Personal fabrication and how it will impact ID

I apologize if this has been discussed somewhere, but I didn’t see anything after a few searches.

Anyway, how do you see personal fabrication affecting industrial designers and the field itself? I am about to go to college, and industrial design is one of the fields that I’ve considered majoring in. But I can really see this technology taking off in the near future, and effectively destroy the purpose of an industrial designer. If one can design and possibly make the product themselves, why would they want someone else to dictate a design to them?

here are a few links about it, in case you have no idea what I’m talking about.

Thoughts? Opinions?

Simple. The same reason people go to concerts, restaurants, museums. Just because someone can do something, it doesn’t mean they will be good at it. If you own a stove, does that mean that there are no longer any need for gourmet chefs?

On the other hand, I think it will encourage more people to do things for themselves and that is always a good thing.

Hi Keifer,

This is pretty much the exact subject of my PhD research. The title is kind of dry and academic, but I usually subtitle it “What will designers do when everyone can be a designer?” My basic assumption is that as rapid manufacturing technologies become cheaper and more readily available, consumers will use them to design, modify and manufacture their own products. And that this will happen whether designers, companies and brands like it or not.

The hypothesis I am testing in my research is quite different to your assertion that the purpose of the industrial designer will be destroyed, however. My belief is that the role of the designer will change, and that in future industrial designers will be responsible for defining the parameters within which consumers can create designs. In other words deciding what should and should not be modified or redesigned. Doesn’t mean that some people won’t want to totally design a product themselves. But the purpose of the traditional design process is not just to impose a uniform aesthetic - it also refines and rejects on the basis of ergonomics, durability, integration with other products and systems, cost etc. These are all areas in which the designer’s expertise is the best tool to resolve the conflicting demands of a product brief, and most consumers will understand this (and if they don’t, they will learn when they attempt it for themselves).

My blog talks about this in a lot more detail: http://no-retro.com

fatkid - So, what you’re saying is that industrial designers are professionals that have an (generally) insurmountable edge over an amateur? I guess that’s a fair point, but I don’t think the cook analogy is a good one. A gourmet chef takes years to perfect a recipe and develop cooking techniques. A large portion of design however is much, much simpler. For example, look at cell phones, or any personal hand held electronics. I’d bet that most consumers could design one that they liked sufficiently and be satisfied with it, considering that it’s not that complicated and doesn’t require a huge investment of time or skill building.


matt - I understand what you mean by that. I guess I would just feel like I was holding back the natural flow of new technology and innovative creative freedom by setting standards for what exactly can be changed. I’m a really strong supporter of “open-source” types of things, so I’m not sure how I would feel.
But maybe leaving some aspects to the “professionals” would be best, as badly designed products may appear because the makers are not experienced. My rebuttal to this is that
a) Any one person’s product would really only impact them, ie any person with a good design is free to make their own, and considering that everyone will be making their own products, those with good taste will make good products, not be limited to the lower quality.
b) No offense to any IDers out there, :smiley: , but I’ve seen some badly designed stuff out there, and certainly a fair number of things I feel I could do better.

Maybe I’d best stick to being an underground/amateur industrial designer on my own time :slight_smile:

I like DIY. I like the idea of designing tools. I think there is a place for that, but I also agree with the Chef analogy. Anyone can cook, most do, but there are a ton of restaurants. Some because of the quality of the chef, some because of the convince.

music is another good example. I can go buy a guitar tomorrow and with enough hard work and interest, I might even make it.
Access to tools allows a wider participation pool, but does not mean people will be satisfied with their own products from those tools.

from your blog:

At the moment though, I have one trick up my sleeve - I can use CAD, to design a product and to communicate that design to the means of production, in a way that no non-designer can.

if all you have to offer is pushing CAD, you aren’t embracing the role of a designer. CAD is just a tool, just like sketching, model making, drafting, a RP machine or a laser cutter or a awesome Jeston-instant-anything-microwave thingie.

Its important to adapt, don’t over estimate the importance or longevity of any one tool.

I hope craftsmanship and individuals take over production, replacing the era of mass production. As CAD evolves it may look less like the keyboard, mouse, menu-driven crap we have to deal with now. Maybe much more like being a woodworker, sculptor, artist, etc.
RP is one possible path to get there, but so is a collapse of the oil economy (I’m betting our future leaders are Amish).


ps:
BTW, the shining light example the whole world uses to praise design, Apple , is the exact opposite of open, collaborative, user-tweak-able.

Your right, there are bad designed products out there and you probably could do better, so go for it. Stating that there are bad designs out there as a reason why ‘designers’ (like its some club or something) aren’t better than the unwashed masses is rubbish.

Based on what I have read so far, you will fit right into the Marketing Group at virtually any corporation.

Good luck with that.

Hi asango,

Thanks for reading the blog and taking the time to respond here. I am of course aware that CAD is just one component of what a designer does. However you are wrong when you say that “CAD is just a tool” - the critical thing is that CAD is part of a process. If you want to be involved in the manufacture of a mass production item, it is virtually impossible without CAD expertise. In this sense, knowledge of CAD is nowadays the gateway that you have to pass through if you want to be part of the product creation process, either as a designer or an interested consumer. Don’t know CAD, don’t get something made (and yes, I know there are exceptions, but this is generally the case, and becoming more so every day). This is what I meant by the trick up my sleeve - I can engage in the product creation process in a way that non-designers cannot, because I can use the “tool”.

What’s interesting about what’s happening now is that the status quo seems to be changing in two different ways. The first is that CAD software is becoming more accessible, which is what the particular post you refer to was concentrating on. The second, which I talk about in other posts, is that the means of production are coming closer to the consumer. The promise of rapid manufacturing is that in time there will be no need for massive investments in tooling - this is very analogous to the way the laser printer removed the need for printing presses and moveable lead type.

@Keifer: “I guess I would just feel like I was holding back the natural flow of new technology and innovative creative freedom by setting standards for what exactly can be changed.”

You’re right, you would. And my point is that sometimes this can be a good thing. Any car designer that restricts choice regarding ABS is restricting the innovative creative freedom to crash and die. For some consumers this is unacceptable, and they will buy vehicles in which the ABS can be turned off, or they’ll try to pull the fuse to bypass the designer’s intent. For many others, the decision of the designer and manufacturer is right. Chances are the same will be true of aesthetic considerations - some consumers will want to have unique looking products and will believe their choices are just as valid as those of an industrial designer; others will feel that someone who is trained and practices design every day is able to make better judgements than they are.

Keifer:
Not everyone wants to design or take the time to design every product they own. I agree with fatkid’s chef statement.

If you own a stove, does that mean that there are no longer any need for gourmet chefs?

Right now every one can mow their own lawn and be thier own landscape architect. Yet millions of people hire this out eventhough they could completely customise their flowers, plants, etc. Many consumers have deemed this something they don’t want to do.
Your cell phone comment seems a bit nieve.

For example, look at cell phones, or any personal hand held electronics. I’d bet that most consumers could design one that they liked sufficiently and be satisfied with it, considering that it’s not that complicated and doesn’t require a huge investment of time or skill building.

Many, if not most, products are deciptively simple. You and the common consumer would be amazed at the thousands of hours of development that can go into a simple product. What happened 25 years ago when page layout and word processing became available to the masses? We began to see a ton of home grown crap. Here we are a quarter century later and there are still jobs for graphic designers. The design field is changing to be sure. But this is the information age and a designer’s expertise is information that can be distributed and sold.

holy crap.

a lot of these comments are taking a myopic, compartmentalised view of design. design is lot more than → ← or → <-, it’s a 360 degree approach and how you integrate other disciplines into it. if you can’t do that, then yeah, joe six pack is going to eat your lunch with the 5 axis cnc he built in his garage.

Really? I am not even going to touch this one… :unamused:

holy crap.

a lot of these comments are taking a myopic, compartmentalised view of design. design is lot more than → ← or → <-, it’s a 360 degree approach and how you integrate other disciplines into it. if you can’t do that, then yeah, joe six pack is going to eat your lunch with the 5 axis cnc he built in his garage.

Dammit, you said that much better than I did.

Spoken like a newb. Nice way to insult an entire community. A real friend maker I might add.

“Personal Fabrication” will most likely not change much in the consumer landscape in the larger scheme of things. Just because I play with garage band on my mac doesn’t mean I make all my own music (or any really). I might bust out an imovie every once in awhile, but I don’t think Scorsese or Tina Fey are worried for their jobs just yet, and when was the last time you down loaded a novel from an un-published writer?

The chef analogy is actually pretty apt. While I can throw a decent meal together in my kitchen, I don’t really invent any new dishes. They are all inspired by what has been passed down from my family or recipes from real chefs (or frozen pizza). I still eat out all the time.

A small percentage of consumers may want to choose colors on their sneakers, or push and pull a few points on a nurb surface for a cell phone, but you comment comes off as pretty ignorant as to what design actually is.

Perfecting design skills takes years, rather decades. Saying that it doesn’t seems to imply your not a designer perhaps?

ahhh, just found this:

Much to learn, grasshopper.

Quote:
“Personal Fabrication” will most likely not change much in the consumer landscape in the larger scheme of things. Just because I play with garage band on my mac doesn’t mean I make all my own music (or any really).

In the sense that consumers won’t all be designing and making their own products, you’re right. But referring to music, personal fabrication could have a big impact in the same way that MP3’s and downloads have. If manufacturers realise the potential of rapid manufacturing they may push it hard as a way to transfer some of the costs of manufacturing (materials, transport, inventory, packaging etc) onto the consumer. If manufacturers ignore it then 3D files might end up on Bit Torrent (3D scanners are getting cheaper all the time).

It’s possible there may be a time where, when you buy your next iPod or Nokia or Dyson, you don’t get a physical item, but a disc full of 3D files which you assemble into a unique product. Some of the parts will be mandatory and unchangeable, some will be optional, some might be modifiable if that’s what you want to do. Then you take your “design” to an authorised store who manufactures it for you. Doesn’t in any way mean that the role of the designer disappears, but it would change the consumer landscape significantly.

BTW, I’m guessing you might want to edit your “years, rather than decades” statement

I wonder where the liability ends up in the future if some one downloads a product from product warez sites and it all goes wrong?

I think the majority of use by any future high customizing application will just be used by other designers or enthusiastic creative types…rather than the masses.

Take the analogy of DTP, most people who have a PC have a printer, they can get a free DTP program, download templates and print out their own materials, yeah some people will use this but the majority of bushiness’s will go though a service.

I think what will be interesting is in the high end of design being more bespoke to those with the cash who want something different. It could turn some 1 man bands in to something more like a cottage industry.

Relax guys, there’s no need to be so defensive. Obviously I’m not a designer, and I’m not here to criticize you. I’m just looking for discussion, not for you to tell me I know nothing and then not even give an explanation other than “kid” or “you have much to learn.”

Yes, design takes years to develop. However, I still feel that I could design great products right now, without any training. But I’m sort of a design-oriented person anyway, so I guess that point could be moot.
It seems to me, although I could be terribly wrong, that design is much more art than science. But it was probably a bad idea to ask a board of designers a question like this.

Anyway, I think maybe I didn’t understand what I originally wanted to ask. I guess that individual use won’t be as much of an issue, but small groups of people and/or businesses.

Let’s imagine that this concept takes off, and instead of fewer, larger brands selling products, millions of smaller ones make small runs of products and then sell them (maybe even direct to the consumer.)

Read this article, it’s pretty interesting and it’s sort of where I’m going with these questions. It seems like business is moving away from the traditional model and I’m curious how IDers will be affected.

If the actual “factories” become easy to own by a small amateurish business, then what of the large corporations that normally make all of this stuff? Would a designer still be as needed for smaller, more independent productions? It seems like one with extensive business/entrepreneurial experience would be in the best position.

Thoughts? Again, sorry if I offended anyone, but it’s an internet message board. I’m not out to get you; just looking for some answers.



Your second statement is what leads to the first. Once you go to school and do a few internships you will begin to understand the scope of what you will need to learn.

In your analogy to mp3’s only a small percentage of users chop the files up and mix custom music, and little of that cutting, editing, mixing and mashing, would be seen as original new music, and the general public has tired pretty quickly of mash ups.

Like you said there may be a time when consumers can mix-up-mash-up their products, it is already happening and will only continue, but it might be a short lived fad for the masses.

I see more interesting long term benefits:

  1. A lot of great products never see the light of day because they are too much of a risk to bring to market. Consumer fabrication through downloads will allow professional designer to bring beter designed products to all consumers without having to go through the filters of development and marketing. Again, using your mp3 scenario, Apple makes an open source file of iphone guts, professional designers do variations, apple decides the 500 phone design it feels fit it’s brand and posts them on iTunes. The consumer downloads the file he or she likes for a fee and prints the 3d parts. Apple could even limit it, so the “keifer” designed phone is limited to 100 prints globally, giving the consumer a limited product, or even a 1 of 1. (this is in a few decades after he goes to school and gets out their of course…).

  2. this technology would be a great training resource for young designers. After you get your first 10-15 products out there you really start to figure it out… the sooner you do this the better. What better way to help a young designer figure out the market than posting a 3d file so the world can access it and seeing that only 4 people download and print when they thought it would be 4 million it because it was too niche.

  3. this would be a great way to identify design potential. A small percentage of users will actively pursue and perfect this. Amateur designers who may not have been given a shot will rise above the masses of poorly customized products and can be identified, trained and brought into the fold.

I think there is a counter trend popping up to this. Over the past decades we have seen a rise in “exclusives” and “limited editions” in everything from sneakers to coffee makers. As everything has become “exclusive” now nothing is, in a sense. The inevitable counter trend is the return to mass produced look, what is being called “super normal”. See the work of Jasper Morrison, and the retailer Muji as examples.


Yes, read that as decades rather than years… typing too fast :wink:

For example, look at cell phones, or any personal hand held electronics. I’d bet that most consumers could design one that they liked sufficiently and be satisfied with it, considering that it’s not that complicated and doesn’t require a huge investment of time or skill building.

This is the most ridiculous, incorrect, naive, and ignorant comment I’ve ever read on Core77. Period.