selly
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by selly on Sept 9, 2008 9:03:41 GMT
i'm getting to the stage where i am wanting to educate myself more on the principles of design.
without getting unbearably pretentious, but wanting to stretch the mind a little can you guys give me some pointers?
Why do some designs work so well? Are there underlying mathmatical principles that please the eye consistently? I guess certain principles consistently underpin good design?
Where can I learn more and what can you wise owls tell me?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrgrimsdale on Sept 9, 2008 9:24:05 GMT
i'm getting to the stage where i am wanting to educate myself more on the principles of design. without getting unbearably pretentious, but wanting to stretch the mind a little can you guys give me some pointers? Why do some designs work so well? Are there underlying mathmatical principles that please the eye consistently? I guess certain principles consistently underpin good design? Where can I learn more and what can you wise owls tell me? Cor that's a big question! Some would say yes to both of these, some no. I'd say no myself ;D Golden ratio etc is a bit mythical. IMHO it's entirely up to you to choose your preferred point of view, there is no right or wrong, though there is better and worse in terms of technical construction, which can't really be separated from visual design. Whatever you do - don't fall for the hype which gets attached to so much trendy stuff  but on the other hand you have to learn to appreciate everything to be able to discriminate. So I'd recommend first: look at everything you do/don't like and ask yourself why. Second, read some history of design books. "Pioneers of Modern Design" Pevsner is a classic but no doubt there are more modern alternatives. cheers Jacob |
|
|
|
Post by engineerone on Sept 9, 2008 9:54:16 GMT
dsign is something like modern art, sometimes it has point at others it is in the mind of the beholder. in the late 90's a book came out by a bloke called garth or gareth graves, available still i think from gmc or stobart. it was a design book but what i found disappointing was the lack of instruction in relation to the inner parts of something. if you look as jacob recommends at older furniture, ie 18th century stuff, they did not have computers etc but used some really thin sections in various parts, not least pigeon holes etc. you would think that someone by now had worked out the various strengths of these things so you could get a better idea of the materials to use. but certainly not in the grave book. there are in fact two parts to the design, one is the overall look, and second is the way in which it can be made. take motor cars, most years, manufacturers unveil concept cars at certain exhibitions, but look 3-5 years down the line and see if and how it has translated into actual manufacture. again as jacob suggests un less you understand how stuff is made, then all the design in the world will not work, since it will not have the strength and structural integrity. check out places like the design museum, and local colleges which have design courses, they will have a reading list to guide you. hth ;D paul  |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Sept 9, 2008 11:33:02 GMT
The Golden Ratio was discussed here |
|
|
|
Post by Dave S on Sept 9, 2008 12:58:27 GMT
Interesting thread!! Some members may remember Tony's furniture thread over there. A year or so ago, Sgian Dubh suggested in that thread that people might expand more on their thoughts and be a little more analytical, rather than just expressing a like or dislike for a piece. I then started a thread about how to analyse one's likes and dislikes. Very often I would see a piece and strongly like or dislike it. The difficulty I often had was working out why. I do remember Jacob writing in that thread, but then it quickly sank without trace after someone went and got themselves banned and in due course this place opened up . So I'd recommend first: look at everything you do/don't like and ask yourself why. I think this is important and something I have tried hard to do over the last year or so. Not easy, though. I've tried to look at as much as I can and to separate into 3 groups - strongly like; strongly dislike; and inoffensive but no strong feelings either way. Then I have tried to look at common characteristics within the groups, particularly the first two. With that I have started to get a better idea of what I like and why. One thing I definitely don't like is designs which seem to be different for the sake of it. Evolution is generally better than revolution, IMO, and I believe I have heard others express similar thoughts. However, at the end of the day, it all boils down to personal preference. If you're making pieces for yourself, the only opinion that really matters is your own. As to mathematical principles - designs that use them I often find 'safe' - whilst less likely to be in my strongly dislike category, they are not guaranteed to be in the strongly like category either. Dave |
|
|
|
Post by mrgrimsdale on Sept 10, 2008 7:46:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by jfc on Sept 11, 2008 7:28:30 GMT
;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by engineerone on Sept 11, 2008 8:59:16 GMT
rhanks for the link jacob, however as i said the problem is it does not discuss the strengths of sections to allow you to decide on the proportions of the separate pieces of your item so no guide to pigeon hole spacers, or drawer sides, silly things like that which when made too thick make the whole piece look wrong paul |
|
|
|
Post by mrgrimsdale on Sept 11, 2008 9:46:57 GMT
Primary sources are more important than books by a long way, i.e. woodwork itself. So not only look at things, but measure, photograph, draw; tape, vernier caliper, pad and pencil, camera etc.
Rule of thumb is that thin things (like drawer sides) are often thinner than you'd guess, and vice-versa, e.g. I was surprised by the sizes of door frame timbers encountered in trad joinery; 4"x5", 5"x6" etc. Bigger than I would have thought from a quick glance.
What's more, books often perpetuate various myths which turn out not to be true e.g. that dovetails should be 6/8 degrees for hard/soft woods. If you take a look you will find every angle from 30 to 5 degrees, sometimes on the same piece! Well 'variations' on the same piece at least.
cheers
Jacob
|
|
but on the other hand you have to learn to appreciate everything to be able to discriminate.
