Several years ago I bought the domain name duncanstephen.co.uk. I have never really been sure what to do with it, but I have kept it up because, well, it’s my name. I have had holding pages up, but never anything of real note.
I have had a bit of time off work this month, but I hadn’t planned anything. So I decided once and for all to make a proper attempt at putting a good webpage up there. The result is this new design.
I used this as an opportunity to experiment with new techniques. This should look pretty good on both mobiles and desktops — though it’s reasonably straightforward here since there is not really much content to speak of. (I am working on making this blog a bit more mobile-friendly in due course.)
I found it fascinating working on this design. It reminded me of when I was first learning about web design a decade ago. For the first time in years, I truly pushed myself to learn new things, and I was hooked on trying to get it all working the way I wanted it to.
I am a big fan of their less-is-more approach. I have always loved minimalist design, and I have increasingly strived to create designs that are simple and clear. Hopefully I have achieved it here.
It should work fine in all major browsers, although I have noticed a few quirks in Opera Mini, as well as older versions of Internet Explorer. Please let me know if you spot anything unusual.
I am not an extreme railway enthusiast, although I do find railways quite interesting. I only knew that Steam existed when I happened to pass it on the train a few weeks earlier on a separate journey.
I decided I wanted to visit, and it was quite convenient that I managed to incorporate it into my holiday. It is very easy to get to by rail, being just a stone’s throw away from Swindon railway station.
The museum is very comprehensive. It is not just a collection of old trains. The very first thing you see when you enter is a mocked-up back office. I wandered into a small room to find myself walking in on a worker being given a row by his boss for turning up late for work! Quite amusing.
From there, you go on to learn about the processes of building a steam locomotive, step by step.
Then, finally, you are presented with the finished product. This is Caerphilly Castle.
This is just one example of the excellent way exhibits are presented at Steam. A staircase allows you to walk straight underneath the locomotive to give a view of the underside.
After that, there are exhibits about the building of the railway itself. You learn about the Box Tunnel, and the Great Western Railway’s original unusual, but superior, broad gauge.
This is perhaps the most fun part of the museum. There is an awesome train driving simulator, and games that demonstrate the difficult job signalmen had.
Then you pay a visit to a mock GWR railway station.
The station contains objects like clocks, benches and vending machines of the steam period. But the highlight for me was the brilliant silver-plated locomotive-shaped coffee pot.
This was used at Swindon railway station, which apparently was notorious for its awful refreshments. Isambard Kingdom Brunel himself complained about it, with audio of his complaint playing out in the mock railway station. The display describes it as a “foul brew”, but you cannot deny that it was gloriously presented.
After you have looked around the railway station, it is time to enter ‘Speed to the West’, which is all about the efforts made to attract tourists to use the Great Western Railway. Among the exhibits are old slot machines, which you can still try out for 20p.
“See your own country first,” one poster implores. “There is a great similarity between Cornwall and Italy in shape, climate and natural features.”
This was another highlight for me. I have a particular fascination with the visual identity and graphic design of railways.
It would have been really great if I could buy some prints of old GWR posters from the souvenir shop, but sadly they didn’t sell anything like this. I made do with a GWR keyring and three bottles of beer that were brewed by the Box Steam Brewery, based near the Box tunnel.
I also pressed a penny to emboss it with the GWR logo. I haven’t done that in years, but it is always quite a nice and inexpensive souvenir of a visit.
All-in-all I thoroughly enjoyed my visit to Steam, and would highly recommend that you pay a visit if you happen to be in the Swindon area.
I recently received this print as a gift. It is a poster advertising the 5th Monaco Grand Prix, held in 1933. Doesn’t it look great?
A great deal has changed in the past 78 years. But this is unmistakably Monaco — the exit of the famous tunnel, with the harbour to the left and the hills to the right. It’s a great design that sums up Grand Prix motor racing beautifully, whether it’s 1933 or 2011.
Meanwhile, a fan-made set of posters for each of the grands prix of 2011 has taken the internet by storm. PJ Tierney’s Formula 1 2011 poster series is a brilliant exhibition of great design.
PJ Tierney set himself the challenge of producing a poster a day. The idea is to use Formula 1-based imagery to form the flag of each country hosting a grand prix in 2011.
It is a simple but brilliant concept, beautifully executed. The poster for the Japanese Grand Prix particularly impressed me. It is clean, bold and clever. This poster would look great on the wall, so it’s just as well you can buy them.
The use of the DIN typeface also links these posters in neatly with official Formula 1 branding. These are so good that they really ought to be the official posters. Bernie should get this guy on his books!
Compare it with the actual official posters, which are bland and utterly devoid of character. The example here is for the 2008 Chinese Grand Prix. (If you really want to, you can buy this poster for the knock-down price of 45p.) Mind you, it’s quite apt.
A near identical poster was produced for each grand prix of that season, and was used as promotional imagery on the website and elsewhere.
Deeply dull, these official posters are a brilliant example of how to turn the marvel of grand prix motor racing into something sanitised and watered-down.
Autechre really annoy me. They are too good. What I don’t understand is why no-one else is apparently able to make music like this.
Autechre may be perceived as being wilfully difficult. Maybe they are. Almost without fail, the first time you listen to new Autechre material it is impossible to get your head around. It sounds like a mess.
But the music always reveals its majesty after repeat listens. It is the aural equivalent of a magic eye puzzle, only less naff and much more stylish.
‘Intelligent dance music’, the genre of music most often associated with Autechre, has fallen off a cliff for me in recent years. It just isn’t exciting to me in the way it was five or ten years ago.
Sure, there are a few big names that you can depend upon. Those are the Aphex Twins and Boards of Canadas of this world — although releases from these artists become less and less frequent. Once you start searching for new acts beyond them, the quality drops steeply. Most ‘IDM’ these days is disappointingly derivative.
But Autechre still always push the boundaries far beyond what anyone else can even think of. It says a lot when even Autechre’s off albums are still more fascinating than the music of their peers.
Listening to Autechre’s back catalogue is like hearing a pair of audio explorers in search of the pinnacle of electronic music. 2001′s Confield was the culmination of the search. My jaw still drops when I listen to it, and it disappoints me that no-one — not even Autechre — have come remotely close to creating another album as good as this.
2003′s Draft 7.30 was a fine follow-up. But since then new Autechre material has felt like a step below what is possible — even though it was still miles ahead of the rest.
Oversteps
Following the slightly clunky and plodding Untilted, and the sketchy and uncohesive Quaristice, their new album Oversteps marks a return to form for Autechre in my book. In both previous albums, it seemed like Autechre were operating within their comfort zone. Quaristice especially sounded like it was churned out without much thought, turning to styles they had explored in previous albums.
In a reversal of the trend, Oversteps brings us an Autechre we haven’t heard before. Their ability to push things forward like this is what I always admired most about Autechre, which is why for my money their new album is their best since Draft 7.30. (I gather the reaction of many Autechre fans has been more negative, which I think is a shame.)
Autechre have probably not been this melody-focussed since 1994′s Amber. But this does not mean that they have sacrificed any of their uncompromising approach — quite the opposite in fact.
As you would expect, this is music unlike anything you have heard before. It is dense and viscous-sounding, yet also shimmering and liquid. Somehow it all feels right, as though this was the way music was always meant to be.
After just a few weeks of listening to Oversteps, it feels like I have been listening to music like this for years, even though it is totally unique. Much of the album has a pleasingly organic vibe to it, ‘krYlon’ perhaps being the best example.
For me, ‘ilanders’ is as catchy as music gets, even though the beats are particularly unconventional. Another highlight is ‘known(1)’, which is deceptively — perhaps irritatingly — simple at first, before transforming into one of the most mind-bending pieces of the album. In that sense, this is the ‘Surripere’ or ‘Fermium’ of the album.
It’s not all about the melodies though. My favourite part of the album is probably the rip-roaring ‘d-sho qub‘, reminding us that Autechre are making (what might be loosely described as) dance music.
Move of Ten
The accompanying EP, Move of Ten is released today. Although it was common in the 1990s for Autechre to release an EP related to each of their albums, that trend had stopped. With Quaristice, they released new ‘versions’ of the album’s tracks. It was a nice idea, almost like a “making of” the album, although by the time the last ones came out it was starting to sound quite repetitive.
Move of Ten sees a refinement of the concept. It reminds me of the 1990s approach where Autechre would remix their own tracks, but with originals being almost unrecognisable. But the relationship with the original tracks is much clearer in many of these tracks — closer to the Quaristice Versions / Quaristice.Quadrange.ep.ae model.
As you might expect, Move of Ten shows us Autechre with their hair down a bit, relative to the ‘serious’ work of an album. Some of the tracks here are very immediate. Autechre have brought the funk, and you can clearly hear the duo’s roots as hip-hop aficionados.
The best example of this is ‘rew(1)’. This track teases you, hinting at an immensely funky basis. But like many of Autechre’s best music, it never fully reveals its full powers, leaving the listeners to fill in the gaps to their own delight.
Move of Ten mixes the best of Autechre’s always-forward-looking approach with nostalgic reminisces of vintage Autechre. ‘nth Dafuseder.b’ in particular sends a chill up my spine as it begins sounding like a lost Autechre recording of 15 years ago. But it brings with it also a jazz vibe with a cold wind blowing through it like the best work of Brothomstates.
I gather that Move of Ten has gone down better than Oversteps among fans in general. For me, it feels more like an EP than an album. It just lacks that extra bit of cohesion that an album should have. But with both releases, Autechre have demonstrated that they are still at the height of their powers, and at the absolute pinnacle of path-finding electronic music.
I just wish that others could step up to the plate and make music as good as this. If not, I hope Autechre are documenting their approaches so that this wonderful approach is never lost.
The Designers Republic back from the dead
The excellent artwork for Oversteps and Move of Ten was designed by The Designers Republic. This marks the rebirth of the firm, which closed down in early 2009. Just another reason why Autechre’s material this year has been great!
In my previous article about the post-Bahrain backlash, I noted that I thought the main reason why people felt that the race was boring was down to something fully within Bernie Ecclestone’s control. It is the most important thing to the vast majority of fans, although in the rush to blame the presence of heavy fuel loads or front wings or whatever personal hobby-horse they have, many people have forgotten about the television coverage.
FOM feed the world
Nowadays, the “world feed” carried by every broadcaster for almost every race is produced by FOM, run by Bernie Ecclestone. (The only exceptions at the moment are the Monaco and Japanese Grands Prix, where the world feed is produced by Télé Monte Carlo and Fuji Television respectively.) This is generally a very good thing.
Until a few years ago, races were covered by local broadcasters, meaning that the quality of the coverage could vary quite wildly from race to race. I always remember the Japanese Grand Prix being particularly bad because so much time was spent on board with a below-average Japanese driver trundling around doing very little.
This situation was not helped by the fact that the quality of this standard feed was deliberately stunted while Bernie Ecclestone attempted to launch a premium digital television service, F1 Digital+. “Bernievision”, as it was called, was a very good product.
There were lots of innovations that improved the quality of the coverage, including some smart systems that could detect when an overtaking manoeuvre or a crash was about to happen. You can see this in action here, when the coverage automatically cuts to the on-board camera of Jacques Villeneuve just before he crashes into Ralf Schumacher during the 2001 Australian Grand Prix.
Unfortunately, the main problem with F1 Digital+ was that it was ahead of its time. The adventure began in 1996, at an impossibly early stage of the development of interactive television. There were teething problems in the early days, including an incredible clanger at the 1998 Belgian Grand Prix, where the “superior” product managed to completely miss the biggest crash in F1 history! But they learned over time and there were innovations aplenty. With the broadcasters struggling to make any money with it, the service was closed down in 2002.
Since then, the technology on which F1 Digital+ was based has been used on the standard world feed, which FOM have gradually taken over from the host broadcasters. This has brought about a noticeable improvement in the quality of coverage since 2004. Broadly, the pictures have been better. Incidents have been caught live more regularly, and replays have been shown quickly. The information displayed on the on-screen graphics has also improved considerably.
But after reaching a peak in quality three or four years ago, FOM’s coverage has stagnated. Many times, innovations have been brought to the coverage, only to be used sparingly, and eventually disappear.
For instance, whatever happened to the tyre temperature indicators that were used once or twice a few years ago? Why do we no longer often see the graphics comparing the telemetry of two drivers racing side-by-side? What has happened to the thermal images?
Why don’t FOM buy some of those awesome super slo-mo cameras instead of just using the ones in Germany? Why is line comparison only ever used during practice, and even then not very often? Why isn’t more use made of the graphics that show the position of drivers on a map of the circuit?
The poor usability of FOM’s new graphics
Things are not totally stagnant at FOM though. At Bahrain, they unleashed a new set of graphics. It has to be said straight away that they are very good looking, and with a few tweaks will work very well. However, at the moment there are some major flaws with them.
The font appears to be a version of DIN. This is a bold, clear and readable font.
However, FOM have made a mistake by choosing to display the drivers’ names in all uppercase. It is known that all-uppercase is more difficult to read. Often readers look at the shape of words rather than the individual letters. This is much more difficult when capital letters are all the same height and many are roughly square-shaped. It is thought that it may even increase the amount of time spent reading by as much as 20 per cent.
Then there is the odd slanting of the lower-third graphics. I see what they are trying to do, by echoing the slant of the Formula 1 logo. But while it looks stylish, it is pretty painful if you want to actually try and read it!
As you can see, unlike a normal table, the text is not aligned to allow for easy comparison of figures down the column. Instead, you have to read down and to the left. Slanting is one thing, but if you are going to slant one way, slant towards the right! We read from left to right. Effectively reading from right to left (and then switching back to left to right to actually read the information!) is completely counter-intuitive. I know Bernie Ecclestone is keen to take Formula 1 to new markets in Asia, but making us read from right to left really is going a step too far!
The graphics also animate on rather extravagantly. This is particularly irritating with the graphics that update as each driver crosses the line. Each driver’s name and time now takes a while to animate on. But when cars are passing through so quickly, this is vital reading time lost. The new graphics really are a bad case of style over substance.
There was also a large outcry over the fact that the ‘tower’ graphics — which display a list of positions down the left hand side of the screen — appear to have been done away with. Although the tower made a couple of appearances during the race, it really is much more useful during qualifying, where positions change much more rapidly.
During the commentary, Jonathan Legard mentioned that the BBC had received plenty of complaints about the disappearance of the tower, although the content of the world feed is beyond the BBC’s control. For commentators to start bemoaning the poor quality of the world feed once again shows how much of a backward step FOM have taken lately.
On the plus side, there were a couple of interesting new additions as a result of the renewed emphasis on the speed of pitstops. The pitstop time graphic now shows the length of time spent in the pitlane as well as the amount of time spent stationary. However, the stationary time displays only after the driver has exited the pitlane. Why not reveal this first?
They also get the thumbs up for finally switching the lap counter so that it counts up rather than down. I generally like the new graphics, but they have some major flaws just now. With a bit of tweaking, it will look great and work well. But I do wonder what FOM were thinking of when they made some of these decisions.
Too much action was missed
But, of course, the design of the graphics is small beer compared with the actual pictures themselves — and it is here that I think FOM are particularly letting themselves down just now. A few years ago I was amazed at how much action they caught live. Today, I find myself with difficult believing how little action they catch — and how few replays they show.
For instance, what actually happened to Karun Chandhok? We know he binned it, but how? All FOM showed us was his slightly smashed-up car. A replay of the event was never shown. Did their cameras completely miss it?
Moreover, the BBC’s post-race ‘forum’ showed several replays from the on-board channels that brought to light much more action than FOM showed us. Nico Hülkenberg’s first lap was rather eventful, but FOM showed very little of it.
Another on-board shot, not shown on the world feed, revealed how Felipe Massa squeezed Lewis Hamilton early on in the lap. This was totally missed by FOM, and caught all viewers, and even apparently the pundits, by surprise when the BBC showed it later.
And why were viewers never given the full story of the mêlée caused in the midfield as a result of Mark Webber’s blue smoke on lap 1? And, for that matter, why was so little attention paid to the recoveries by Adrian Sutil and Robert Kubica, who made their way back up through the field following that lap 1 incident?
I have to admit that I am baffled. The race was allegedly “boring”, so there was plenty of time to show replays of interesting incidents, but clearly the opportunity was passed up. Why?
The whole style of FOM’s product has become rather stale, clinical and formulaic as well. While a few years ago the feed contained interesting shots of the cars and the circuit. Now there is a greater emphasis on wide shots of the venue. While these shots are attractive, they do not showcase the race.
The coverage of last year’s Abu Dhabi Grand Prix is a prime example. There were so many wide shots that it was often difficult to pick out the cars. It felt like most of the time was spent looking at the giant sparkly hotel that looks a bit like a rude sex toy rather than the race itself. And the final lap lunge by Jenson Button on Mark Webber was missed by the cameras!
You can see the moment on this video, at 2:30. Also watch out for when the cars out out of shot when Robert Kubica is battling with Sébastien Buemi at around 1:40, so we don’t properly see what Kubica really did.
It is worth noting that the FIA obviously thought that FOM had done such a good job of producing an uber-slick but ultra-dull feed that they awarded the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix an award for the best television coverage. I thought it stuck out as a particularly poor performance from FOM. It was another triumph of style over substance. I guess they were trying to trumpet this new grand prix, when it was widely recognised to be an underwhelming circuit that produced a rather dull race.
When will HD finally come?
I feel as though FOM have almost given up on improving the television product. F1 is supposed to be the most technologically advanced sport in the world, yet it is still not even broadcast in HD. It is probably the last major sport in the world to only offer an SD feed, and before you know it 3D will have come along by the time F1 goes HD.
Fuji Television are prepared to produce an HD feed for the Japanese Grand Prix (although this is only shown in Japan). I also noticed people praising the Japanese GP coverage for its interesting shots and pretty solid coverage. But Fuji were once universally recognised as one of the worst of the host broadcasters back in the bad old days.
Fuji really have upped their game in the past couple of years. It is notable that we can actually now compare Fuji with FOM and say that Fuji may actually be better. Certainly, Fuji provide a welcome breath of fresh air to F1 coverage when every other race is presented using the formulaic approach that has increasingly been taken by FOM.
There was also a large outcry over the fact that the ‘tower’ graphics — which display a list of positions down the left hand side of the screen — appear to have been done away with. Although the tower made a couple of appearances during the race, it really is much more useful during qualifying, where positions change much more rapidly.
2 comments