Figure 1 is a camera I designed for the blind people, Mer camera and the name Mer is inspired from the word memory. The design concept of this camera is to hope that it can let the blind people enjoy the happiness of taking photos and share photos as normal people. For this blog I would like to share some ideas that how the functionality and design concept play an important role in the “good taste (Christoforidou et al., 2012)” of products in some way by comparing with my personal work Mer camera and the Ergorapido designed by Łukasz Jemioł (figure 2).
First of all, I would like to give a brief concept of Mer camera. When I designed this camera, I started by analyzing the general reasons why normal people use and own a camera. Generally speaking, there are two reasons. The first one is to record some precious moments in life, or to create some impressive images in the form of photography art. One day in the future the photos can help people recall the scene at that time, or use photos to share their own visual feelings with others. That is the first reason, but another reason to use and own a camera is a little different.
Another reason is some people want to achieve a kind of lifestyle by having a camera in their life. In other word, the functionalities of camera just a small part of the reason why they own a camera, they’re more concerned on what it means to own a camera. It could be a lifestyle of being that loves to travel and live, or it could be people who want to show their concern for the beauty of life. As a conclusion, they purchase cameras to cater for their self-satisfaction. They purchase for the meaning behind the objects. The yoga industry is a good example, As Juliana Luna Mora mentioned in the article “yoga is a multisensory luxury experience, providing consumers with achievement of both tangible and intangible physical, mental and spiritual individual needs and aspirations (Juliana, 2018).”
What’s more, Mer camera is completely focus on the function. More specifically, figure 1 the switch located on the top of the camera, and when you turn on the switch, there will be a slight sound and a shaking as the feedback. The switch is designed move left or right only. It allows the blind people to better understand whether the camera is on or off. Furthermore, The Braille next to the buttons can help blind people understand the function of each button more quickly. For instance, if a blind person just got the new camera, he might want to take a try right away. Then the Braille can help him understand the function of each button immediately without spending a lot of time reading the introduction first. Also, blind people cannot use the icons to locate the key information they want quickly, they may often need to read the instruction from the very beginning to find the information they need. Therefore, giving some key buttons with Braille can save their time to a certain extent. For the blind people, functionality is their main consideration. They also have their own “good taste” for the products, so is this camera a good taste or bad taste for the blind people? Will it feel the same as the “Bling” product we saw? Compared to the Ergorapido, “Electrolux has developed a model of a handheld vacuum cleaner, the Ergorapido, in a limited edition designed by Łukasz Jemioł, whose external shape is the same as the original but it is encrusted with approximately 4,000 Swarovski crystals (Design You Trust, 2011).” In my opinion, the Ergorapido is a very good example of bling product, “Bling is obvious, straight to the point, and easy to recognize. A bling product shouts out its message: bigger is better, more is better, glitzier is better (Christoforidou and Olander , 2009).” So when we want to judge if the Ergorapido is “good taste”, we cannot just focus on its functionality, but from its main concept when it is designed which is obvious, more is better and glitzier is better. It is the same as blind people, in order to figure out if a product meets the “good taste”, we cannot just think of a product from one side, whether from its function or how many diamonds it has. According to Lisbeth Svengren Holm, “Consequently, it is not appropriate to simply express a taste-related opinion; one must also show that the thoughts behind that opinion are adequate to count as an expression of taste. It requires a legitimization to be judged as a competent arbiter (Christoforidou et al., 2012).” And “Referring to Plato, Brunius (1961) states that beauty in objects implies partaking of the truly beautiful, that is, the form or the idea of beauty (Christoforidou et al., 2012).” The meaning behind a product is an important role in its value. Now for Mer camera how much you will value its functions and how much you will value its concept?
REFERENCE
- Christoforidou, D., Olander, E., Warell, A. and Holm, L. (2012). Good Taste vs. Good Design: A Tug of War in the Light of Bling. The Design Journal, 15(2), pp.185-202.
- Christoforidou, D. and Olander, E (2008a). ‘Bling bling and how its message captures our interest – or is bling bling as tasteless as the design elite find it?’ Nordcode 7th Seminar: Paradoxes within Design Research – Mechanisms and Contradictions, Lund, Sweden, 28–30 May 2008.
- Design You Trust (2011). ‘€15,000 haute couture vacuum cleaner’.Design You Trust [online]. Available at: http://designyoutrust.com/2010/07/06/e15000-haute-couture-vacuum-cleaner
- Juliana, M. (2018). THE YOGA INDUSTRY: A CONSCIOUS LUXURY EXPERIENCE IN THE TRANSFORMATION ECONOMY. PhD Candidate and Teaching Associate. Monash University.
Design Research 
A nice design practice comparison between the Mer camera and the Ergorapido handheld vacuum cleaner to question the Mer camera is it good or bad taste for blind people. I understand you used the bling product which is handheld vacuum cleaner as an example to show we need to consider both sides when we think for a product as good taste which is its function and its thoughts or ideas behind the product to seems like its another value that people will purchase it.
Moreover, you have told that your design the Mer camera which is a functional product for blind people because they can easily to use in a way of braille instead of figuring out the instruction. I could be told that you stand for “the blind people, functionality is their main consideration.” However, I think maybe the main reason why they purchase a camera could be “the another reason” that you have already written in the third paragraph which is the value behind the camera, to achieve a lifestyle and self-satisfaction as normal people. Despite the blind people purchase the Mer camera you design which is convenient for them to use, they still can not recognize what is the photo about, what kind of the visual expression that shows in the photo, they only enjoy the process of taking photos rather than see the photo itself. Nonetheless, the result for them is the same between the Mer camera and the normal camera.
In addition, both objects have obviously shown the function in appearance, while we could not see the invisible value on the camera but bling does. So, I think that is a difference between these two objects, perhaps it could be a point to include in your blog to improve the connection of the Mer camera and the vacuum cleaner stronger.
At last, you questioned the value of the function and concept of the Mer camera. In my opinion, it gives an amazing opportunity to blind people have the convenient way for their photography experience while its concept value behind the product is not a bit different as a normal camera. If the decision makes by blind people, they may find a slightly different way to consider the Mer camera as good or bad taste. Perhaps, they would define another important value behind the camera.
By the way, a great simple black functional design camera!
LikeLike
I really liked the fact that you compared an object with a more physical visual sense of ‘bling’ with a product with bling associated with the meaning and functionality of the product. The bling in the vacuum cleaner seems more straight forward in terms of its appearance whereas the the camera requires a bit more background information and the intentions of the camera in order to understand the value of it. A great comparison with simple products that most of us will understand, as the base requirements of the camera and vacuum are widely known, so the communication of the concept you are trying to discuss is a lot easier to grasp and understand.
In my blog, I wrote about how the functionality of the product can sometimes not be affected by the visual upgrades made to it by the designer, and gave an example of the Apple Watch Hermes edition, where the added luxury of the product doesn’t affect the use of the product, and I can see the correlation between my ideas discuss and yours with the bling alluded to the vacuum cleaner. Give that a read if you’re interested in the topic.
LikeLike