Jump to content
Product Design Forums

Treasurebox
Sign in to follow this  
Guest csven

"future Of Design" Video

Recommended Posts

Guest csven
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>">
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest CheckMate

Interesting, How many years off do they think this is then? Where does this leave sketching?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest csven

Dassault has been really pushing this stuff from the computer software/connectivity side, but it's the interface side which is the biggest issue, afaic. There are prototype systems out there, but I'm guessing 10-12 years before this kind of stuff has an impact.

 

And (2D) sketching isn't going anywhere for some time.

 

What I believe will happen at some point is a shift from 2D sketching to sketching by 3D sculpting (perhaps accomplished in a few different ways).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice vid- I wish that I knew Maya a little better to animate something like that. The content is a little disappointing really. Somewhat lipstick on a pig- the lipstick being the minority report /Star Wars Hologram interface. The pig being the same old interface being shown here. There was nothing inherently better about what they were showing. Perhaps it was a marketing gimmick to show that the future is here or some such rubbish. I mean seriously drag and drop materials...really?? And look!!! push and pull deformations!!

I appreciate the coolness factor but I wish that there was something more substantial. When Jeff Han demonstrated multi-touch at TED it blew your mind because it thought through the ramification of multitouch. For instance here they are working on 1:1 scale. What happens on a 747 and you want to zoom in on a fastener. How would a 3D zoom work?? Would it feather at the edges? Would it be some kind of 3d volumetric section through the voxel data? It could have been much cooler. All that they did could be accomplished on a 2D screen. Assuming that you had a minority report screen, how would that allow you to work deeper??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Grant Howarth

Very interesting video, reminds me almost of Minority Report. I dont see this being too far off in the future. It's funny how something we perceive as sci-fi now could be sculpting the world of the future. I could definately see thin being used for cad modelling where you could use your hands to form shapes much like you would with clay.

 

There is a part of me that worries about stuff like this though... the more reliant designers are on technology the more disasociated they are with the fundamentals of design. Hell knows we see plenty of designers knock up beautifully polished renders without any thought into the actual feasability of the product... Will we ever reach a point in time where the machines we design to assist us design end up coming up with solutions of their own reducing the need for the designer at all? I guess im thinking too sci-fi here.

 

I read you're piece on rapid prototyping, creating a new era of spam, which was very interesting yet quite scary, also had me laughing.. It made me think that soon enough any person with cad literacy will be able to create their own products and every single person in the world will design every single product that they can possibly need...

 

'Soon the place will be crawling with stone jackals' (Vilem Flusser: The shape of things, a philosophy of design).

 

Don't read into anything i'm saying too seriously, but could design, as a profession become obsolete?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't read into anything i'm saying too seriously, but could design, as a profession become obsolete?

 

http://boards.core77.com/viewtopic.php?t=17414

http://boards.core77.com/viewtopic.php?t=16060

 

 

About the vid: all I could think was "Will we have doorknobs when we have that?". I agree with Thomas here.

 

I would like to have a physical object I could manipulate like that, however that would work. Some sort of energy-cloud or something scifi-ish like that. Or clay.. hmm :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest csven

@Parel - I left my critique on their blog. You might want to add your thoughts. That said, and as I indicated in my earlier comment, Dassault probably isn't interested in the hardware interface. They're interested in the collaboration aspect. Hence, much of what you're taking them to task on will probably fall on deaf ears.

 

@Grant - I've been saying for years that Industrial Design is dead. Design, however, will take off.

 

@engio - I read those threads and found them to be mostly defensive "only we can design" comments; the kind of stuff I heard in the early 80's when people laughed when someone said "everyone will own a computer some day" or what I heard in school when an ID professor laughed at a graduating senior showing a cell phone concept (that student is now an award-winning design firm owner).

 

A lot of IDers will be in for a rude awakening, imo.

 

And btw, there are smart materials being developed ("digital clay") which is what I was mostly thinking about when I said "sculpting".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Buff
Dassault has been really pushing this stuff from the computer software/connectivity side, but it's the interface side which is the biggest issue, afaic. There are prototype systems out there, but I'm guessing 10-12 years before this kind of stuff has an impact.

 

And (2D) sketching isn't going anywhere for some time.

 

What I believe will happen at some point is a shift from 2D sketching to sketching by 3D sculpting (perhaps accomplished in a few different ways).

 

 

I'm not so sure that it's as far away as 10-12 years.

 

I'm curently working on a project which will make use of technology which has some remarkable similarities to that presented in the video.

 

Also, take a look at what Autodesk are working on, it's nowhere near as forward thinking, but it presenta a very real probability of the next step in the CAID/CAD/CAE toolset. My guess is they are about 2 years away. Integration of technology such as WOW Systems/Microsoft Surface/holograms etc with design tools is just a little further round the corner IMO, perhaps 5 or six years. I think the "impact" will be felt much earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm 10-12 years sounds about right to me if ever.

Current display prototypes from Siggraph

multiple projectors create a walk around image. Still limited

using a spinning screen- limited manipulation possibilities

 

seems to be the only one that would produce the hologram that we are talking about- But that works by creating plasma balls in mid -air. probably lop your hand right off. They would have to have a computer fast enough to scan for hand positions and then stop the laser when it passes through the volume of your hand- yeesh. So probably protective gear needed or very brave users (No Ctrl Alt delete for the death lasers Mr Bond).

Thats still a few years away.

 

My guess is that creating the impression directly in your brain will probably be the successful route. I bet the US Military is already working on that for their UNCAVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest spook

what struck me about that video is how sexy it all looked. they made a really nice presentation. some of the detail in the modeling was a bit stupid, like how it magically turned from a 2d sketch with nothing to suggest depth, into 3d form. cool none the least

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest AutomóvilVerde

that's cool. Looks almost like the one from iron man. The day that the one from iron man is made, it will change design forever. there would be almost no need for clay modeling/prototypes. and the one in iron man can be held and moved around like an actual object.

 

this one doesn't look like anything too revolutionary. it's basically just a massive touch screen, there's no true 3d where you can move around it and stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure its all very Hollywood but we have seen this kind of stuff for years now. Ref Bill Buxton's Alias research work from the early 90s.

 

http://www.billbuxton.com/buxtonAliasVideos.html

 

All this looks cool but do I really want to be standing all day in a darkened room waving my hands around? Where does my coffee cup go, or my phone, or the 10,000 post its :P

 

Yes I can see a case for this kind of thing for pure style based design but to be frank when you are doing "true" design - functional design integrated with visual design these systems fall apart. The other big factor is cost. Can you imagine how much this stuff will cost?

 

at the end of the day, is this really any better than existing approaches? Would it make me a better designer? No. Would it let me communicate the design better to a non designer? Again no. IMHO marketing people need physical objects - so I'll spend my money on 3D printers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest csven
Sure its all very Hollywood but we have seen this kind of stuff for years now. Ref Bill Buxton's Alias research work from the early 90s.

 

http://www.billbuxton.com/buxtonAliasVideos.html

 

All this looks cool but do I really want to be standing all day in a darkened room waving my hands around? Where does my coffee cup go, or my phone, or the 10,000 post its :)

 

Yes I can see a case for this kind of thing for pure style based design but to be frank when you are doing "true" design - functional design integrated with visual design these systems fall apart. The other big factor is cost. Can you imagine how much this stuff will cost?

 

at the end of the day, is this really any better than existing approaches? Would it make me a better designer? No. Would it let me communicate the design better to a non designer? Again no. IMHO marketing people need physical objects - so I'll spend my money on 3D printers.

I'll play devil's advocate.

 

1) "do I really want to be standing all day in a darkened room waving my hands around" - That sounds like designers in the 90's who were saying "do I really want to be sitting all day in front of a computer screen using a CAD program". And the answer to that turned out to be ... Yes, if someone pays me to do it.

 

2) "I can see a case for this kind of thing for pure style based design but to be frank when you are doing "true" design - functional design integrated with visual design these systems fall apart." - They do? I'm not even aware of anyone using "these systems" in actual practice (aside from the occasional story of a car company or military contractor successfully(?) using this kind of stuff), let alone documented examples of them falling apart. Care to share how you arrived at this definitive conclusion? While you're at it, can you define "true design"? Does that include FEA, CFD and the rest of the stuff you're not likely to find taught in a college industrial design degree program? Would Boeing's all-digital aircraft design program be "true design"?

 

3) "The other big factor is cost. Can you imagine how much this stuff will cost?" - I can imagine that on a relative scale what it might cost today is what a seat of Pro/E running on a decent SGI ran in the late 90's; in the tens of thousands of dollars. A significantly more powerful system today can be had for under $5000. Not bad for ten years. As an aside, you've seen Johnny Lee's TED talk, yes; where he hacks the Wii to create a digital, interactive white board for next-to-nothing?

 

4) "at the end of the day, is this really any better than existing approaches?" - Is using a computer better than using a drafting table? That's what IDers used to ask. Your question reminds me of their comments and a general reluctance to even try a new technology (I see a lot of hesitance to try new things among the supposedly curious design community).

 

5) "Would it make me a better designer? No." - I'd venture most people would come to the same conclusion, since I'm unaware of any tool which makes a person a better designer. However, as far as I'm concerned, the question being addressed with this video really is: Might it help a person be a more efficient designer when working with a geographically dispersed development team? Maybe it will. Again, Dassault likely isn't interested in hardware (or where your post-its go); they're interested in collaboration software ala their 3DVIA website and latest CATIA developments.

 

6) "Would it let me communicate the design better to a non designer? Again no." - Again with the definitive statements. You've tried this? You seem extraordinarily certain about something you've apparently never used. And besides, I don't recall the video being specifically about marketing or communicating with non-designers. For all I know, the only people who'll wind up using a network of these things will all be designers, and they'll fab their collective, final solution for presentation to the marketing group. In any event, while it might not help you communicate your design, I suspect it would help some of us. I'd be willing to give it a try instead of immediately discounting it.

 

7) "IMHO marketing people need physical objects - so I'll spend my money on 3D printers." - IMHO, some marketing people need physical objects, and some don't. And since some marketing people start off as industrial designers, they probably don't need them either. Personally, I'll spend my money on those tools which help the team accomplish a task in the most efficient manner available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest AutomóvilVerde
IMHO marketing people need physical objects - so I'll spend my money on 3D printers.

 

Just imagine this, your customer is in China and your in the US. would you rather make a model of the product and ship it across the world to show him, or just send him a file over the internet and let him download it and see it? And the great thing with something like this is that it's 3D so it's just like having the physical object, almost...

 

Also cost, this would have a lot of money in the long run, no need to ship prototypes around that you don't even know they like, and it would save energy, materials, and a lot of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll play devil's advocate.

 

You are very good at that csven! :)

 

Yes I accept your points but reading through your previous posts I can see that you have a similar opinion regarding the terminology of design - that being the traditional style centric "ID" approach and a more unified holistic approach. In this respect I consider true design to be that - considering the whole as opposed to the package. Not that there is anything wrong with just the package - I've done enough of that over the years to know that it pays the bills! I just, on a personal basis, hate being branded as a skin man by customers who associate ID with the looks only, when, in actual fact what "true" ID is about is so much more than that, and involves integration of all the functions in a product.

 

But getting onto the specifics relating to that video, I'm afraid I have been subject to so many sales pitches by Dassault over the years that I get a bit thick skinned over all this gee whiz stuff. I am not adverse to new technology either - my problem is I use too much technology sometimes! What I get tired of is seeing the same old marketing BS dragged out and tarted up for the YouTube Blog age that 10 years ago was a mailshot on CD, or an expensive day out. There is nothing inherently new in any of that video.

 

I have customers in the defence industry and automotive industries and they have dabbled with haptic VR devices with big screens and I grant you, these things are hugely impressive, but I have to say I am not convinced they enhance the actual design process. They certainly enhance the "internal" selling process and communication to marketing and board level, so in that sense they are justifiable.

 

Sure costs have come down dramatically, but the problem is not necessarily one of cost anyway. I run a tiny design business yet we are better equipped than some customers I have with £25m turnovers. I agree with your point about it being designers who will have these things, but then that is probably not what Dassault wants to hear. The prime market for Dassault is large enterprise, so having a collective of designers is of no interest to them - they want this stuff on every desk from CEO down to the shopfloor. The other huge issue - which I'm sure every professional designer here has come across - is that no matter what we produce, we rely on our customer's skills at interpreting the results. When you are presenting results digitally, that requires the customer has the skills to use whatever is given to them.

 

What I mean is, in the "good old days", pre CAD, we would work all night on wonderful markered up visuals mounted onto expensive Pantone gradient backgrounds, with maybe a painted up foam model or test rig as support, then travel to the other end of the country to present the work.

 

These days, it tends to be a document that the customer can print out at their end (colour lasers now being the norm), backed up by things like E drawings or 3D PDF, or occasionally a web conference. If a prototype is needed, these can be shipped to the customer direct from the RP bureau, or from here after they have been tweaked.

 

I would love to be able to run web conference sessions to present to every customer a work in progress but every project requires an element of presentation material. The newer tools we have now - like Hypershot, or 3D printing, make this a lot easier but it still needs to be allocated in the development process.

 

So any comments I make about this technology are based upon years of dealing with a) sales pitches from software companies and B) trying to minimise my presentation prep time and maximise my design time. If I truly believed that this stuff would allow me to halt design and immediately share the data to customers I would be first in the queue to buy it. But I don't believe it will.Not yet anyway. You see, as a service designer we are , at the end of the day, salespeople. Our customers ask us to come up with a solution. If we spend 10 days on something and come back to them with a VR presentation and no tangible results (by this I mean - physical deliverables - printed reports, visuals, prototypes) they question the value of the input.

 

For internal design teams this is maybe not such an issue (but even here it requires that the company structure buys into this method of presentation - we all know how the corporate types love churning out reports!).

 

I don't have the answers. I have no idea what the future is for this kind of thing. Sitting here in 2009 I think back to what we used to think back when I was at the RCA in 1987, and then we were talking about much the same kind of stuff as we are now - VR, haptic devices, big touch screens, 3D printers. The one thing nobody saw was the one thing that has made a huge difference to our ability to communicate - the explosion of the internet. Who is to say that another 20 years down the line we will look at these Dassault videos and think - those guys got it so wrong! How could they not see the iSEE3D eye implants coming!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.