AI for friction, humans for meaning. Raw output is never finished work. Verify before trusting. Disclose where it matters. Skepticism welcome when specific.
Standing recap slide — every week from here.
Today
Today's promise
A research method that is faster AND more trustworthy than your current one — and a concept direction you could defend line-by-line in a crit.
"By 4pm you'll have caught at least one invented reference yourself. That catch is the skill."
Deliverable
You will leave with
A mini concept board — 6–10 items, provenance marked
AI widens the search. You verify the sources and own the narrowing.
Board-worthy.
Today's map
Today's map
Research hygiene + the influence question — 40 min
Demo: "make it cyberpunk" → three real territories — 45 min
Lab: triangle → board → statement — 70 min
Share: narrate the path — 45 min
Breaks protected.
Part 1
Research hygiene
~0:10.
The good news first
Where AI research genuinely shines
Mapping unfamiliar territory · finding the right questions widening past page one of Pinterest · summarizing the boring PDFs
The biggest honest speed-up in creative work.
Lead with real value — this week is pro-research-AI, anti-gullibility.
The danger
Where it fails dangerously
Invented references — artists, books, movements that don't exist
Plausible-wrong history — dates shifted, movements blended
Confident citations — links to pages that don't say what's claimed
"All delivered in the same confident voice as the true stuff."
The counter-move
SIFT
Stop — before repeating or reusing a claim Investigate the source — who actually says this? Find better coverage — does anyone reputable agree? Trace to the original — click through to the actual thing
60 seconds per claim.
Mike Caulfield's framework; linked on the week page. Stays on the board all day.
The stakes
Why bother
One invented reference in a crit or client meeting destroys more credibility than ten good ones build.
Verification is reputation insurance.
This sentence converts the lazy skeptics of verification.
Try this now
3 minutes
The hallucination trap
"Recommend 4 lesser-known [your field] practitioners from the 20th century and one signature work each."
Image-search ONE. Hands up for ghosts and mismatches.
Lesser-known + signature work = reliable trap. Collect two stories aloud.
Pre-empting the objection
"But it gave me a citation!"
Cited ≠ correct. Tools cite pages that don't say what's claimed.
Trace to the original. That's the T.
It returns in Q&A — answer it now.
Part 1, continued
The flattened-references problem
~0:25.
The problem
Everyone gets the same board
"Moodboard ideas for X" → the average of the internet. Same neon. Same grain. Same Pinterest page, laundered.
Callback to the average machine, weeks 1–2.
The escapes
Three escapes
Ask for territories — named directions with qualities, not images
Demand the non-obvious — "avoid the clichés; flag uncertain references"
Cross domains — geology, deep-sea biology, industrial processes, sport science
"The model has read those corpora too. Almost nobody asks."
Part 1, the heart
Influence vs. copying
~0:32. Slow down.
First, permission
Everything is a remix
Copy → transform → combine. How Bowie worked. How Kurosawa worked. How every movement you love worked.
Influence is how culture functions. The question is the line.
Ferguson's hour is embedded on the week page; final third addresses AI directly.
The line
The working test
Influence
Multiple sources, transformed + combined Qualities extracted You can narrate the path
Copying
One source, imitated Signature lifted You hope nobody sees the reference
"Narratability is the professional test. Can you trace your path out loud in a crit?"
Today's method
The tool
The Influence Triangle
One historical source — verified, ideally public domain One contemporary source — engaged with, never imitated One non-art source — science, industry, nature, sport
→ a direction none of them contains alone.
"Three points make a territory. One point makes a tracing." Today's lab.
New discipline
Moodboards
Boards need provenance now
Mark every item: [real — verified] · [real — unverified] · [AI-generated]
A synthetic "1970s Polish poster" that never existed will art-direct your whole project from inside your board.
"AI 'references' are outputs wearing research costumes. Label everything."
The authorship act
The narrowing is yours
Research widens. A direction statement narrows:
150 words — the direction · its named sources · what it refuses · why it fits.
The model can describe territories; choosing and committing is the human part.
Break
Break — 10 minutes
Stage the weak cyberpunk prompt before walking away.
Demo
"Make it cyberpunk" → three real territories
~1:00. Prompts in DEMOS_AND_VISUAL_AIDS.md Week 03.
Demo
Stage 1
The weak ask
I'm designing a music venue identity and I want it to feel "cyberpunk." Generate 5 image prompt ideas.
Read the sameness aloud. "This is the average. Everyone gets this. Your competitors get this."
Demo
The result
Neon. Rain. Kanji. Hooded figure.
The average of the internet, served instantly.
Let the room laugh at the predictability — the laugh is the lesson landing.
Demo
Stage 2
The territory expansion
Three named territories for "near-future tech unease" — each:
Read one card slowly. Point at the non-art reference: "That's where originality sneaks in."
The moment
Stage 3
Verify, live
Two references → image search → on the projector → honestly.
Real and matching? Real but different? Ghost?
THE moment of the week. Correct the card with whatever you actually find. If all clean: show the saved hallucination from prep. Never skip the failure.
Demo
Tie-off
The correction is the method
The territory card now says what's actually true — and it took 90 seconds.
AI drafted the map. The search made it real. You own the route.
Tie-off line for the demo.
Your turn
10 minutes
Mini-try
Run the territory expander on YOUR project's feeling-word (a feeling or problem — not an aesthetic name)
Verify ONE reference by image search
Hands up when you catch a ghost
Collect two catch-stories aloud. Students who catch nothing still practised the move.
Break
Break — 10 minutes
Lab next: your triangle.
Standing brief slide staged for project-less students.
Lab · 70 minutes
Triangle → Board → Statement
A. Triangle hunt — 30 · B. Concept board — 25 · C. Direction statement — 15
No project? Standing brief: identity for a Dublin venue hosting trad sessions AND electronic nights.
Parts + times on board.
Lab A · 30 min
Part A
Triangle hunt
Territory expander once → pick the territory that surprises you
Build the triangle: historical + contemporary + non-art
Verify all three exist — SIFT + image search
Source list with [real — verified] marks
Circulate demanding receipts: "Show me the verified mark."
Lab B · 25 min
Part B
Mini concept board
6–10 items showing a direction, not a pile.
Real references (source noted) · your sketches/photos welcome AI items only labelled[AI-generated] — and outnumbered.
All-AI boards get: "Which of these is real? This is currently a hall of mirrors."
Lab C · 15 min
Part C
Direction statement
150 words, written by you: the direction · its named sources · what it refuses · why it fits.
Optional anti-cliché pass after. Final wording is yours.
Enforce authorship: students read a sentence aloud and defend a word choice in share-out.
Always available
Alternative
Zero-generation track
This lab needs no image generation at all — by design.
AI for territory text and question-finding only — or skip AI entirely and build from archives. Verification + synthesis identical.
Genuinely equal this week; say so.
Share-out · 35 min
The narrate-the-path test
Show board, read statement (90 seconds). Then:
"Trace one item from source to direction."
Plus: which triangle point works hardest? What did verification kill? Engaged-with or imitated — convince us.
Every week
Integrity check
This week's four
Could you narrate the path in a crit?
Is every "fact" on your board verified?
Contemporary source: engaged with — or imitated?
Are AI-generated items labelled?
#4: "An unlabelled synthetic reference is a lie you're telling yourself."
Reflection
Write 4 lines
One AI reference that turned out not to exist (or not to match)
The non-art source that most changed your direction
One sentence of your statement you're proud of
Where the trio is saved — it's your Week 4 starting point
Two quiet minutes.
Next Wednesday
Image Generation and Editing
Your verified territory becomes the brief — for disciplined visual iteration where you reject most of what you make.
Bring this week's board. It becomes your image brief.
End on time; corridor questions after.
Tonight, optional
Go deeper
Everything is a Remix (2023, full hour — embedded on week page)
SIFT: The Four Moves — Mike Caulfield
The Public Domain Review + Europeana (bookmark both)