Wednesday, December 16, 2009
pd486
pd486
pd486
PD486
pd486
pd486
pd486
pd486
pd486
pd486
Thursday. I began brainstorming for studio today. I am looking at ways of producing food in small spaces without soil. Because the soil is just a medium and structure for the roots, i would like to look into a way of removing the soil from the equation, most likely hydroponics or aeroponics. I'm also curious as to how I can utilize collected rain water for the water system as well.
For my small grow space I would like to maximize the use of natural light and perhaps incorporating as little much artificial light as possible. Also, using materials such a mylar will help increase the reflectivity so that light can bounce off surfaces. The location of the lights will need to cover as many plants as possible.
I am just going to dive head first into this thing. I don't have much farming experience but I need to wrap my head around this subject. I have decided that I am going to try and build a small green closet in the studio space at school or in my apartment. I figure I will be able to use recycled water bottles, jars, and other recycled materials to cut down on material costs for prototyping.
I am also going to continue working on my bottle opener. I would prefer to use metal for my design rather than plastic so I will need to look into ways of bending and forming the metal.
PD486
pd486
pd486
pd486
PD486
PD Bottle Opener
Reading Response 7
Reading Response 6
mmm, i'd probably never work at alessi. I dont understand how a company can possibly do as well as alessi has by only concentrating on looks. this, can't be true, some of the products they have produced are very functional and rational, but the aesthetics must outshine the simplicity and functionality.
I consider myself to be a very grounded, pragmatic person. I go about solving problems very rationally, or what I think is rational, thats just my personality, aesthetics have always been back seat to function, because if a product doesn't function they way consumers expect it to then its just a paperweight. I hate to bring it up but Im just going to say it because it's impossible to read this article without thinking of it... "form follows function" It's an overchimed saying. when I hear it i cringe a little bit, but I also agree. I have a hard time thinking about aesthetics. Personally, I think it's almost a defense mechanism. I prefer to keep aesthetics at arms length because I'm afraid i'll get too caught up in what the product looks like, and thus overdesign. while I subscribe to form follows function, I'm also and advocate of, "keep it simple, stupid" and i think that simple aesthetics aren't nearly as simple as consumers perceive them.
Take the iPod for example. My iPod Nano looks like its a simple form, but I know that mindboggling amounts of time were spent shaping, forming, designing, and redesigning this mp3 player into what it now is. the complexity of simple, restrained aesthetics is hard to accept sometimes. although the iPod is also very well design at performing its function.
good for alessi though.
Reading Response 5
Reading Response 4
I dont know. The First Thing's First 2000 Manifesto is romantic and idealistic, but come on. This is the world we live in nowadays. The US economy is driven by commercialism, and we all need to pay the bills. I have to admit, it's nice to imagine a word were everything we design is just and right: stops hunger, cures cancer, no more depression! no more aids! breast cancer?! gone!.. but come on.
That little list just brought an example which I think is somewhat relevant here. Breast Cancer. Breast Cancer is not as nearly as dangerous as we think it is. WAIT! breast caner is still bad! but there are more prevalent, and far more fatal forms of cancer out there. shoot, as far as i know if you have breast cancer it's fairly easy to diagnose and treat. But why do we not know as much about those cancers as we do about breast cancer? It's because breast cancer has killer marketing and public relations. colon cancer, prostate cancer, lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, thyroid cancer, leukemia, endometrial cancer, and kidney cancer are all looked past because there was a breast cancer walk last week and i forgot to care about the other cancers. I thought about lung cancer the other day, but I saw one of those pink ribbons on a woman's lapel and forgot to be concerned about the second hand smoke i was inhaling... and who are the people that design all the GRAPHICS and pamphlets and information?! im guessing at least a few digital artists.
Perhaps its not that we need to step away from advertising and its commercial form, but we just need to bend it and shape it to meet our requirements. Breast cancer is one of the least fatal cancers out there, but because it has great marketing and awareness, it has more funding than any other branch of cancer research.
All in all I think manifesto's are kind of pretentious, at least that's the sense of got from this manifesto. These artists call to the public for change, but are they quitting to posh advertising careers to make the world better? doubt it.
Reading Response 3
After reading these two articles I find that I mostly agree with the points made. I'll begin with Gropius and the Bauhaus. At this time combining all these trades into one school, their use of materials in relation to production, and the scope of the project undertaken were earth shaking. These days, this is common practice, it's expected. I can't think of any product design project i've worked on where I haven't had to deal with several different categories and skills. Drawing, rendering, brainstorming, prototyping and model making, market analysis, materials and manufacture research, layout, testing and so on are all skills we need to have. And all of these skills and procedures all have a part in forming how the product is developed, how the user interacts with it, which materials are best fitted to each function. This has benefits and advantages. I like being a part of all of these procedures because it allows me to have control, as I work I know what my parameters and constraints are because I created those constraints through research. On the other hand I have also found it debilitating. By knowing what my parameters and constraints are, it becomes difficult for me to think outside them. Which in turn limits the possibility for innovation. It's unrealistic to think that one can handle everything to do with a product from conception to manufacture, but I still think it's vital. If a marketing person knows how and engineer thinks, and visa versa, the two will be able to work better together. Ying. Yang.
I love Dieter Rams. I find his designs so timeless, everything is so squeaky clean! It's interesting to read interviews about designers whose work I've seen so much. By seeing his designs I always got the impression DR was kind of a stick in the mud. His designs are so restrained, and, via the transitive property (I believe) he must be restrained too! But reading this article kinda shows that he's a bit of a goof. Most of the info I got from the interview was stuff I'd read before I think, but it's still nice to interact vicariously through the interview with Rams.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
This article brought up a few points which genuinely surprised me. I thought it was a type when I read that Herman Miller does no market research. Consumers are becoming more and more intelligent and picky about the products we purchase. And the more money spent on a product the more cautious we become. But how does Herman Miller remain a market leader without knowing what consumers want? Well, actually HM does know what consumers want, good design. If HM's mission is to provide authentic, innovative design then that is all they have to do. Good design will sell because today's consumers are so intelligent about the purchases we make. And because HM provides "true" furniture which pushes the boundaries of production, then there will always be a market of intelligent consumers to purchase their furniture.
Loos and Foster
Loos seems to be ranting in this article. He views ornament as something which is unnecessary, and that because nobody will even design any new ornamental patterns that we should stop ornamenting things. I am going to straddle the fence a bit on this article as I agree with his point of view in some aspects and disagree in others. It would be ridiculous to just stop ornamenting, the world would be a cold, bland, hospital hallway if there were no ornament. Decoration brings a sense of vitality to both products and spaces. On the other hand, I find over-decorating something is more of a foul than under-decorating. There should be deep thought put into ornamentation. How does the ornament describe function? Does it compliment the form? Is it necessary? I would rather see an object with a few well thought out ornaments, than an object that was just ornamented for ornaments sake.