Hasta La Ideas

Les étudiants du Southern California Institute of Architecture ont imaginé ce projet impressionnant “Eye, Robot” combinant cinématographie et robotique. Guidés par leurs professeurs Brandon Kruysman et Jonathan Proto, les étudiants nous proposent cette vidéo passionnante à découvrir dans la suite.

iKnow, we all waiting in anticipation for something spectacular to come forth and the iWatch rumors are pretty strong. So if we were to indulge in fantasy for a minute, then this is how Esben Oxholm thinks the Apple team would design the phone/watch. Heavily inspired by the look of the iPhone 5 and sporting a minimalistic, sleek look, the watch is crafted with black aluminum on the outside and a thin layer of soft matte rubber on the inside.

It has got the highly recognizable round home button as the only physical button. The rest of the fun happens on the newly developed slightly double curved touch screen. The iWatch can be fitted to your liking, by removing or adding spacers in the lower part of the bendy bracelet.

Designer: Esben Oxholm

–
Yanko Design
Timeless Designs – Explore wonderful concepts from around the world!
Yanko Design Store – We are about more than just concepts. See what’s hot at the YD Store!
(iWatch was originally posted on Yanko Design)

No related posts.

Opinion: in a special Valentine’s column, Dezeen editor-in-chief Marcus Fairs explains why designers have dumped dowdy green design in favour of glamorous robots.

Tech has killed green. Until recently the design world was on a mission to save the planet; now it seems enthralled by gadgets. Adjectives like “sustainable” and “eco” have been usurped by upstarts such as “smart” and “hacked”. The cardboard furniture glut of recent years has disintegrated; recycling has gone to landfill.

It’s not long since design-school grad shows were dominated by the hand-made, the low-tech and the organic; now it’s all embedded sensors and connected devices. Design fairs have ditched the obligatory maker or two turning discarded pop bottles into chandeliers – or knitting seaweed into cushions – for 3D printers and robots. Collaborations with Vietnamese basket weavers are out; Raspberry Pi mashups are in. In Milan this year the young Dutch contingent will no doubt have stopped serving wholesome hyper-local snacks and will instead be touting lab meat and printed biscuits.

Green design felt right at the start of the economic crisis: it sought to replace over-indulgence with frugality, served with a side order of punishment for our wickedness. Penal minimalism was all the rage: spartan furniture made of ethically sourced timber that was so good for you, it hurt.

Natural was good, artificial was bad. Soon we’d all be growing our own organic food on our city balconies and installing complex plumbing to irrigate it with our bathwater. We’d be going off-grid, hooking up to domestic wind turbines and pondering the plausibility of upcycling under our solar-powered lamps.

It was a romantic vision, but a pessimistic one. It demanded we atone for resource scarcity by making do with less. It suggested we undo the damage caused by rampant consumerism by engaging in a paradoxical and ill-defined un-consumption. We would buy our products only once, and they would last us forever, whether we liked it or not.

But sustainability turned out to be unsustainable. We just didn’t have the time; we couldn’t afford to be green. We thought the products looked ugly. We didn’t enjoy the preachiness or the guilt.

But most of all we got seduced by tech. iPads! Plasma TVs! Replicator 2s! Drones! Anything, as long as we can plug it in or put batteries in it. Anything, as long as it has a touchscreen or makes a reassuring beeping sound.

Even green design blogs such as Inhabitat and Treehugger have experienced technophiliac mission creep and now cover smartphone-powered satellites and 3D-printing on the moon as well as passive ventilation.

Design movements come in regular waves, of course. In my fifteen years as a design journalist I’ve witnessed the tail end of the Dutch conceptual boom around the millennium; the return of decoration in the early noughties, spearheaded by Marcel Wanders and Tord Boontje; and the design-art bubble of the mid-noughties. These are just a few of the fads that have swept through design.

But green design felt different as it sought to both comment on, and provide solutions to, a more profound set of questions than designers usually address. It felt too important to be a passing phase.

In truth, green didn’t completely die. Some aspects of it became so ubiquitous that they vanished from view. Many products today use less packaging, less embodied energy and fewer nasty chemicals than they did a decade ago. They just don’t shout about it so much. Green became normal.

But green’s message did not adapt and it ran out of steam. It fell foul of the law of diminishing returns: it’s easy to make the first cut in your carbon footprint, but every subsequent one gets more difficult. And because the back-to-nature, made-do-and-mend doctrine supped from a limited gene pool of visual stimulus, it became an aesthetic trap. Once you’ve hewn furniture from raw timber, there’s not much further you can go.

Technology however is intrinsically optimistic: each new development, each new device brings the promise of a new future. Each new way of arranging atoms or bits opens the door to a new solution cloaked in a new form. And since these elements are infinitely configurable, technological development is more sustainable than sustainability, since it will never run out of ideas.

It’s harsh to break the news on Valentine’s Day but here it is: sorry green design, it’s over. It wasn’t really going anywhere. And we’ve fallen in love with a robot.

The post “Sorry green design, it’s over” appeared first on Dezeen.

Voici le nouveau spot de la marque « Nikon » dans le cadre de leur nouvelle campagne. Intitulée The Day, cette courte vidéo nous montre à quel point les appareils photos peuvent capturer et embellir les moments du quotidien, dans des situations très différentes. Une création à découvrir dans la suite de l’article.

Précédente campagne : Nikon – Tears

NB: Product rendering by Su Chew Lee—not an Apple product or concept

This past weekend saw a tantalizing glimmer of Apple news as major news outlets substantiated rumors of new developments regarding an iWatch. Citing reports of new innovations by Corning Glass, hiring trends and anonymous sources from within Apple and Foxconn, The Atlantic Wire notes that “The iWatch [would] compete with existing wearable devices like the Nike Fuel Band or the Pebble smartwatch.” Reporting for the New York Times Bits Blog, Nick Bilton’s sanguine prognostication concludes with a survey of extant wearable technologies, including Quantified Self accessories as well as Google’s Project Glass. “Investors would most likely embrace an iWatch, with some already saying that wearable computing could replace the smartphone over the next decade.”

Meanwhile, longtime Apple designer Bruce Tognazzini offers his discursive but interesting two cents on his former employer’s foray into wearable technology, predicting that the device has the potential to be as revolutionary as the iPod or iPhone. His account depicts the iWatch as Apple’s voice-controlled, NFC-enabled gamechanger, facilitating user authentication and mobile payments. (Tog also speculates about more utopian features such as real-time geolocation feedback based on pressure sensors—”the more sensors, the better.”)

His account is certainly worth reading, but I can’t help but think that most (if not all) of the “Most Useful Apps” that our esteemed forum members posted in a recent board discussion—an admittedly informal and somewhat biased sample—require a fully-featured device, either in terms of interface or the hardware itself.

Ewan Spence of Forbes.com is also skeptical of such a product, noting that it is nothing more than an update to the sixth generation Nano + third party watchband, as in Scott Wilson’s now-iconic TikTok.

Yet the collective uncertainty about the device—measured optimism at best—only underscores the fact that the smartwatch has largely been conceived as an extension or variation of existing devices. Tog, for his part, imagines a host of unforeseen applications and behaviors… anyone else care to venture a guess?

(more…)