From www.core77.com a designers site.
It discusses smooth Vs sharp shapes and how they affect our instinctive reactions to an object. It also asks why cant designers of cars phones and household items incorporate the organic blending techniques that we, as shapers use every day.
Great stuff surffoils.
Particularly the ideas expressed in this excerpt:
"For the consumer, it’s easy to forget how much the emotional
response to an object determines his or her relationship to it, but
this forgetfulness can be plausibly explained by the dominant role our
analytical mind plays in formulating language. Because it is able to say it’s in charge, as the executor of structured argument, the analytical mind generally convinces us that it is in
fact the authority. Reasoning therefore holds higher status, and
emotional reactions are easy to dismiss as immature or irrational. This
poses a very real barrier to the acceptance of design as a source of
value in product development; enough that it’s worth examining
alternate ways of evaluating design, transcending this subjective view
to create a more universal system of measure.
Form has meaning; it can touch us at such a primal level that our
mind is left scrambling to rationalize our emotional reactions.
Consider the visceral impression conveyed by a natural setting: The
deep serenity felt, for example, while walking through a majestic grove
of redwoods. The delicate lace of fern fronds wave as you drag your
hand through them as you walk, and your heart jumps into your throat
when startled by a deer caught wondering across the trail. These
natural forms hold an innate meaning that not only transcends the human
experience, but even predates our verbal expression, definition, and
measurement. In other words, we did not create this meaning; it comes from the forms themselves, and existed long before we did."
Dave
Geoff Mccoy’s entire theory is pretty much formed around some of this. Most of his designs are very subtle and lack many of any edges. He told me one time: " think about what it is your attempting to ride on and how what your using to ride it best fits on the the face of a wave " He told me that his attempt was to create pressure under the board.
It’s one of the reasons, I continue to respect him; he actually studies what it is he is doing. He does not go on other’s findings, but his own observations and experimentation. This is why he is a creator type shaper rather than a copier type of shaper. You never see Geoff’s fish prgram or quad program. Geoff just does what Geoff does.
Great article BTW
Exactly!!!
The positioning, the cut of the track, the spray pattern, the speed, the ssschisssing sound! Think about how all that can be made by something without any sharp edges and pentrating fins – just a soft, flexible, malleable shape-shifter that only weighs ounces.
Slice by Bruce Cowan - Surf Mat by Dale Solomonson - Photograph by Kaser1
Nice article.
As a CAD software developer and mechanical engineering Ph.D., I have long thought that good surf shapes are probably C3 (have smoothly varying curvature). The derivative of acceleration is called “jerk”. When designing cams, you look at curvature (normal acceleration) but also the derivative of curvature (jerk) to try to ensure that jerk is continuous. I’m certain that’s also true for fluid flow; fluids are not going to like tangent discontinuities in curvature; they will prefer it smooth.
The big focus for years (and still) is cubic curves and curvature continuity but I predict it will be moving to smooth curvature sooner or later. Not only for improved function, but I also think it will make a subtle improvement to the eye in industrial design.
Good to see you surffoils!
Hmmmm…maybe not so “past” after all! 
wink wink
Good stuff!
Mahalo