Mac Motorcycles out of the UK makes these gorgeous bikes powered by an affectionately known “Thumper” one cylinder that fires every second turn. I’m curious to hear what that sounds like, but there doesn’t seem to be much information around unfortunately.
In any event, wow.
…and this is why they’re $8K.
And with that the year is over!
We had two presentations of our J5 robot – one open house trade show style and one stand up presentation to leaders of industry for direct feedback. Both were really good and I speak on behalf of the group when I say we’re proud of the end result. The crowd response was really encouraging and I daresay we impressed even the professionals.
The robot itself is one of the ASNT projects (ASNT being SAIT’s robot division) and we were commissioned to design and build the panels to cover pinch points and generally look good. We used magnets on the panels and body so they’re removable and allow for the ongoing robot construction which will happen after we move on. The panels themselves are made of Sintra, which is a 3mm PVC foam that we hand formed to curve using a heat gun (it has a soft point of like, ~65 degrees C) and then painted on the outside with mica pearl and clear coats while black Rocker Guard protects the inside (and fades it out of notice). The grey and red bits are vinyl that we did up in Illustrator and plotted out. It worked out, actually, that instead of doing a bunch of difference random shapes we could just reuse the J5 logo over and over in it’s various pieces.
The group is (and this was chosen by random and just happened to work out) familiar: Alex Forrest and Duncan Carmichael, who you’ll recognize for our Stealth Chair. We’re an awesome group and a good spread of talents to combine into an awesome outcome. It’s been really good working with them again.
Today’s open house went smashingly and I’m still processing photos and things from the event / of the project. Tomorrow we’re presenting the whole kit to a panel of industry leaders, so you’ll just have to be a wee bit patient.
Also in the pipeline: my sandal project.
Stay tuned, sports fans!
It should be noted that I don’t condone violence or weapons, but I do really appreciate the design of them.
I watch the two videos and love both of them in their own right. Projectile weapons, as terrible as they are to the health of living things, tend to have a really cool design outcome. It’s raw functionality. I can’t really say they’re precision things, because there are many examples like the AK-47 whose famous reliability is based entirely on working with sloppy tolerances, but there is something inherently precise about the design of weaponry. It’s rarely arbitrary; the outcome design is based on examples and data. The aesthetic is the realm of the neo-classical mind and is appreciated for it’s reasons and purpose, not it’s overlaying being. It’s gorgeous. Like the tiny gears and ticks inside a watch.
Part two is the difference between them: one is made in a factory or machine shop and each will come out 99.999% identical to the others. The other is made from a plant that is found and chosen by a man and then crafted into something by him, by hand (or foot, as it may be) and will be very different from the one beside it in form, but ideally identical in function. This, I feel, is an important distinction.
You can tell, for those who have already read the book, that I’ve been looking at the world though these lenses (or divisions of Phaedrus’ knife, as his metaphor would suggest) lately. It’s not a new concept to me, certainly, but it’s nice to look through someone else’s eyes for a while; see the world anew.
I’ve learned something about myself recently: I’m much more artisan than I thought. Originally – and realize this is untrue – I equated artisans solely with hand spun clay pots and woven wicker baskets. The people who sell laptop bags on Etsy made of sewn together scraps of old mens’ tweed jackets. The essays with reference to Yanagi Soetsu in Less and More: The Design Ethos of Dieter Rams (towards the back half, pages ~716 if I remember correctly – forgive me as I don’t want to look it up) feature his philosophy as a counter-point to Rams’ (representative here as all of industrial design) way of design for not only specific objects, but how those objects relate in context to the mass production and usage in culture. His point, from the perspective of craftsmanship, looks at objects in an uncannily similar way to the mass produced method: a means to achieving a goal. If the industrialist and the artisan both make a thing it should look to first achieve it’s intended task. Makes sense. This is where my misguided preconceptions come in again; I thought they inherently had to differ after they agreed on that. The industrialists to the neo-classical function and the artisans to the romanticist to the aesthetic. But! As I’ve recently discovered, not true. Not quite.
Aesthetics, of course, are a tricky thing to nail down. They’re different for everyone. I equated function with minimalism and practicality and ruggedness and the things that I personally appreciate and like. I was an industrialist, then. That’s what they do. The things that are frilly and useless and mass produced are just misguided. The artisans who made minimal things were rare and the minimalism was probably a result of skill lacking rather than intentional functionalism. They’re supposed to make what I deem gaudy. The ornamented and decorated. The bright and flashy and visually loud. They’re artisans, which I say (and, I apologize, still do) with a certain pretentious derision.
So aesthetics aren’t a function of romanticism but rather outside of those classifications, like a heading under the two forming a four box chart.
You’ll laugh, but these past few months have led to a lot of personal discoveries that are so obvious. I’ve shared a few others previously. How did I miss them? I’m not sure. But I guess that’s the point of being young and curious. I’ve come out of it with an even more apathetic spirit, though. Before there was a conviction for “right” and “wrong” where my personal standings were concerned, and while I still vehemently defend things, they are broader ideas instead of specific (and often meaningless) examples. Namely the ‘problem’ or ornamentation. I hate it and that’s okay, but I might design something that’s ornamental because I know you like it. I wonder though where the line is drawn between selfless and spineless, but that’s a question for another article.
If aesthetics are independent that implies I can be a minimalist artisan. I still dislike that word. Sorry. But I like the design philosophy of wabi-sabi so much. I’m not saying it can’t be incorporated into mass manufactured things because the design definitely can use elements of it, but there’s something inherently at odds when having objects being made identically imperfect. The idea of the imperfection is the beauty of it’s uniqueness.
Uniqueness. Each of those Yumi bows is unique, but they all provide the same function – accelerate an arrow using a string and the materials’ natural properties. Each of those crossbows has the exact same function and as a result of mass manufacture has the exact same form. There’s something beautiful in both, though, don’t you think? Something romantic in buying a hand-made bow (or a hand machined gun) but also that there’s a machine somewhere in the world that makes the same piece over and over again at a speed that would stagger the mind and that piece gets assembled perfectly into that spot on every single product. It’s just, beautiful to think about for me. That’s my fear though; I think hand made things resonate with people better in general. It takes a very functional mind like mine to appreciate a factory.
Now, am I giving up my industrialist tendencies for a life behind a potter’s wheel? Certainly not. But I do wonder where that broad, overarching line is. I have such a passion for the method and craft itself that the outcome seems almost secondary – whereas a true blood would set up a factory without a second thought and have the focus be entirely on the output product.
I’ll be coming back to this topic; I have other examples and explorations.
TL;DR Aesthetics are independent of design philosophy divisions and form and function are independent yet again of both each other and the previous classifications, creating unique possibilities I hadn’t considered before.
My favorite part starts at 1:50 – modular shelving options!
It’s a tricky balance; on one hand you have people who know very little and are happy for an all-in-one system that this provides, but on the other you have the fact that these messes exist entirely because people have a lot of options, from Apple TVs to game consoles and want and use that modular freedom.
On the third hand is a big picture question: is the TV dying? I probably won’t ever have one in my lifetime. I mean, maybe, but it’ll be a purchase that will be made if I happen to have a stack of cash laying around – not that I’m waiting with excitement as I raise the money to get one. I have a handful of large monitors and an iPad for watching Netflix in bed. I’m entirely content and satisfied with this arrangement, so there isn’t any real obvious reason for me to get a TV.
I’m probably the exception, not the rule, but I do wonder how many out there are like me right now and how many of our kids in the next generation will be more (or less) like that.
Gorgeous, both the finished project and and process itself.
There’s something lovely about a craftsman, if you’ve ever just sat and watched one. Aged hands with surprising grace and dexterity from years of use. They grasps things differently. Watch them. The touch is a different thing, it’s tuned and refined and the interface between flesh and material is so pure and seamless. When working with tools or simply touching a surface the fingers know exactly where to stop and how to move. It’s practice of course – sheer repetition – but there’s something that falls short if you describe it like that. My appreciation for it is so much deeper and more subtle than that.
And it doesn’t matter if the above paragraph is read about man or machine, there’s a beauty to each. An outcome that boggles my mind even as I’ve seen it happen so many times. A fascination, I guess, with process.
So, Jeffrey, tell us a bit about yourself / how did you first get into design?
During my time at Ohio State (1997-2001) working on a degree in sculpture, I kept finding myself leaning more and more towards furniture design. Sadly, my profs didn’t tell me that there was an entire program geared towards that one building over, and instead just pushed me to refocus on more conceptual and less functional work.
After I graduated, I started getting one-off furniture into galleries, but the prices were always a barrier to entry for the people who really seemed to like my style. I ended up focusing on how to build simpler designs in ways that I could produce multiples relatively quickly and affordably. When I told my sister-in-law that designing for production was way more fun than actually making the stuff, she arranged a tour for me of Fitch, the company where she did copywriting, and introduced me to the world of industrial design.
Alas, I had just finished my 2nd degree, in automotive technology, and didn’t have the money or the drive to jump right back into school. So I continued to work on projects on the side while trying to make a living doing just about everything else.
It wasn’t until 2007 that I was thinking about going back to school for an MBA that my wife asked me if I shouldn’t be thinking about something more creative. That got me to remember my previous dreams of studying industrial design. Going back to school filled in all the gaps between the skills I already had, and introduced me to the world of 3D CAD, which has been a life changer.
Could you describe your approach and philosophy to design?
As far as aesthetics and products, I try to bring something new to everything I do. I want as diverse a portfolio as I can get. If I have designed something, the next project is an opportunity to try something different, within the confines of the client’s desires, of course.
As for work that I do under my own name or my label, FurnLab, I work to make most of what I do open source. I focus heavily on CNC processes, whether 3D printing, laser cutting, or a router. I figure if I can look at other people’s work and cough up my own versions, there certainly isn’t anything preventing someone with access to the same gear from doing the same to my designs. Instead of spending my time obsessed with protecting my idea, I’d rather be working on the next project.
So I make my work available and just restrict commercial use. If someone likes something I’ve made, let them build it. Who knows, maybe they’ll give me some feedback or make some awesome improvements.
What do you love the most about the open source world?
People who understand the concept are very positive and supportive of the work. Open Source implies that you can make changes to your design down the road without implying your previous version is flawed or the the new one is the final iteration. I’m still evolving one of my oldest designs, The Mod, which is about 11 years old now.
I have more ideas than I have time to develop. The open source concept allows me to develop an idea as fully as I can within my budgetary and time constraints and put it out there for the world to see/enjoy without having to make the promise that it is a perfect design, just a worthwhile idea.
I love feeling like a pioneer. There is plenty of open source software, but beyond Thingiverse and its audience, most people have never heard of the idea of an open design for a physical object/product.
What do you hate the most about the open source world?
Ha! Explaining to friends and family that I’m not sinking my career by giving away my best ideas. I restrict commercial reproduction on my designs, but it still seems risky to them. The funny thing is that my brother used to work for the Eclipse Foundation, one of the biggest open source software organizations, and no one seemed to bat an eye. There just isn’t the same kind of precedent for open source product design.
The documentation. Even an 85% developed idea still requires documentation and this is where I am the worst. I have about 4 or 5 fairly complete designs that I haven’t made available simply because I haven’t found the time to provide documentation/instructions and I don’t feel right putting out a DXF without any additional information. My most recent product, Xylotones, are Half-tone images cut on a CNC machine. The individual products are custom and I’m still scratching my head about how to open source the work.
What’s the hardest thing about what you do?
Did I mention the documentation?
As far as consulting work, there is always something the client wants that you either dislike or are pretty sure won’t work but can’t talk them out of.
Getting strangers to understand open source is pretty difficult. I mean, if I can’t get my own family to fully understand, well, a 3 minute introduction typically leads to more questions than understanding.
As I mentioned, sometime I have trouble figuring out how exactly to open up a design.
If you had any advice for young designers, what would it be?
Draw, draw, draw. I don’t care if it is is pen/paper or digitally. There is absolutely no replacement for good drawing skills. Furniture design is one of the few places where you can get away with mediocre drawing skills, but you have to be good at what you do to overcome it. 3D modeling will never be as fast as sketching for throwing out quick ideas. Do no let your equipment be an excuse to no draw. I’ve got friends whose napkin drawings make my best Wacom work look like a kindergartner’s work. Well, that may be an exaggeration, but, you get the point.
If you could instantly change anything about our society, what would you change?
Planned obsolescence and the culture around it. I wish we still designed things to last, be repaired/upgraded, and be treasured. Sadly, people are not willing to pay higher prices for well-built things because they expect to replace them sooner than later. The cost of hitting the prices that they are willing to pay takes an incredible toll on our environment, and on the quality and timelessness of design.
Describe your favorite colour using only nouns.
Yikes! 1st gen Porsche 911, 1970s VWs, clementines, construction cones, discontinued iPad Smart Covers…
After receiving some good response with the Max interview, we’re back with another:
Alex Jones of Cambridge Industrial Design
So, Alex, tell us a bit about yourself
I am an industrial designer based in Cambridge, UK. I have been a designing stuff since I graduated in 1994. I am currently the managing director of Cambridge Industrial Design Ltd. I have worked on lots of interesting projects from loudspeakers and Hi-Fi to lab robots and a motion capture suit. Living and working in Cambridge means you are close to a lot of exciting new technology and ideas.
How did you first get into industrial design?
I did a 4 year BSc (hons) Engineering Product Design course at South Bank university in London. The one year placement in Sydney, Australia with a small manufacturing company was the main highlight for me – and not just for the beaches! Getting the placement was just luck – I happen to be looking in the right place at the right time. Abberfield Technology is a small company designing and manufacturing ticketing machines and I was the design department with the MD and Production manager guiding me. It was a really great education – learning about technical drawing for the real world, dealing with suppliers and working in a team were all elements that are actually essential for a industrial designer. Looking at today’s students I feel getting some experience of manufacturing to be even more vital. There are a lot more design graduates out there now…
Could you describe your approach and philosophy to design?
Get a good design brief – try to get as much information as possible and listen to the client (something you don’t get in college)
I design from the inside out most of the time. Improving a product or coming up with a new product – you have to do that from the inside in my view. What is the target price and volumes? Therefore what manufacturing processes are available to me? What value should the product convey? The list goes on but they all affect the design from the start. We try to give clients concepts that have a wow factor but also designs that will work.
What’s the hardest thing about what you do?
The hardest part is also the most satisfying – go over the design detail again. And again. And again. Refining the detail can be very hard and time consuming but when you get a mechanical prototype that works – it’s a great feeling.
What’s the part that you love the most?
Seeing people use a product I’ve designed. A few weeks back I saw a busker in Cambridge use a Fender Passport. Last week an engineer at a networking event said how much he liked the Sureflap cat flap. Makes all that detail work worthwhile!
If you had any advice for young designers, what would it be?
Get some experience with a company that actually makes stuff. In my view you can’t be a good consultant with out that experience.
Don’t just focus on sketching – get up to speed with materials, tech, manufacturing process
If you have just graduated and love industrial design – stick at it.
If you could instantly change anything about our society, what would you change?
UK engineering to be prized and respected – engineering is undervalued by many in the UK and yet can solve big problems with such elegance – most of the time : )
Describe your favourite colour using only nouns.
Ferrari
I appreciate any concept artist who can move so fluidly from characters to props to environments. Bradley Wright, you are the man.
Honestly, I wish I could post more but I’m already way over my vertical usual, so I’ll just have to redirect you to his wall of awesome. Seriously, I’m in awe at the sheer amount of work here. Fantastic.