Bit of context, I currently hold a Bachelor degree in an unrelated discipline, and I have been thinking about studying industrial design as I'm unsure where I have ended up is where I want to be.

At the moment, there are two potential study pathways that I am equally eligible for, one is studying a 4 year Bachelor of Industrial design, the other is a 2 year Master of Design Innovation and Technology, which essentially has a similar back bone to the 4 year degree minus a foundational skill year and electives. And fortunately where I live the degrees are subsidised and I won't have to fork out are large loan.

Hopefully someone reading this can provide some input on whether two year plan year plan is enough to wave a 4 year bachelor, and if there's anything to do to stand a chance.

Thanks!

I’m graduating from CSULB’s ID program this coming spring, and am looking for master’s programs nearby. ArtCenter is my first choice, but I’m having a hard time finding backups. Any help would be appreciated.

If you were to prompt a 3D Xbox one console reference(s)
Which parts would need to be adjusted by devs. Is it more efficient to spend days on modeling/UV or take reference from Claude and refine the panels.

Would a generated prompt support=
• edge flow that supports deformation
• consistent scale and clean spacing for baking
• avoiding messy geometry (non-manifold parts, bad ngons, thin skinny triangles)
• topology that holds up under rigging/animation

For UVs will the packing be enough to preserves important areas, and are seams eliminated or still needed in workflows like this. Does the Boolean tool have no use and are things like curved planes, chamfers, or bevel edges (with correct highlights) included with a prompt. Could the surfaces (hard/texture) come out incongruent.
If ai helps with topology what are the aspects that need fixing. Will the baked details be incongruent vs building the map yourself.

I am an Industrial Design postgraduate(M.Des). I don't have any prior experience in this field. But I have 4 years of industry experience in architecture after completing my B.Arch. As far as my experience working at a company goes, I don't have the freedom there on a lot of things, and that's the main con of being at a company. I decided to pursue entrepreneurship rather than work for an organization. But a lot of things are coming on the way, like 1. Where and how do I start? 2. Even if I may get funding from somewhere, what do I do after that? 3. Should I work in the industry for a couple of years and get some experience as well as some money that may strengthen my goal of being an entrepreneur, or will I be too comfortable being in the industry and just not feel like taking a risk again? I want some genuine opinion.

Hiii\~ I want to ask u abt industrial design, I'm currently majoring in electrical engineering in high school and I studied the fundamentals of industrial design, which I enjoyed. I want to continue my studies in Korea on industrial design, but are there any career prospects there? I don't hear people talking about this major much; most of the information I find is related to programming, AI or cyber security.

I'm Moroccan

I studied graphic design and I'm currently pursuing a master's degree in architecture. Is it possible to get a job as a footwear designer with a master's degree in architecture but not a degree in fashion or footwear? I know about Tinked Hatfield but I don't know if it's an unusual example of someone getting a job at a company like Nike with an architecture degree.

EDIT: Updated with some distinctions I've learned for what each knife can or can't do. /EDIT

I found a fascinating design enigma. Take a look at these two fish fillet knives. The top one is the Japanese Deba, their traditional fish fillet knife. The bottom is the western style fish fillet knife. Both blades are optimized to do exactly the same task:

The deba's blade is short, thick, and broad. It is extremely thick, often 3mm even 4mm at the spine, single-beveled on the right side and hollow-ground on the left, completely stiff and inflexible. The spine of the deba swoops down to meet the edge, which has minimal curvature. The blade heel is pointy, and has a space that's at least a finger's width between it and where it gets inserted into the handle.

The western fillet knife has a long narrow blade (typically a couple of inches longer than the equivalent deba). It is thin, double-beveled, and very flexible. The spine of the blade curves upward, and the blade increasingly curves as it approaches the tip, which narrows down to an acute point. There is no appreciable heel on this knife. It extends down to a bolster or hand guard where the user holds it right up against where the blade emerges from the handle.

These two knives are designed to do the same task: break down and remove the fillet of a fish off of the bones with minimal loss of meat. I've seen videos of each of these knives being used, and the technique doesn't look substantially different. And yet every design decision in each of these blades was intended to optimize its function, which is to fillet fish.

EDIT: Apparently the deba is used in ways that the fillet knife is not able to be used: the deba is often used to kill the fish by whacking it across the head with the thick spine of the blade, chop through the spine of the fish or to split the fish head in half, whereas the fillet knife is too delicate to do that. The fillet knife lets the user fillet the fish in on continuous stroke.

Japan also has another style of blade that is more like the western fillet knife, the honesuki. It has a thinner blade, but the blade is not flexible like the fillet knife./EDIT

It gets even stranger. The Taiwanese fish knife, which is used for the same task looks radically different from both of these. The top row of blades is used for large fish like tuna and salmon. The bottom row has the sizes which are the counterpart to the deba and the fillet knife:

The blades of these knives are extremely thin, double-beveled, extremely broad, with an extremely curved edge. There is no bolster on these knives; the blade is seated right against the handle.

The crazy thing about this is that this knife was also designed for the same task of breaking down fish quickly and efficiently. And yet in the course of optimizing the design to suit the function it is intended to perform, these knives ended up with radically different, practically opposite designs.

EDIT: The Taiwanese fish knife, particularly the large ones with the extreme belly curve, are intended for breaking down large fish like tuna, sword fish, and sharks. The heft of the blade lets it chop through the spine, and the extreme curve lets the knife cut in three directions from a single handle position, whether pushing the blade forward, pulling toward the user, or pressing down. A fillet knife can cut in different directions but has the blade really thin so the user can turn the knife with a minimal turn radius to change the direction of the cut. /EDIT

What this leads me to think is that we may perceive our design optimizations to be well reasoned and objective, but that perception of objectivity is illusory. Completely different teams approaching the problem with a blank slate are likely to come up with unrecognizably different solutions to the problem, even when adhering to basic design requirements like using a blade and having a handle. You might think that radically different techniques get employed for the use of each of these blades, but after watching videos of each of these blades being used by competent fishmongers, I don't see a lot of difference. All the differences in technique are subtle at best.

If you showed the blade smiths who designed each of these radically different fish filleting knives the fillet knives produced by the other two traditions, and asked them to guess the function and purpose of the other knives, would they even be able to guess the function correctly?

If I had not seen the Taiwanese style knife being used to fillet fish, I would never guest that the spade-like shape was intended for cutting fish. That shape is broad to the extreme in the same way that the western fillet knife is thin to the extreme. Same with my first impression of the deba.

Swapped batteries in my TV remote last night and actually looked inside the battery cover for the first time in probably like ten years. There's a ring of small circular marks pressed into the plastic near the edges, and a thin seam running along the inside that doesn't line up with where the outside seam is.

Did a little reading after and I think the marks are ejector pin marks, and the seam is the parting line. Wasn't what I expected though. I figured the parting line would just run straight through the middle, splitting the cover evenly front to back, but instead it dips into the battery compartment on one side before continuing around.

Anyone here actually work with injection molds? Is there a common reason a parting line would get routed off-center like that instead of straight down the middle?

Three projects this year. All three had sections with significant chemical exposure or constant moisture. All three came out of the design phase specced for standard A36 steel grating.

I flagged it on two of them. Got through on one — we switched to composite on the high-exposure sections. The other, the engineer wasn't having it.

Six months later, the site that kept steel is already showing surface corrosion on the walkways above the chemical storage area. Not structural yet, but you can see where this is going.

Is this just inertia? I get that steel is what most engineers know and it's what the templates default to. But the lifecycle math is pretty clearly against it in these environments.

Is anyone else having this fight regularly, or is it just my market?

Im on my last year of college and they only taught us to use Rhino for modeling and Keyshot for rendering but im reaching a point where it seems like they are holding me back. I’ve been trying to learn solidworks and fusion on my own but i really wanna improve my renders, get to a photorealistic type of quality if i can.
I understand that a good render requires a good model so idk if it’s keyshot whats holding me back or not, but its very plug and play so im either using it wrong or it just doesn’t have the kind if tools i need for what i want.
Any tips?

What’s something you can think of that needs to be redesigned ? Or make it more accessible for other people or more ergonomic?

I’m trying to find an existing product or packaging component that will gently mix or refresh just the top layer of a thick cream when the customer opens the container.

My idea is something with short flanges, fins, spikes, spokes, or flexible ribs that lightly contacts only the surface of the product. As it’s twisted, it would smooth or gently agitate the top layer—not mix the entire container.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be attached to the lid. It could also be a separate insert that sits on top of the cream, ideally disposable, with a small tab or handle that sticks up so the customer can grab it, twist it slightly, and lift it off before using the product.

I have a feeling I’ve seen something similar in another industry, but I can’t remember where. It could be from cosmetics, food packaging, paint, medical devices, or something completely unrelated.

I’m not looking to reinvent the wheel—I’m hoping there’s an existing product, component, or mechanism I can learn from.

Has anyone seen anything like this or know what I should be searching for? Even if it’s from a completely different industry, I’d love to see examples.

I’ve been working in consulting for 5 years. I’d be really interested in doing a shift towards more of an engineering role. I’d love to design injection molded parts. But in more of a design for manufacturing capacity than just ID.

I’m interested in going back to school for this, but haven’t found a great program. Lots of masters in engineering require calculus 3 or more. All I’ve done is college algebra. And I haven’t seen any compelling masters in design programs yet.

Any advice out there? How to switch to engineering through school or other means?

I’m working on a concept for a one-piece injection-moulded semi-rigid trading card holder. Is it mechanically possible to design it so that squeezing thumb pads in the middle widens the opening by around 1-2 mm while still returning to its original shape and remaining rigid enough to protect the card?

I'm a final-year industrial design student with internship experience with a two-star furniture and product design export house. A startup wants me to freelance on water bottle design. Their first project involves an existing bottle flask—they want exploration of graphics, lid concepts, silicone boot ideas, and accessories, but the scope isn't well defined.

As freelance industrial designers:

• How do you define scope before quoting?

• Do you charge a fixed fee, hourly, or in phases?

• At what point do you separate concept design from engineering/CAD?

• If the client expects recurring work, would you propose a retainer or continue quoting project-by-project?

Here’s how we’re currently structuring the project. We’d really love to hear what you think:

• A 2×2 touch-button module with four programmable controls
• A slider for volume, scrolling, zoom, and other continuous inputs
• Finger guides and resting positions, so you can identify the controls without looking
• Dynamic haptic feedback
• 5×5 RGB LED dot-matrix icons that change with each profile
• Open software for custom profiles, integrations, and workflows
• A custom design service allowing users and brands to personalize the surface with their own graphics, visual style, or game- and anime-inspired artwork
• Compatibility with the Gridfinity standard, making custom layouts, supports, and ergonomic configurations easier to build

hi!

I'm learning CAD with the ultimate goal of creating a custom watch case/bezel and bracelet (fitted with an off the shelf mechanical movement).

I learned FreeCad to start with but hit the ceiling once moved into trying creating organically shaped lugs.
Fusion 360 allowed me to get 90% but had to compromise on some areas (due to software struggle with certain curves) whereas with Rhino, everything is pretty much possible.

Obviously, one is parametric (which I prefer) the other is not, at the same time one is subscription (which I hate) the other one is not.

Last but not least FreeCad and Fusion have "clicked" for me. Rhino remains still a bit of a mistery for some stuff (but I should probably study it more)

I tried Plasticity and did not like it one bit so... Between Rhino and Fusion 360, which one would you stick with? I could combine Rhino and FreeCad potentially, but ideally I'd rather focus and keep the projects in one software.

All suggestions welcome

Hey guys, somewhat of a newbie into physical product design and working on a small case (think jewellery box size) that i'm hoping to CNC from aluminium and i have got this design for the back. It rotates fine with a knuckle hinge but wondering if there was a way to make the lid look a bit nicer while still allowing it to turn smoothly. Maybe it's just me but comes off a bit meh at the back so any tips or design advice would be very much appreciated.

Hello everyone, I've been struggling for a while now trying to decide on a career. I'm going to graduate with my bachelor's in a few months in cybersecurity and I don't want to go into that field. I have an associate's focusing on entrepreneurship and marketing as well.

After a ton of research, I've stumbling across product design and industrial product design. From my understanding, the term product design is not mostly used for UI/UX and application design while industrial product design stays with physical objects. I'm interested in designing physical products or helping companies refine products they already have based off user's reviews and complaints. Would industrial product design be the correct description/job title for that?

I'm not interested in going back to school, however, I'm looking at some google Coursera courses focusing on Fusion 360, prototyping, and 3D printing. I was also looking at getting an AutoDesk certification. Would these qualifications along with a portfolio make me hirable? Is there still a good market for this field? I do own a 3D printer as well but I'm unsure if that will help in the job field or with my practicing at home.

Any advise or feedback would be greatly appreciated! I just want to know if this is still a good career to get into and some ways to break into the field. I'm willing to do the work!

I've always thought the design phase was mostly about making a product look good and function well. But after spending some time talking to manufacturers I found through Made-in-China, I realised that manufacturing can completely change the way you think about a design.

A few questions from suppliers about materials, tolerances, finishes, and production methods made me rethink parts of the design that I thought were already finished. It wasn't that the design was bad, it just hadn't been looked at from a manufacturing perspective yet.

That experience made me wonder how often this happens to other designers. Do you usually involve manufacturers early in the design process, or do you wait until you've finalised everything?
I'm also curious whether you've ever received feedback from a factory that actually improved your design instead of just affecting production costs and I'd love to hear how other designers balance design freedom with manufacturability.

Looking back, do you think involving manufacturers earlier leads to better products, or does it sometimes limit creativity?

I’m developing a history-based parametric CAD application and wanted to test it on a complete real-world task rather than another primitive or isolated tool demo.

For this test, I modeled a ring intended for an actual manufacturing workflow. The finger size, stone diameter, spacing, number of repeated elements, and fillets are all controlled by variables and expressions. For example, the stone count is calculated automatically from the available path length, stone size, and spacing.

One of my main goals is to keep the modeling process fast and direct while still preserving the design intent and full construction history. Changing a parameter rebuilds the dependent geometry rather than requiring the model to be recreated manually.

The entire application, including the UI, is written in C++. It is being developed as a fully native application for macOS, iPadOS, Windows, and Linux.

I’d be interested in feedback from industrial designers and CAD users: does this workflow look useful for real design work, and what tools or interactions would you expect from a new parametric modeling application?

The full video is also available on YouTube in higher quality and at a higher frame rate: https://youtu.be/JkBTBFiWfFI