Car design is harder than I had thought... help please

nice !!

that issue also had a good tribute to Chuck Jordan,GM VP Design

 

too funny!

i'm just going through and making a 'first buy' list of issues, i'll check that one out


http://carstylingmag.com/

in this article, i found it interesting that toyota says that a single design would have to go through as many as 100 executives, before being given a go ahead

 

i guess I'm amazed they have 100 execs that review the designs

 

The main software used throughout the industry is Alias. I think every company uses it to some extent. I have not seen that Rhino edition to know how useful it is but Rhino was developed by a couple of ex Alias guys and works basically the same. Most surfacing softwares use the same principles, they just have different buttons. So learning Rhino is not a bad stepping stone, and depending on what you use it for, it is a perfectly good tool in it's own right.

 

they are a huge corporate entity ...how many layers of managment would a typcial GM design have to pass through, approximately?

thanks John ....for my own use, i'm learning sketchbook right now, but for 3D i want to be able and take a design of mine (from profile views) and create a 3D rendering that i can then turn for any perspective, skin & set into background(s) ...for efficiency i want to focus my learning/investment into one program vs. several

 

I think the best way to use 3D in the designers process, is to use it to create very rough (simplified) proportion models which can be used as underlays for sketching. This lets you develop a nice proportion and maintain the same proportions through multiple views and sketches. Creating nice quality models takes way too much time (and experience) to be effectively used in a typical design process. Alias or Rhino will work great for this though Alias would have better shading/rendering capabilities. Sketchbook was developed by Alias and comes free with the purchase of Alias software, and there are some added features when working between the two, but Alias costs substantially more then Rhino.

 

you mean as a frame work? yes, i do something like that now, but more lowtech, a basic sketch then scanned and used underneath to sketch up as many variations as i want
i'm meaning more for once i have gone through that process, and am ready to render much nicer illustrations digitally
i have sketchbook now, and it's proving good to learn with, perhaps is anice stepping stone for me from manual sketching to 3d
i havent used p-shop much, but i know some amazing illustrations can come from it
is alias similar in that way, or more geared for industrial (cad/cam) type purposes?
i see some illustrations done in a seemingly short turn around time, and that's what i want to get to, for example: http://images.localmotors.com/user_images/353857.jpg
i recognize i have a lot of time to invest yet to get to that point, which is why i'm looking closely at which program to invest in before i get to far along
thanks

 

After 408 posts in this thread, couldn't a moderator be so kind as to add an "er" to
the word "hard" in the subject line? I mean really....



Jedi

 

but then it might get moved to the backroom lounge!

 

Very cool!

 

Very cool!

 

i know lots of threads on this, but seems appropriate to bookmark here

RIP ~ Sergio Pininfarina 1926 - 2012
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

here is a topic for discussion, i will start carefully, so as to not sound racist in any manner

asian style influence of car design!?

the pacific asian & china markets are huge, and there seems (?) to be a large portion of design students influx too ...i comfortably admit, i am an average white male minority ...so this is simply a matter of population percentages

we can see a particular style, in the same manner there is an american style, an italian style, a french style, etc

i can see the influence in mercedes most recents cars, and other non-asian manufacturers are surely to follow suite ...it understand that certain demographic likes the design styling, which tends to be more ornate, lots & lots of body lines, even a certain cartoon/anime quality sometimes

...but i do also see non-asian designers following in the "cool anime" style, kind of like how you see white kid hip-hop wanna-bes LOL

i do understand that the makers will follow the market demand ...i'll say i'm not entirely a huge fan of the particular styling always ...but i understand the market forces involved ...but does being popular (trend) necessarily make it good design? or is the fact that it is popular make it good design?

what i've witnessed is how asian influence segments can tend to eventually overrun thier markets ...i don't find this is spoken of openly anywhere, maybe in an attempt not to potentially offend, but it's there, so i figure why not discuss it

don't take me wrong, as i am all for promoting one's own particular gender or ethnic group ...these are just my observations

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlbmzmT_8t0&feature=related[/ame]

 

Interesting video that I hadn't seen.It's like a recruiting video for Korean students to attend ACCD.So far the

classes I've taught have been made up of @ 50% Korean students.

Your comments /questions however have been around since the car design profession began.Designers have

always been curious about what makes an "American" design V a "German" design,V a "Japanese design.But with

the advent of the internet,and the globalization of design,those lines are getting more blurry with each new

design. Prospective design students pretty much attend the same 20 or so schools worldwide,and the net provides

instant access to what everyone else around the globe is up to,in real time.

But I personally don't think,to your point it is an ethnic phenomenon but rather a cultural exposure phenomenon. Just like is

often pointed out,most car junkies relate the best to the cars of their youth.Witness the current nostalgia for '60's muscle

cars.The Baby-boomers are now reaching an age where they have the disposable income to finally buy the cars that they

considered were so cool when they were young. I think that the young aspiring designers of today were brought up with the

influence of videogames,and Anime,and Saturday morning cartoons.That is their reference point for form & surface

development.It may seem busy & fussy to someone like myself that has a totally different reference POV.The classics

from the '30's were the cars that were often cited as design benchmarks when I was a student.Today,the students have very

little regard for those '30's cars.Just a different POV from what they know & what influenced them.But rather than force my or

someone else's POV on the students,I would rather they develop their own style & POV.That's the only way anything new will

come about,IMO.

But there are always trends and fads that come and go in any design occupation.Good/great design however is what always stands out

from all the other stuff that hits the streets.But I believe that the days of very strong "nationalistic" design I.E. German,American,Japanese,

Italian,design are slowly coming to an end.Look at any new Mercedes and I think you'll see what I mean.Do MB cars really look

"German"anymore?It's all Global now,design & sell in Berlin,Milan,Tokyo,Beijing,LA,Soul,San Paulo.As tastes converge,so will design.The

world has gotten so much smaller.Where I used to like to say that "one size fits none"...........now,maybe that observation is not quite

correct.Although French cars always seem to look French

Just for fun Google image the cars from the Beijing or Shanghai auto shows.There are some pretty wacky looking design solutions.But

that is from a Westerner's eyes.But the designers that did those cars relied on their background and their own sense of what is appropriate

for their market.As the Chinese mfg. become more globally focused,we'll see if their design vocabulary starts to coincide with the design

vocabulary of the "West".The Chinese don't have their own historical reference POV for automotive form development.Whether or not they

develop their own unique style,or adopt those of the rest of the world remains to be seen.But just like Japan sent many of their designers

to the US in the '70'-'90's,and the Koreans are doing the same now,I expect the Chinese to have their designers educated in the "Western"

schools as well.That's what makes the car business so damn entertaining IMO.Never a dull moment!

All this is just one person's opinion,no more ,no less.Time will tell.

 

I am going to second the theme of John's response. Convergence of world wide markets and the same limited sources of training for the professionals. All the professionals do generally look at all the same things, go to the same shows and read the same professional publications. When in mass market products, and especially for global market considerations, it is difficult to get too far afield from the basic sensibilities.

In limited run "halo" cars it is possible to make more nationalistic type cars. They will never have big runs and are known to have limited appeal. At Chrysler Prowler never needed to appeal to worldwide markets as a good example. Some of the Japanese cars that have been done were pretty much domestic only; retro to their own market's history.

If one wants to look at the "German Look" as an idea then consider what happened when J. Mays went to Ford. He immediately started to make Ford's become Audi like across the board. The first Lexus 400 sedan was a blatant iteration of trying to be a Mercedes language; they wanted an instant credibility in that market segement.

Unit volume does not necessarily equate to good design. Look at the second generation Chevy Monte Carlo for that (the one with the fat heavily scultured fender bulges). It may have been Kip Wasenko talking about the challenge of designing the 3rd generation. All the designers hated the 2nd but had to argue against the 1.5 mil sales that "go for baroque" styling had achieved.

The ability to afford complex tooling and pressing operations may have more to do with some of the differences of nationalistic design themes through the 1950s and part of the 1960s. The US manufacturers had the money and justifying sales volumes to employ complexity that others could not get to. When we look at the Italian exotics then realize that they were limited production and since they were hand beaten they could achieve shapes that that would have been way too difficult for pressing.

In an old Style Auto from around 1970 Walter Gotschke did an article (with illustrations) on the historical 1950s and 1960s European versus American approach to sedan design. The proposition was that the American approach was to design thematically with forms going through the entire car. The Europeans instead were more prone to take the 3 boxes and then locally shape a nose and tail. Now we should also recognize that physical size does allow mutating shapes to play out while the small cars do not. For proof of this look at some of the 1950s Europeans that tried to apply American styles - not enough surface areas to resolve the shapes and the proportions then become highly forced.

Jeff

 

+1 Jeff
that 2nd gen Monte Carlo was beyond ugly............and it sold like crazy.....go figure..never underestimate the taste of the buying public

talk about a tire to body relationship gone awry :0

 

That was what Kip said was so hard to argue with the marketing and sales guys over. With that high of sales volume the non-design folks kept wanting more of the same while design kept seeing the 2nd generation car as one of the most hideous creations in Mitchell's declining years.

I did always find the 1st generation Monte pretty nice but what they did to make the 2nd a sad wonderment of why that was the logical extension. The Grand Prix and the Grand Am were so much nicer looking.

Jeff

 

I'm going to see Kip today...........i'll remind him about the Monte

 

Kip visited us one time at the new campus. He was in town doing wind tunnel work at Cal Tech.

Question for him: When he did the 2 rotor Corvette was Palmer also working on the project? I do not remember any renderings or sketches by Jerry in the published work. For the 4-rotor that was seemingly all Jerry for the exterior; in spite of the one rendering by Stemple - the rendeirng with Stemple's wall paper from his house.

Jeff

 

I'll verify it later today,but it 's my understanding that the 2 Rotor Corvette was Kip,Dick Finegan,and IIRC Dick Ruzzin. Palmer wasn't in on the 2 Rotor.Look at Car Styling #6 for the sketch development.

Kip has always been adamant that during that period,Mitchell designed all the Corvettes. The guys in the studio just did the sketches (wallpaper) .... per Bill's direction.

Re: the 4 Rotor/AeroVette,the Semple rendering came after the car was done as was often time the case.Tom was probably one of the best renderers/illustrators at GM at the time.He was my boss in Olds for awhile,then he quit & went to Nissan with Hirschberg. Tom is an awesome talent.His full size airbrush renderings were the stuff of legends.I was able to learn so much from Tom & was sorry to see him leave.

 

With the 4 Rotor heard that Jordan did not want the pointed nose (look at the development clays) but that Mitchell ordered that last adjustment.

The 2 Rotor also had a nice story in Style Auto - thinking it was #35 or 36; one of the last ones published.

So what studios were the 2-rotor and 4-rotor done in? Was Palmer running the Corvette, Camaro and Monza studios at the time? Which one was Kip in? Was the 4-rotor a one-off Advanced assignment?

Of more recent times I have been seeing reports that the 4 rotor design (with the regular V8 Aerovette iteration) was really headed for production. At the time of the Aerovette just figured that the V8 installation was just because they loved the car too much to let it not be a usable prototype. What is the story on the productionizing? Were the Jordan trick bi-fold doors going to be replaced with normal? Or is all this productionizing a new storyline developed after the fact?

Jeff

 

true, i don't personally think the style comes as an ethnic but cultural, as with any ...as you say 'a french car will always look french'
it's interesting to me to discuss ideas and observations ....design is primarily visual, but in context by conversation, perhaps why i really enjoy reading or hearing designers insights

i personally think we're still a ways off from a singlular global style ...and i for one am quite happy for that, i like the variety ...i want to see italian style, and western style, and asian influence styling!
the fact is we can see the differences, even if we can't always explain them

i like that a dodge 300 looks american, that a GTR looks japanese, that a mercedes, um, crap!

the current mercedes range is a great example, it certainly isn't teutonic styling as we've come use to ...to my eyes it has a strong asian influence, with some anime character styling , switch-back line, etc. ...and that 'aggressive' car look too
above the merc pic, is a kia & hyundai

another interesting phenomenon i observe, is how difficult it seems to be for asain car makers have in creating a consistant, recognizable, repeatable brand look ...lexus does now, but it took them a while ...even toyota IMO

hyundai seems to go it's own direction now, which is a good thing IMO ...but it sure fits my "asian" influence design parameters

it's funny you guys bring up the monte carlo ...my dad had one, copper color (almost just like the one in pic) ...i LOVED that car as a kid!

looking at it, Jeff's comments on the volume/size makes sense ...you simply couldn't accomplish the same contours over a short body length ...the ratio of height/length/width are very disimilar

more to think about, hmm?
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Your dad's Monte Carlo was the first generation. I liked that one. It had style without being grotesque in the manner with which it achieved it. Open the hood to see the extreme distance from the nose to the front of the engine and the amount of fan shrouding to the radiator, especially with the small block.

Hundai has done a lot of making sure that their cars mimick designs from other cars. For someone wanting to build credibility it may not be an illconsidered approach even though it is not a purist path.

Globalism in 4 seat cars is certainly prevalent. The package certainly drives a majority of the basic proportions. Conservative corporate management plays a huge part too; these are monstrous financial investments and marketplace failures, or even severe underperformance, can be cripling to a company. This then makes it even more impressive these days when there is a high volume car that does break the mold on its look. The real corporate decision makers are accepting the risk of not being safe.

Some companies are more risk adverse while others are, in comparision, willing to be more aggressive. Part of this has to do with the question of to what extent they are willing to compromise a package to achieve a look. The MB CLS made that choice in the back seat to get the roofline. The CTS was approved while (apparently) accepting that alienating some potential buyers was acceptable.

American designs have generally become less "American". The surface area has gone down from that in the 60s to mid 1970s and the idea of big fat door cross sections that allowed lots of surfacing is part of that too. This is also a reflection of the designers coming up through the ranks from Art Center and CCS. We were in favor of Giugaro with the thin sections and the abandonment of the heavy sculpturing that had been part of the American idiom.

The Italians can do really wonderful sometimes. The will make compromises to get the look (see some of the Alfa sedans). The French will do unique - don't understand why, seemingly they do it just to prove who they aren't. My take is that the Japanese are generally conservative anyway and rarely will, or have any real intention of leading in design. Besides they are filled with American and/or American trained designers.

When GM was at its design height a major contributor to this was its ability to force engineering and manufacturing to come up with the solutions needed to achieve the design as intended. If this is not pushed for then design reverts back to similar solutions and constraints like everyone else.

John, suspect you could talk about what it took to get the Z stamp for the fender vent on the 2nd generation CTS as a case study of design versus the "nay sayers".

Jeff

 

ah, you guys meant this one ...not as nice i admit, much longer fenders, but it's got those right GT coupe proportions, but the whole body seems set really high off the wheel arches ...there certainly were many places available for stashing a body! ...there were worse styled cars IMO i always thought it looked better than the cordoba
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login