to the advent of electric lighting, when the
designer of the electrical system, generally
an electrical engineer, used to also light the
environments. The calculation techniques
could not avail of any software, as software
was still inexistent, and consequently they
were based exclusively on methods with
tables, containing data provided by the
manufacturers – as for example the utilisation
factor (UF) method, which is still used today
for specific requirements –, or on simple
calculations such as the point to point method
in order to calculate direct illuminance.
The aim of lighting design projects was
therefore to quantify the number of units that
were necessary to obtain a determined level
of average illuminance in an environment
(general lighting), and it was practically
impossible to evaluate the effects produced
by the so-called decorative units as there were
no techniques to obtain a graphical display
based on the physical parameters. Photometric
data were provided only for the technical
luminaires, while in case of the decorative
luminaires, use was made of experience and
also quite randomly. Furthermore, according
to public imagination, decorative lighting was
often associated with the idea of mobility
or flexibility, as in the case of table lamps or
floor lamps, while technical illumination was
rigorously fixed. The decorative approach was
typically assigned to architects, who have
always been considered not very scientific
and rather artistic by the engineers and
furthermore, the lack of a common language
was of no help; for example, a lamp, for
an engineer, even today, is a luminous source
to be inserted in a framework, while for an
architect it is often the entire unit (a table
lamp, a lamp for the living room…).
This different approach, as if there were two
separate worlds, yet both linked to lighting
environments, has produced a distorted vision
of the form-function relation, giving
importance to function for technical lighting
and form (incorrectly associated with design)
for decorative lighting. Today, thanks to the
rapid technological and cultural evolution
that began at the start of this century,
apparently this distinction is not necessary
anymore: any element that emits light must
not only integrate aesthetically with the
environment, even when it is turned off, but it
must also contribute to defining the luminous
environment, together with all the visual
implications (performance, comfort) and
non-visual ones (impact on circadian rhythms,
on one’s mood…). With LED sources it is
possible to create luminaires characterized
by shapes that were unthinkable with the
traditional light sources, and with the software
available today it is possible to carry out
simulations with all types of luminaires.
Finally, the best lighting designers are mostly
architects, as the lighting design competencies
stand out more than the electric ones.
Today, the need to guarantee a suitable quality
of the environment, outdoors and indoors,
does not allow us to distinguish between
products that are merely “technical” or
conversely “decorative”, and therefore the two
groups are not disjoined at all, but quite the
contrary. This means that we need to look
at design in the lighting sector as the only
possible way to deal with the design and
creation of high quality products. It is
particularly significant that what seems to be
a consequence of a very recent evolution,
which is still full of prejudices that need to be
cancelled, is actually a teaching left to us
about forty years ago by the great master of
design, Bruno Munari. He points out in almost
all his writings that fantasy, imagination,
creativity and invention are correlated, even
though each one is distinct, and these must be
fed and developed with much awareness
in order to create real objects. The book written
by him that best teaches us to understand how
the creative act of design needs a rational,
consequential and well defined methodology,
without which one cannot obtain results,
is Da cosa nasce cosa (“Out of One Thing Comes
Another”), published by Laterza in 1981.
Since it is a methodology, it does not depend
on the particular technological or socio-
economic context, and it is therefore, still
today, absolutely topical. To apply a procedure
with methodological rigour does not mean
eliminating degrees of freedom or suffocating
originality; rather, the opposite is true: through
awareness and adequate technical and
scientific knowledge of all the aspects that
concur in the definition of the context one
is working in, it is possible to avoid ingenuity
and mistakes that have already been made by
others, and to create beautiful and functional
products, because they are designed well.
How does a designer like Munari deal with
the topic of light? There are two aspects: the
first involves recognizing the important role of
light and colours in different environments –
as for example living spaces, museums and
exhibitions, department stores, gardens etc. –,
showing furthermore a farsighted attention
with regard to children and elderly people.
The second aspect concerns lighting in the
specific sense of designing luminaires that
need to be aesthetically beautiful and must
carry out the function these were designed for.
When creating an object that emits light,
one cannot avoid considering the photometric
characteristics, where it will probably be
positioned, and also the effects it will have
when inserted in a luminous context. In the
book there is a paragraph entitled “lighting
design”, an invitation to consider and study
the technical topics. How is a new product
generated? How to make use of imagination
and creativity? Today, with LED sources one
can indulge in creating completely new shapes
of all types. However, it is always necessary,
when proposing a project, to first identify
and solve all the related practical and
functional problems (including economic
aspects, the materials, structure, ergonomics,
psychology …), and that is when creativity will
generate the shape. I would like to quote what
Munari once said, “Beauty is the consequence
of right doing”, which is a Japanese saying.
In other words, today more than ever before,
creativity needs technique and competence.