Spanish designer Oscar Diaz has designed a calendar that uses the capillary action of ink spreading across paper to display the date.
Each month, a bottle of coloured ink spreads across a sheet of paper embossed with numbers, colouring them in as it goes.
Ink Calendar will be exhibited at an exhibition called Sueños de un Grifo – Diseño con Alma de Agua that opens at the Círculo de Bellas Artes in Madrid today.
See also our story about the Dramprom light by Roger Arquer that appears in the same exhibition.
Here’s some info from Diaz:
–
TITLE : INK CALENDAR
DESIGNER: Oscar Diaz ( http://www.oscar-diaz.net)
DIMENSIONS: 420 X 595 mm
MATERIALS: Paper and ink.
Project Description
Ink Calendar make use of the timed pace of the ink spreading on the paper to indicate time. The ink is absorbed slowly, and the numbers in the calendar are ‘printed ‘ daily. One a day, they are filled with ink until the end of the month. The calendar enhances the perception of time passing and not only signaling it. The aim of the project is to address our senses, rather than the logical and conscious brain.
The ink colors are based on a spectrum, which relate to a “color temperature scale”, each month having a color related to our perception of the weather on that month. The colors range from dark blue in December to three shades of green in spring or orange and red in the summer.
Ink Calendar is shown as part of SUEÑOS DE UN GRIFO.
Diseño con alma de agua at the Círculo de Bellas Artes in Madrid.
Curated by Hector Serrano (http://www.hectorserrano.com) and Javier Esteban, the exhibition explores the role that objects may have in our dialogue with water from different points of view.
On view until October 11, 2009, the exhibition has been organized by ddi (Sociedad Estatal para el Desarrollo del Diseño y la Innovación, and Círculo de Bellas Artes ( http://www.circulobellasartes.com) in Madrid, where is being held.
When: 17 July – 11 October 2009
Where: Sala Juana Mordó, Círculo de Bellas Artes, Madrid (Spain)
–
Posted by Marcus Fairs
July 17th, 2009 at 6:16 am
July 17th, 2009 at 6:18 am
lovely!
July 17th, 2009 at 6:41 am
This is ingenious!
July 17th, 2009 at 6:44 am
I would love to have a set. pretty pls?
July 17th, 2009 at 8:16 am
Would really be surprisingly awesome if it ( only even kinda ) works !
July 17th, 2009 at 8:38 am
cool stuff! not practical tho but nice piece of transformative art I would want to have on my wall!
July 17th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Wow. I absolutely love this beyond belief. I just wonder if it actually accurately keeps track of the date. If so, where can I get one, immediately?
July 17th, 2009 at 8:57 am
… woah.. I totally need like 4 of these… I’ve always thought that my internal clock worked different than the rest of the world… It seems like numbers with larger surface area would take longer to saturate… I would have to see. very interesting and well designed. I think that this idea opens a lot of doors
July 17th, 2009 at 9:11 am
i like it very much! it’s just a very good idea!
i want it!
July 17th, 2009 at 10:02 am
love it. want one.
July 17th, 2009 at 10:12 am
just beautiful and so poetic
July 17th, 2009 at 10:41 am
But there should be absolutly exact same surrounding contitions of air
It would be more simple to this inside glass box, to control air
July 17th, 2009 at 11:22 am
nice but is this tested? i would imagine that by the end of the month it would have either stopped or it would be 5 days behind.
anyway its cool.
July 17th, 2009 at 11:26 am
sweeeeet!
could also be a chromatography as time goes by! (different colors travel different distancas)
dunno if it would work on that scale, though
July 17th, 2009 at 11:38 am
What a brilliant idea ! Simple, clear and completely executable.
July 17th, 2009 at 11:41 am
if this actually works and doesn’t dry out, it is a brilliant idea
July 17th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
This is so cool! simple yet great!
July 17th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Like oscar diaz I too can design things that are really, really ingenious but don’t actually work. Only this morning I designed a space ship made of toast that uses the inherent energy within molecules of butter to transport the entire human race to a fourth dimension. It’s brilliant, simple, looks great and and you’ll all really want one, immediately! All I need to do now is get it to work.
Oh hold on, what am I thinking! Being able to actually function isn’t important is it! It just needs to look nice.
pathetic
July 17th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Neat. Especially like the idea of a chromatographic display by michael. How about an ink that would change colours based on the temperature?
July 17th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
bodkin bodkin bodkin….i agree with you. Toast spaceships are the best!
stay fresh.
July 17th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
this, for sure, is not working
July 17th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Bodkin: If you just knew how many technical advances have been done on papers recently, you will understand that is possible to make it work.
Is just sounds like you are jealous…don’t worry the feeling will go.
Post a link to your ship please, want to see it..
You can see other of my works on my website, and then judge also if they work or not.
If anyone has a question of how it works , just drop me a line.
Oscar
July 17th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Fantastico Oscar Diaz!!!
Por fin alguien que da la cara y que pone una buena respuesta en Dezeen con todas las letras a los enormes comentarios que van apareciendo en los posts, parece que todo el mundo haora es critico de design y hacen de Dezeen su profession del dia para decir que todo es muy malo!
Un buen fin de semana.
July 17th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
OSCAR! YO TENGO UNA PREGUNTA!. CUANDO ME PODES MANDAR UN CONTAINER A BUENOS AIRES PARA EMPEZAR A VENDERLOS! ESTO SALE COMO PAN CALIENTE! TE FELICITO! ES UN INVENTO GENIAL!
July 17th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
I think that bodkin’s comment is idiotic. Oscar’s project is absolutely delightful, and even though I too would like to see a movie to find out how it looks & works over time I trust that it works. Well done Oscar!
July 17th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
esto es seriamente una de las cosas mas
hermosas que he visto… podrias literalmente
sentarte a ver como pasa el tiempo jaja!!
esta genial
July 17th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Oscar Diaz don’t say if it works or not.
Does it really go until the 30 days of the calendar?
And if it does how much time does it takes?
It would be really great that he tested (I believe he did but he just don’t say) and see how much time does the ink takes to travel in order to color the number in relation to the space/size of the numbers.
I think that the last numbers should be smaller because the ink will take longer time in order to travel to all the first days.
July 17th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Hey this is pretty stellar. someone definitely needs to take this idea and great a desktop background calendar with the same idea behind. Would be an awesome background for sure.
July 17th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
officially the coolest thing ever
July 18th, 2009 at 9:46 am
a beautiful idea providing that it works in all conditions at the same rate (heat, humidity etc), nonetheless if successful in all conditions, it is a simple wonderful idea.
July 18th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
I love the thought that time becomes something that you can see and touch, something tangible…beautifull!
July 18th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Brilliant. Assuming climactic deferences don’t render it inaccurate I definetly want one. Well done Oscar.
I also appreciate your pwn of bodkin who obviously thought he could be a jerk and get away with not being called out.
July 18th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Ha! Bodkin. You absolute idiot.
Why do you think this is rocket science to make this work? (I gather by the way it already does work in some way).
This is obviously a beautiful and functioning idea. The guys a poet and damn clever.
Oscar – I love the fact that you replied to that fool. Carpet under feet gone.
Give me a kiss.
July 18th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
“Bodkin: If you just knew how many technical advances have been done on papers recently, you will understand that is possible to make it work.
Is just sounds like you are jealous…don’t worry the feeling will go.
Post a link to your ship please, want to see it..”
i would like to see too what Bodkin can do…..ha ha
July 19th, 2009 at 11:59 am
This is really very cool. the only question i’d like to ask is if climatic variations, humidity, extreme heat etc… won’t somehow make this any less accurate provided it works well.
July 19th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
This Oscar Diaz’s mind is really creative. Deserves a lot of respects. I just fill sorry that we haven’t that kind of exhibitions in Russia.
July 20th, 2009 at 8:42 am
That’s awesome! Too bad you can’t collaborate on it!
Ravi
@followwme
July 20th, 2009 at 9:36 am
to everyone who has commented on this page. get some blotting paper. put paper in ink or other fluid. leave. the fluid may well get as far as shown in images 6 and 7 but no further. this is simple science, not jealousy. the atmosphere will dry the ink / fluid before it travels all the way to the end of the strip. therefore it is a bad design for a calender. end of story. no jealousy, no ‘pwn’, just common sense. i, unlike most contributors to this page, am trying to point out that good design is something that beautifully fulfills it’s function or brief. it is not good design to simply imply with a few pictures that you have invented a new type of calender if it does not actually work. if you can provide any sort of proof that this will function accurately across an entire month i will happily grovel for forgiveness. if not then i stand by my comments that you are not a good designer.
July 20th, 2009 at 9:38 am
…but if you forget to put an ink on the first day you have to wait for whole month to have a correct calendar
July 20th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
bodkin: Don’t you think that the designer would be aware of evaporation and do something about it? I can think of a simple and obvious way of overcoming the issue. Oscar already offered to answer your question if you would contact him directly.
July 20th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
@ dejan .. what a briljant comment to end this discussion ! Thanks bro.
July 20th, 2009 at 7:47 pm
If Oscar Diaz can explain how it works, and answer bodkin’s question, then why doesn’t he post the answer here?
Maybe it’s not common sense, but a closer look should hint to people this project can’t actually work as a calendar. Consider: the ink doesn’t travel the same distance for each day (set of numerals) eg: compare “11″, “15″, “21″ and “22″
July 20th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Bodkin, please do the following things: 1, get a life. 2, go back to high school and finish chemistry class. It’s called chromatography — depending on the type of liquid (Oscar didn’t say it was pure octopus ink) and the type of paper, color can move through 30 whole days of surface without drying up. It depends on many factors, but your little “test” with blotting paper and “ink or other fluid” doesn’t prove anything. As a chemist, I know this. As a creative person, I support artists & designers. You, as a hater, pathetically attempt to discredit innovative designs. Someone who has never seen the calendar in person, never asked Oscar questions about it’s design, and yet gets on the internet to spread negativity = bodkin! Try looking on the bright side of things dear, you’ll live longer.
July 20th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
even as the bodkin-entity projects his personal brand of skeptism… (I always enjoy a good barb.. he had me going fer a minute with the toast spaceship and all) I am glad I continued reading. …
As a letterist my own damn self, I find this whole project not wanting AT ALL for mystery and wonder.. speaking of which folks might check Denis Brown’s (Irish calligrapher) website for ink in motion. It is called quillskill.
July 21st, 2009 at 6:57 am
bodkin: Who ever said that the ink had to dry? It could just be a light oil with coloring added, for example. I also doubt that the substrate is simple blotter paper either.
July 21st, 2009 at 7:46 am
Oscar why not explain how it works here where you work is being questioned? I too can’t see it working beyond a couple of days due to the ink/paper combo drying up interferring with the capilllary action required to draw the ink across a substantial distance. I hope like heck that it would work as it is a truly solution to a normally dull thing, a calendar.
July 21st, 2009 at 10:19 am
Hello, since people seems very curious about how it works, I will explain a bit more in detail;
I was inspired by the the capillary action (which is how water moves through plants and trees), and by looking how some people dip partially sugar cubes on the coffee, and wait for the coffee to rise up to their fingers, before dropping the cube in the cup.
The paper is a very very special paper, which is made so the fibers create regular cells . This means that the ink will pass from one cell to the other on a timely manner. Is an expensive paper, but with incredible properties, all thanks to recent developments on the paper manufacturing process.
I put double numbers (apart from the first one) so the surface to fill up is pretty much the same. The ink doesn’t dry because has been modified. There is many types of inks and most contains a shellac to make the ink more shinny, but that make it dry faster too.
Each numbers works also as an ink tank, which means that each number is feed by the previous number and not by the ink bottle, and if you remove the bottle, the ink will continue to move forward for a couple of days until it slowly stops.
That is how ink can get to the end.
Hope this answer some of the questions. Thanks for reading.
Oscar
July 21st, 2009 at 3:35 pm
GREAT IDEA. Even only as a concept. I hope it works and if it does so you should consider selling it. I would buy one for sure!
Enhorabuena, no desveles el secreto y patentalo si de verdad funciona.. Y si sale la venta avisame..!!
GJ
July 21st, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Where’s my kiss?
July 21st, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Oscar,
Thanks for the details about how your design functions. I’m sorry on behalf of all the narrow-minded, jealous haters out there.
Great work.
July 21st, 2009 at 8:19 pm
wow, this is really lovely, so clever but still with the appearance of simplicity, really nice
July 21st, 2009 at 10:04 pm
Hi, Oscar, that’s really neat!! Thanks for sharing it!
July 22nd, 2009 at 12:09 am
This is a lovely design. And Bodkin’s tone does suggest a twinge of jealousy. But with all due respect to Mr. Diaz, I remain skeptical that it could consistently accurately track the date unless the environment were carefully controlled for humidity at least…
July 22nd, 2009 at 9:41 am
There seems to be a senseless need to beat up the feasibility of this project. There are many people working on many problems more scientifically puzzling than this. Whether this works is a matter of calculation, not of possibility. Great concept, Oscar.
Speaking of possibility, there is a curator in the fourth dimension just dying to hang a toast spaceship in his gallery…
July 22nd, 2009 at 10:55 am
I really don’t care if it represents the date accurately. I have a phone and a computer that does that. If I bought it – which I probably would – it was because it ‘kind of’ works. I like the idea – not the accuracy. It’s a decoration, not a cuckoo clock.
July 23rd, 2009 at 3:59 pm
It’s a BEAUTIFUL prototype. And while I’m not in the bodkin camp, I do think it’s very fair to say that *this* specific version of the calendar does not work. Now I’m not saying it’s impossible, but I AM saying that Oscar has not managed to get it to work as of yet. People here are saying that it’s not complicated; but actually, anytime you try to track time, complications arise. For this calendar to actually work, you would have to account for distance for the ink to travel on the substrate and calculate the effects of gravity (while capillary action can seemingly “defeat” gravity, gravity still has it’s effects) as well as calculate the decreased rate of spread when the ink comes to a cross-roads (ie the bowl area of the 4) where the rate would be decreased due to an increased surface area available for coverage (cut a paper towel in half, drop ANY liquid in the middle, and tell me I’m wrong). No “very very special paper” changes that fact. Do you really think it would take the same amount of time to fill a “1″ as it would to fill an “8″? The numbers are not scaled or spaced appropriately enough to account for this.
This calendar is labeled “prototype” on Oscar’s website. Translation: this specific iteration doesn’t work. Which is fine. I’m not slamming it. It’s a beautiful design. But I think a little transparency and integrity is called for when presenting designs on the internet.
Also, since lots of people here don’t seem to know what they’re talking about, please read the REAL definition of chromatography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatography
July 23rd, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Nice commentary Craig.
Whatever – I think it should be pretty simple to make this work quite accurately for say – a week- ish? Thereafer it might not work quite so well, or at all, and then eventually the month passes and you’ll leave it on the wall and tell people that ‘this ink showed me the day of the month as it bled into the paper’.
And the story is basically all that’s needed – as are the photos.
Other’s can concentrate on flying into space (using toast) or just normal spaceships for the good of mankind – some other’s can think a bit about poetry and the world that is here in front of us.
July 23rd, 2009 at 8:52 pm
@ Craig, a little correction , for designers a prototype means that is not in production , not that it doesn’t works. Oscar seems is a designer to me and not a manufacturer of calendars, so yeah is not in production.
Check it :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype
July 24th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Wow, pretty bored of the will it/won’t it argument after reading all that! I propose a dezeen web cam to film the calender, that we can all check on morning noon and night until we are satisfied it works (or at least until Bodkin is)
I like it either way
July 24th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
I’m not here to stir up dissent. And yes, I’m quite aware of what a prototype is. I do it for a living. No need to shake the “design” language book at me. I already have it
All I’m saying is this: If any company (Apple, Nokia, Honda, Boeing, you name it) posted pictures of something that looked really awesome and then wrote a bunch of generic words of how technology makes all this possible, and then it worked “quite accurately for say – a week- ish…” everyone would claim BS!
I’m saying it comes down to honesty and integrity, and I think that’s what Bodkin is trying to say. Anybody can post pictures on the internet of something awesome (including toast spaceships) but if it works semi-decently for a brief period of time, it’s not true Design. It’s a novel idea. I’m just saying “Don’t lie to people and dupe them into believing something works if it doesn’t.” The world comes crashing down when people do that in advertising. This is no different.
July 25th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Hmm… Craig….I’m not sure you can claim to know what ‘true design’ is (is that all the stuff in German industrial design shows? Garlic crushers and taps? I’m pretty sure the world has enough of that fuly functioning – and profoundly boring shiny stuff.).
Could you please define the borders of ‘true design’ and let us know if there is room for opinion? I’m scared that my definition would no longer be in the book.
I think this is a really great piece of ‘true design’. I didn’t actually consider it a prototype (I don’t think things need to be made in their millions to be ‘true design’ either).
If it works for a week – it’s good enough for me. Moreover, I don’t believe that Oscar is misleading anyone – video pending right?
oh –
You can buy fully functioning clocks in Argos :
http://www.argos.co.uk/
but – they’re not as good looking as (the first three days of) this calender.
July 27th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Responding by your paragraphs…
1. Design is not governed by aesthetic alone, or the fact that it functions. The fact that you cite German industrial “boring shiny stuff” as a reference shows we’re not even talking about the same thing, nor are we even remotely on the same page.
2. I used Design with a capital “D.” Which is far different from the little-d design you’re referring to. I admit that it is terrible that we have to differentiate between the two in our profession, but the need is there. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/18/magazine/design-with-a-capital-d.html
3. I, just like you, don’t think that things need to be made in their millions to be “true design.” You’re putting words in my mouth.
4. Then it’s art, not design. If you want to put this on the wall of your bedroom, that’s fine by me. I’m not complaining. You’re missing the entire point that I’ve made during my comments, which is the need for transparency and integrity when presenting designed objects. That’s it. End of story. If you want to argue another point, that’s fine, but I’m not arguing it.
It’s funny, however, how your argument has changed drastically over the course of commentary here. First you said “This is obviously a beautiful and functioning idea. The guys a poet and damn clever.” then it changed to “I really don’t care if it represents the date accurately. I have a phone and a computer that does that.” then changed to “Whatever – I think it should be pretty simple to make this work quite accurately for say – a week- ish?” and then finally you landed on the fact that the first 3 days are enough to get by. Make up your mind. If it’s a wall mural, then it’s a wall mural. If it’s a calendar+clock, then it records and displays the passage of time. A dog is not a cat simply because you wish to call it a cat.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Ink shmink. Clearly this discussion is actually the work of art.
July 28th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Well, well, well I would love to contribute to the debate currently raging here about what letters should be in capitals in deSiGN, however I’m too busy actually doing it not spelling it. The calendar as an exercise is delightful & inspiring, it has given me ideas for future projects & speaking only for myself that is what I look for, for everything else I have spell check!
July 28th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
I think somewhere along the line we lost track of the point of this discussion…which as far as I can tell is some sort of argument about spaceships made of toast. Well. To be honest I would built a spaceship out of bread so that when it takes off it will toast itself all the way to space. Your good Bodkin, real good…but as long as i’m around you’ll always be second best, see?
Ok.
Point one:
This calendar is a beautiful idea.
Point Two:
I reckon it could work, but only after some serious “how do we make this actually work” type thinking…as opposed to the pitiful depth of thought that this project currently displays. This project appears to have stalled at the initial “this looks pretty ” stage and then through some sort of miracle managed to get itself on Dezeen.
Point Three:
Get this to work and I reckon you’ve got a pretty saleable idea.
Point Four:
How about an ink clock?
That should keep you busy whilst I subtely take over the wall-mounted chromatography ink calendar market.
Love to all Dezeen commentors.
July 28th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
A M A Z I N G !!
July 29th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
It’s amazing how quickly some of you trolls are willing to bash something without thinking it through. First off, who cares if it’s not perfect, it’s art, it’s not suppose to be perfect. Second, he’s not out there trying to sell you a swiss timepiece is he? No, it’s a piece of art that happens to be somewhat functional which is much more than you can say for a lot of the other crap people try to pass off as art these days.
That said, if you look at the spacing of the numbers and how they connect to each other, it’s quite obvious that some serious thought went into the way the ink will flow and the timing of it. Again, I doubt it’s perfect but then what is? If you really want to believe it won’t work then how about you put it into a graphics program where you can count the pixels (not perfect but will give you a rough idea of volume of ink needed) for each date (including the connecting line) and see how far off they are from each other. I bet it will be much much closer than you think.
Oscar, I think it’s absolutely great! I can’t wait to see the next iterations of it!
July 29th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
I have skimmed through the comments and don’t want to comment on them…I want to comment on the piece…it’s stunning!
July 29th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
It is kind of weird that Oscar just says it works. The guy may be an artist and a genius, but he most certainly didn’t succeed with a one off prototype. He has to have been working on it for at least a month with at least a couple of iterations. Admittedly, a full month wouldn’t dispel all suspicions, but would make assertions that ‘it only works for a week’ seem pretty dubious. Especially since all the photo evidence now supports the assertion.
July 30th, 2009 at 1:18 am
i guess if it doesn’t end up working as well by the end of the month you could always change the font of the numbers to a thinner or smaller size and see if that speeds it up… that’s assuming it doesn’t work in the first place, which i hope it does.
July 30th, 2009 at 6:18 am
whether is works or not, it’s a beautiful and novel idea
August 1st, 2009 at 10:04 pm
And soooo… what are the parameters of ‘true design’?
Sorry – ‘Design’?
August 3rd, 2009 at 2:37 pm
I’m with Bread Maker. This calendar is a beautiful idea. But especially on his Point Two: “pitiful depth of thought that this project currently displays”
asdfghjkl, go read a book. You obviously haven’t learned anything throughout this discussion.
Craig, stop reading books. You have a doctorate in design philosophy, leave the poor kid alone
August 3rd, 2009 at 7:27 pm
I defy any of the those above to come up with a better design than this that is of ‘pitiful depth’. Please post them on Dezeen, with a link back to this comments page. Go on.
Oscar – congratulations – the plan to get you as the most commented on story for the month is working!
August 4th, 2009 at 11:48 pm
Hey!
I didn’t think it was possible to be heckled by someone who uses smileys.
August 5th, 2009 at 1:42 am
increible, lo quiero YA! solo una pregunta, que pasa con los anyos bisiestos?
August 6th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Thanks Craig for absolutely understanding my point. If this was intended as a piece of art, then I would view it as such and judge it on a different set of criteria to if I am presented with it as a ‘design’ for working calender, which it is not. If you look at my (deliberately provocative) first comment I was not debating the aesthetics, simply the point that this is not a successful ‘design’.
But I’m glad to see it provoked debate and I’m still disappointed with Oscars rather weak response, but that’s a discussion for another day
August 6th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Whoops – think you missed the point there Bodkin.
It’s a design for a working calender not an art work.
A really very good successful design that many people like and don’t have a problem imagining. It’s not a spaceship made of toast, it’s a calender that sucks up ink slowly.
Designers imagine products that utilise existing or new techologies. Engineers and technicians realise these ideas. Contrary to what you say (and Oscar can make this claim as loud as you can deny it) it’s not beyond the realms of belief to make this product function to a degree that would silence any of the above critics. In fact he has already said that it does work – so in fact you are out-right saying he is lying.
Whether or not the calender works is not important and does not determine whether it is a successful design (I believe it does, fully, but I really don’t care if it does or to what degree it does), the beauty of the design is in the idea – the imagining of a product that could (quite easily) exsit (and if we are to believe Oscar it already does exsit).
I believe the inability to see past this is probably a problem that has held back the potential of many designer’s who feel in some way they need to solve every technical aspect of a product before it is a ‘true design’.
I wish I had doctorate in design…
August 10th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
i really like it, it’s good idea
August 10th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Again, asdfghjkl, you’ve missed the entire argument. Let’s rehash this:
You claim it works.
You claim it could work.
You claim it might work.
Then you claim it doesn’t matter if it works.
Then you claim it works and is “A really very good successful design”
Then you claim, once again, it doesn’t matter if it works. But it works.
I think we understand you. And I think we all understand very clearly that this isn’t exactly your field of expertise, nor is writing in the English language. Now listen to what the debate is really about:
I agree, it’s not “beyond the realms of belief to make this product function.” I’ve said that all along. What I’m saying is that it doesn’t work RIGHT NOW, and as such, it is unethical as a designer to present a functioning product that does not function as intended. We would be judging the success of this piece very differently if the initial intentions were different; but when you set out to create a functional piece, you find success when it functions as intended. This is certainly not the first time this product has been attempted (despite what you would like to believe). It’s very fair to say that the reasons why this has proven unsuccessful in the past have landed in Oscar’s lap, and it has (once again) fallen short of its well-meaning intentions. The history of the “design” professions have been plagued by this exact theme; a great idea that cannot be executed. Call it the Toast Spaceship Syndrome or whatever you want. A great designer will foresee these problems and act accordingly. A not-so-great designer will come up with BS at the end. I still maintain that this calendar is beautiful, and that it is a WONDERFUL idea. And that’s where it ends.
August 11th, 2009 at 9:22 am
Craig, do you know the B of the Bang by Thomas Heatherwick?
It was a big explosion of spikes made as a public installation.
Due to engineering problems the spikes started falling off and it’s now been removed.
Does this mean it is no longer a design? That it’s just an idea? Or simply that the technology and engineering was not yet up to the standard of the designer’s imagination?
Heatherwick was not the man that calculated how it would work, but he was the designer. He came up with the design – that he said works – based on what the engineers told him.
You claim that the Ink Calender does not work RIGHT NOW – but have you asked Oscar? Interesting that you would trust Bodkin’s commentary rather than Oscar’s. Have a look what else Bodkin says about eg. the coloured vases posted later on and it might change your point of view.
August 11th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
asdfghjkl,
Thank you for proving my point. “B of the Bang” is art. It was not pretending to be a functional design product. IT SITS THERE. It was an ill-conceived project, whether you’d like to believe it or not. We do not judge “B of the Bang” as a functional design product, but as a sculptural installation that failed and resulted in legal ramifications. See what happens when a “designer” creates something without truly thinking through the execution? It is not incumbent upon the engineers to just figure out how to make something happen if the designer has his head up his tailpipe and is disconnected from the construction process. Judging by how you throw around the word “design,” it’s pretty obvious you have misunderstood what the real responsibilities of a designer are. And please don’t reply back asking for these responsibilities as you tend to do in a discussion; read a book.
A good example of this is Gehry Partners being disconnected from the construction process of the Stata Center, thus resulting in a terribly-executed structure that now sprouts mold and is the center of a lawsuit. I love Frank Gehry, but that project was missing a big conceptual piece: how to make it work.
So thank you for finally proving my point for me. All of the above are what happens when a designer creates something without truly thinking through the execution.
August 12th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
“All of the above are what happens when a designer creates something without truly thinking through the execution.”
Okay – so the quality of a design and whether it works depends wholly on the level of the designer’s understanding of the entire process of the realisation of their original idea. Not how good the people working with them are.
For example when Ron Arad designed his SMS chandelier for Swarovski he must have had a full and complete understanding of programming, scrolling LED systems and telephone technology. No, obviously he didn’t, someone else did all that. He just sketched an idea on a piece of paper.
Does that make it a bad design? No.
Did it work – yes?
Does that just mean that it was a ‘lucky design’? – no.
It’s a good design. The fact that someone made it is a bonus – for some people this validates the original idea, for me the oringal idea would have been enough.
Controversial maybe, but I believe that the realisation of an idea has little or nothing to do with design, and the quality of a design or even an idea. The quality of an idea always comes first. This may be a different point of view as to the role of a designer in the world.
(By the way did anyone read Bodkin’s commentary on Diaz’s RGB vases? It’s quite hilarious).
August 13th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Oh – and B of the Bang – the ‘art’ didn’t fail, the engineering failed, these are seperate and independent parts of the project.
Craig, you state quite clearly that the designer has responsibilities, but you don’t dare list them here. Perhaps you could list one or two to get us started? As I don’t believe that they have any – beyond those of normal human existence.
August 16th, 2009 at 11:14 am
The amazing thing is how the guys that are trying to take the project down, don’t even give one reason why the calendar doesn’t work. They just say it doesn’t work but no argument for it. Now, if you pretend that you know everything you should give at least one reason, isn’t it??
It seems like some people have reach the limit of their imagination.
August 18th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Does it really keep track of the date?
If so, it’s marvellous! So expressive and emotional!
August 25th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
it amuses me that asdfghjkl keeps referring to my comments on the RGB vases as the validation for his / her argument. the vases stack to make a colour and there is a narrative to explain that this is interesting because it is a juxtaposition of a traditionally crafted material and the use of a computer to calculate a particular colour.
that in itself would suit me down to the ground but then why insist on calling them vases? why not explain what is particular about the colour and why not explain why you would want to stack vases (i don’t, i usually fill them with things, usually flowers, occasionally water and coloured stones if i’m feeling crazy). if they were presented as a simple object of interest (you can believe the narrative if you want) then i wouldn’t care one way or another but if you try and sell me some BS about them having function as well then you press my big red ’stop talking nonsense’ button.
i find oscars designs to be interesting studies in themselves but feel they lack depth when it comes to the crunch. asdfghjkl obviously takes this quite personally for some reason which lends itself to interesting discussions but does nothing to add depth to oscars work.
August 26th, 2009 at 8:14 am
it is great concept and thise is inspiring me.
August 26th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Ha – Bodkin!
Why are you trying to rationalise your desire to write totally negative and totally unnecessary comments for their own sake?
Come on be honest, you’re just a hater trying to look like a (failed) critic.
Nobody cares if you can’t put flowers in a vase.
Nobody cares if you don’t normally stack them.
There is no need to write these things, but you do. This doesn’t make you intelligent or insightful – it simply places you in the category of ‘hater’.
Oscar was right in saying that you were simply jealous – and his refusal to sink to your level of commentary is an affirmation of your lack of intelligence. Thank God there are losers like me who enjoying arguing with numpties like you.
Sorry, but I’m just gonna push your dumb ol’ big red ’stop talking nonsense’ button.
….and tell you to capitalise your ‘i’ in future correspondence.
August 27th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
my wife cares if you can’t put flowers in a vase and i care if calenders don’t tell you what day it is. is this really hate?
if hate is not liking someone trying to present something that does not work then i embrace your description. otherwise you may need to consult a dictionary.
i can’t wait to present my next architectural scheme to my clients on your basis of what makes a good design, i’m sure they’ll be most pleased when the roof leaks, the stairs don’t go up and the doors won’t open. at least it will look nice and we can all congratulate ourselves on how good the design was
August 27th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
No Bodkin… no…. go to the park… look at some trees… breath in some beauty and life… travel…. make love like a wild horse… eat manchega in the moonlight….
…and fix the shift button on your computer – your ‘i’ is still lower case.
August 27th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
… or perhaps you should consult a dictionary.
August 28th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
its bodkin with a little ‘b’
August 30th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
yes – I guessed it was a little ‘b’.
September 7th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
What the hell… I just realised Craig was heckling me saying that ‘this is clearly not your field’…. ha ha ha ha ha… who the hell is he kidding… this is Dezeen! He’s reading and commenting on a website that comes as close to the National Enquirer as design can go… so yes – this is my ‘field’ – mud slinging – and he’s welcome to sit and read it too. How ivory can your tower get?! Get the German garlic crushers out, per-lease.
September 30th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
How does ink know which month has 30 or 31 day, and does it recognize “February”- 28 days, and every transgress year?
November 6th, 2009 at 9:56 am
so creative! it would be funny if ink is ran out before it reaches last day of month. haha