First, the link for the 25 techniques is here now: http://personalexcellence.co/blog/25-brainstorming-techniques/
- 10,000 years ago.
- Items aren’t designed so much as made directly. Stone tools are made interactively, based on how the rock feels.
- With clothing, this could be done as an interactive sculpture, where the item is pulled and pushed into shape, maybe with touch interaction to work with the textile patterns. In the same way that a master stoneworker developed a vocabulary of hand techniques, the user could use different kinds of contacts to produce analogous clothing effects. I can see gestures that translate to stitching, etc.
- 1,000 years ago
- What you wore reflected your station in life and your cohort. Tunics, belts, trousers. Elites imported silk and cotton. Embroidery and colored trim are typical decorations. Around 800 years ago, fashion began, and motifs start to arise. If you are royalty or a courtesan, your dress also reflects your station, but is determined by subject matter experts as to what you should wear for a particular occasion.
- An expert system that “designs” a working outfit based on what’s happening in the local social context, national and international fashion and general rules of esthetics could be an analogue here.
- 100 years ago
- Around 1870-1950, mass production is well established, so there is a large amount of similar items (think Sears Roebuck). At the same time, there is an upscale market for custom items that are enabled by high quality textiles and skilled tailors and seamstresses. In this case, fashion is driven more by what the clothing designer/fabricator can do with the available material and the local fashion. A somewhat theatrical example of this is the curtain dress from Gone With the Wind.
- An expert with a knowledge of how to best exploit materials is implementable. Developing the context for the expertise is probably tricky, but would have an implicit social/crowdsourced component. The material and capabilities would probably change significantly, so printer-specific knowledge would be critical.
- 10 years ago
- Global market and information flows are well established. H&M and similar stores start the IKEA-ification of clothing. Price for low-end fashion collapses. Quality deteriorates to items that can be worn once or twice before they disintegrate. Timeframe from design to retail to remainder bin can be measured in weeks. Shopping is done in stores and online. Designers are more directly connected to their customers through social media.
- 3D printing probably just extends this, but tightens up the loop and moves the profit model over to IP rather than sales of merchandise.
- The idea of clothing that is explicitly designed for one use is very possible, and in fact could be designed to change over time in interesting and unique ways, adding a performance attribute to the clothing as it crumbles through the day.
- 10 years from now
- This is probably the period of time the concept is aimed at. Not sure what to put here.
- 100 years from now.
- Clothing and biology merge. The trend that started with surgical augmentation (well, haircuts, probably) goes to the endpoint. Clothing is alive and intelligent. It may or may not be a (temporary? manipulateable?) part of our bodies. Interestingly, there is a TED talk on this: http://youtu.be/3p3-vl9VFYU.
- 1,000 years from now.
- We are patterns in computers. Because we have a biological heritage, I’m assuming that we still want to interact based on what we currently call our senses. Change can be instant though, and conceivably boundless within the (digital?) ecosystem. I wonder though if after some experimentation with extremely rapid shifting “realities” that we prefer a more “human” fashion timescale. Paradoxically, the cheapest things to make will be those virtual items that can be anything. The truly rare items may be items that are “handmade” in the “real world”. Which kind of implies that we go back to stone knives and bearskins.
Mind Map (built using Freemind)
- It hasn’t been done this way before
- Disguise it
- Make it attractive
- The concepts behind it are kind of tricky
- Hide the concepts completely
- Simplify the concepts
- Make the concepts cool
- It may not make a “finished” product
- Add simple design tools
- Automatically finish product using heuristics.
- Requires making “genomes” for every component that can be used
- Crowdsource (voluntary, like KML files. This means that there is a “Genome designer’s tool like sketchup?)
- Hire designers
- Requires tools to build usable genomes
- Make simple tools for everyone
- Make sophisticated tools for power users
- Sold (Adobe)