A loosely moderated place to ask open ended questions
If your post is
- Open ended
- Not offensive
- Not regarding lemmy support (c/lemmy_support)
- not ad nauseam inducing (please make sure its a question that would be new to most members)
it’s welcome here!
- 0 users online
- 15 users / day
- 32 users / week
- 138 users / month
- 411 users / 6 months
- 19 subscribers
- 574 Posts
- 4.85K Comments
Anytime you enter a product into mass-production, you have to make compromises on the form - and the function in marginal ways - of your design. some shapes cannot be machined by CNC systems, parts can get stuck in molds if you design overhangs in them, etc. There are always a collection of limitations for any given manufacturing method.
This is a big reason why design flaws pop up on various products. worked great in the prototype, but tweaks ended up less effective to work on a factory line.
You can even get forced into certain manufacturing methods due to your design needing to meet certain requirements for its function (being affordable, having to withstand extreme stress or temperature, etc.)
When the first impression counts more than the naked truth.
Keep stackin those joints amigo.
By the way, I meant is as in, it is more important to focus on getting the ‘form’ right rather than prioritizing carrying heavier weights or pushing the limits of the body to try to progress faster. Safety comes first!
That’s true. Much better to have clean form with 10% less weight.
Plus, in the long term, it accelerates the progression to heavier weight (especially with the avoidance of injuries, like you said).
If it is art.
deleted by creator
To be fair, if form and function are the same, then this entire question is tautological. (which is a valid perspective)
You could say that both are examples of function, because artistic beauty has a functional purpose (to enhance free expression, and emotional impact).
And that is the frivolity of words… They are mostly redundant (and exist for the beauty of form (which is a function)).