(lowerdensitystitch), indicatingthatthestitchdensityhadaneffectofcolourmanipulationinstitch(figure7).

Figure7.TheintegrationofprintandstitchoutcomesSource:PhotographElizabethGaston

FurtherOutcomesInpreparationfortheseconditerationoftheexhibition(figure8),whichwasheldattheLeedsIndustrialMuseum,ArmleyMills (4thOctober -26thNovember 2016,)Gaston returned to both themanuscriptandtoFrance’spoetryresponsetothemanuscriptforinspiration.FrancehadusedmanyofthecolournamescitedbyGotttodescribehisexperiments,andusedthemasarefrainthroughoutthepoem.Thiswasused to informcolour choice in the last twopiecesof the serieswithparticular reference to thelines“lavender,peach,Saxonblue”,“fustic,indigo,madder”and“lilac,salmon,bronze”(France,2016).Gaston’s background of knit design and research was also evident in the final two pieces whichreferencedheroriginalcolourresearch,albeitinprocess(knit)andnottechnique(FairIsle).UsingknitGastondescribedtheformofthecolourswatchesinGottsmanuscriptboththreedimensionallyandintexture.Stitchremainedthefocusofthecolourwork.Evaluation

GASTON


10

Crafted Futures was evaluated on three levels, in the first instance as an outcome of two separateresearchprojects,secondlyasavisualartoutcomeandfinallythesuccessofcollaborationwasassessed.SuccessofindividualprojectsGastonandRigoutbothsoughtto increasethecolourgamutavailable intheirchosenmedium.Inthisresearch, success of the development of understanding revealed during the making process wasmeasured intuitively using practice based assessment. Both participants were satisfied with theoutcomesoftheirworkbutcouldclearlyseethepossibilityforanextensionofpractice.DuetotimeconstraintsRigoutsuccessfullydigitallyprintedatonalrangetwocoloursusingnaturaldyes.Thecolourwasfasttobasicwashtestsbutwasnottestedforlightfastness.Thecolourandformoftheprint was clear but there were problems with staining of the printed fabrics. A continuation of thisprojectwouldextendthecolour rangeattemptedandresolve technicalproblemsrevealedduring thefixingprocess.Gastonconfirmedthatmuchof thepatternperception findings revealedduringherdoctoral research(Gaston,2016)wasrelevanttothestitchundertakeninthisinvestigation.Thiswasparticularlypertinenttoopticaleffectssuchasassimilationandopticalmixing.Theworkdemonstratedthatnotonlycolourbut stitch density was important in the creation of new colour. A continuation of this project willinvestigatecolourproductionthroughstitchusingamorecontrolledmethodologyusingclearlydefinedcriteria, echoing a Positivist approach. This may provide a deeper understanding on which to basefurthercreativepractice.SuccessofpublicartoutcomesTheoutcomesofCraftedFutureswereexhibitedintworespectedregionalgalleries,inbothinstancestocriticalacclaim,confirmingthevisualsuccessoftheprojectassessedusingDickie’sInstitutionalTheory(Warburton, 1992, p163). The project is also cited in Connecting Threads (Cassé and Jones, 2017), apublicationcelebratingtheYorkshireYearoftheTextile.

Figure8.CraftedFuturesexhibitedatTheLeedsIndustrialMuseum,ArmleyMills(2016)Source:PhotographElizabethGaston

GASTON


11

SuccessofcollaborationPerhaps the successofa collaboration shouldbemeasuredby thewillingnessofparticipants toworkcollaboratively again. By this measure the collaboration in the production of Crafted Futures wassuccessfulwithbothpartnersexpressingtheirdesiretocontinuewiththeprojectinsomeform.Therewereofcoursesomeproblems,inparticularthelackofcommunicationofthetimescalesofproductionnecessary to complete both of the separate research areas. Clearer communication of expectationsfrombothpartnerswouldbe required in furtherwork. Theprojectwas fortunate thatno conflictingideasofeithercreativepracticeorresearchstrategy/methodologyarosebut thiswouldbeanareatoconsidercarefullyinfurthercraft/technologypartnerships.Theidentificationofacraft/technologycollaborationasadriverforeconomicgrowthwasnotexploredfullyinthisprojectanditisexpectedthatamoretrans-disciplinaryapproachtofurtherworkwillallowthedevelopmentofcommercialoutcomes.Inthiswaytheprojectrevealedthatthecraftpracticewasperhapsnotresearchitself,butatoolforexperimentationthatcanleadtonewunderstanding(MäkeläandRoutarinne,2006,13-23).

AcknowledgementsThe author would like to extend thanks to Dr Muriel Rigout, The Yorkshire Year of the Textile, LeedsIndustrialMuseum,ArmleyMills,Leeds,TheStanleyandAudreyBurtonGallery,LeedsThisresearchhasbeenfundedinkindbyA.W.Hainsworth,Pudsey,WestYorkshire.

References

Adamson,G.(2010)TheCraftReader,Oxford,Berg.

Barrett,E.andBolt,B.(2010)PracticeAsResearch:approachestocreativeartsenquiry,London,I.B.Tauris.

Carnac,H.andDiallo,L.(2012)SidebySide,CraftsStudyCentre,Farnham11-29June,SiobhanDaviesStudios,London,16July–3August.Availableathttp://www.siobhandavies.com/sidebyside/.(accessed10thJuly2012].

Cassé,NandJones,V.(eds.)(2017)ConnectingThreads:YorkshireYearoftheTextile2016-2017.Leeds,StanleyandAudreyBurtonGallery.

Coren,S.Ward,L.M.andEnns,J.T.(2004)SensationandPerception,Hoboken,NewJersey,JohnWiley&Sons.

Day,L.F.(1933)PatternDesign:abookforstudentstreatinginapracticalwayoftheanatomy,planningandevolutionofrepeatedornament,London,Batsford.

Dudley,E.&Mealing,S.(2000)BecomingDesigners:education&influence,Exeter,Intellect.

Eckert,C.andStacey,M.(2000)Sourcesofinspiration:alanguageofdesign,DesignStudies,21(5),pp523-538.

Fogerty,E.(1937)InAdamson,G.ed.(2010)TheCraftReader,Oxford,Berg,pp366-371.

France,L.(2016)WilliamGott’sPatternBookeof1815:ARemindercitedinCassé,NandJones,V.(eds.)(2017)ConnectingThreads:YorkshireYearoftheTextile2016-2017.Leeds,StanleyandAudreyBurtonGallery.

GASTON


12

Frayling,C.(2001)OnCraftsmanship:towardsanewBauhaus,London,Oberon.

Gaston,E.(2016)Theinter-relatednessofknittedfabric,patternandcolourintheperceptionofpatterninFairIsleknittedfabrics.Doctoralthesis.UniversityofLeeds.

Hepworth,B.(1970)APictorialAutobiography,Bath,AdamsandDart.

Kanizsa,G.(1979)OrganizationinVision:essaysonGestaltperception,NewYork,Praeger.

KPMG.(2016)InnovationthroughCraft:OpportunitiesforGrowth,London,TheCraftsCouncil.Availableathttp://www.craftscouncil.org.uk/content/files/KPMG_CC_innovation_report_full.pdf.(accessed15thMay2017).

Lawson,B.,1983.HowDesignersThink,London,ButterworthArchitecture.

Mäkelä,M.andRoutarinne,S.,2006.TheArtofResearch:researchpracticesinartanddesign,Helsinki,UniversityofArtandDesignHelsinki.

McCullough,M.,1997.InAdamson,G.Ed.2010.TheCraftReader,Oxford,Berg,pp310-316.

Thomson,M.,1995.UnderstandingPhilosophy,London,HodderEducation.

Warburton,N.(2013)Philosophy:thebasics,Oxon,Routledge.

White,M.(2010)TheEarlyHistoryofWhite’sIllusion,Colour:DesignandCreativity,5(7),pp1-7.Availableathttp://aic-colour-journal.org/.(accessed6thMay2010).

DrElizabethGastonDrElizabethGastonisatextiledesigner,makerandresearcher.AninternationaltextiledesigncareerhasledtohercurrentroleastheprogrammemanagerofBATextileDesignattheUniversityofLeeds,whereshe specialises in researchand teachingof knittedand stitched textiles,particularly focusedon colourmanipulationthroughmaterialuseandprocess.

crafted futures: a craft/technology collaboration using textile craft processes and digital print as...

Documents