We had the distinct pleasure to interview award winning designer about their original and creative design work. is an award-winning creative designer, that makes our world a better place with their original works.
("") answered Design Interview ("DI") questions about their award-winning work . Interview questions prepared by Frank Scott.
: The main principle behind my design is that form is not fixed — it is emergent. My work through Formzee is driven by the belief that design can be a living intelligence — something that evolves through collaboration between human intuition and machine learning. The idea is not to design objects, but to design systems that generate objects — to create conditions where unexpected aesthetics and narratives can unfold. I’m inspired by opposites: the geometric and the organic, the mythical and the futuristic, the forgotten and the not-yet-known. I draw from architecture, fashion, mythology, and computation to develop a visual language that feels simultaneously familiar and alien. Ultimately, the inspiration comes from curiosity — about what happens when we surrender control, and let machines, memories, and symbols speak together through form.
: My main focus in designing this work was to explore how artificial intelligence can become not just a tool, but a co-creator — and to question what design becomes when we allow form to emerge from systems of logic, memory, and machine interpretation rather than from predetermined outcomes. I wasn’t aiming to create a product or a solution. What I wanted to achieve was a new kind of visual and conceptual language — one that feels intuitive yet computational, emotionally resonant yet procedurally generated. Through Formzee, I aimed to challenge conventional ideas of authorship, aesthetic origin, and even materiality. More than anything, I wanted the work to feel alive — like it belonged to a world we haven’t fully imagined yet, but somehow already recognize.
: Since Formzee is a non-commercial research project, my future plans for this design aren’t tied to production or market release. Instead, I see this award-winning piece as part of a larger, evolving inquiry — a visual and conceptual milestone that opens doors for deeper exploration. I plan to expand on the design’s core language by developing new generative models, exploring how its forms and systems might evolve in other mediums — whether through spatial installations, speculative archives, or immersive digital environments. I’m also interested in exhibiting it in more experimental, research-oriented settings where audiences can engage with it as a living artifact — not just a finished work, but a node in an ongoing process. Ultimately, the goal is not to finalize it — but to let it grow, shift, and inspire new questions.
: This particular concept evolved over several weeks — but in reality, it was built on years of ongoing research. The initial phase, which involved curating references, developing datasets, and training custom AI models, took about 2–3 weeks. After that, I entered a generative phase where I produced hundreds of outputs, refined forms, and began shaping a cohesive visual and narrative language. The most time-intensive part was the iterative feedback loop — where I went back and forth between machine outputs and human decisions, allowing the design to slowly reveal itself. That process alone took another 2–4 weeks, depending on the complexity of the visual system I was exploring. So while the active design time spanned around 5 to 6 weeks, the conceptual and technical foundation behind it is part of a much longer, evolving timeline within Formzee.
: This design was not commissioned — it was entirely self-initiated as part of Formzee, my ongoing research project. I created it in response to a specific curiosity: What would happen if form were allowed to emerge through a conversation between memory, mythology, and machine intelligence? I wasn’t aiming to fulfill a brief or client expectation. Instead, I was pursuing a personal inspiration — a desire to explore how AI could generate aesthetic and conceptual outcomes that feel both futuristic and ancestral. The concept grew out of a larger investigation into how we can build new visual languages through hybrid thinking — blending architecture, fashion, storytelling, and computation. In that sense, the design is not just an object — it’s a question made visible.
: This design is not being produced or used by any company, and I do not plan to sell or lease the production rights. It was created purely as part of Formzee, a non-commercial, independent research project focused on exploring speculative design and human–machine collaboration. The intent behind the work is conceptual, not commercial. I view it as part of an ongoing investigation into generative aesthetics and design intelligence — not something meant for mass production or market application. While I’m open to exhibiting the work in cultural or research contexts, I don’t intend to commercialize it or pursue manufacturing. Its purpose is to provoke questions, not to produce goods.
: I was drawn to this particular type of work because it allowed me to explore a question that sits at the core of Formzee: What happens when we shift from designing objects to designing systems of emergence? I wanted to create a piece that felt like it came from a place beyond the familiar — something that fused architectural logic, fashion sensibility, and machine-generated intuition into a new kind of form. This type of work gives space for both structure and surprise, allowing me to step into a more speculative, mythological, and computational realm of design. It wasn’t about filling a need or responding to a trend — it was about listening to a curiosity that kept resurfacing. I designed this work to experiment with how artificial intelligence could become a co-author in creating visual languages that feel both ancient and entirely new.
: Yes, absolutely — my work is shaped by a wide range of influences, but not in a direct stylistic sense. I’m more influenced by systems of thinking and aesthetic atmospheres than by individual designers. From architecture, I’ve drawn inspiration from the conceptual rigor of Lebbeus Woods and the spatial narratives of Zaha Hadid’s early works. In fashion, I’ve been deeply influenced by the structural poetry of Iris van Herpen, the theatrical intelligence of Alexander McQueen, and the material experimentation seen in contemporary digital couture. I’m also constantly influenced by speculative artists and thinkers — from the machine-driven aesthetics of Refik Anadol to the conceptual provocations of Eyal Weizman, and even ancient mythological systems that feel architecturally encoded. That said, my goal is never to replicate a style. Through Formzee, I use these influences more as a lens than a map — a way to ask deeper questions and build a visual language that feels uniquely my own, shaped through collaboration with AI and guided by intuition.
: This design wasn’t created with a commercial target or consumer in mind. Formzee operates as an independent research practice, and the work is intended more for cultural, conceptual, and experimental engagement than for market application. If there is an “audience,” it would be curators, researchers, thinkers, and creatives who are interested in the future of design — particularly where AI, fashion, architecture, and narrative converge. The goal is not to sell a product, but to spark dialogue, provoke imagination, and explore what design can become when it's freed from traditional commercial frameworks. In that sense, the design speaks to anyone curious about the intersection of technology, form, and meaning — not as customers, but as co-thinkers.
: What sets this design apart is the way it was created, not just how it looks. Unlike many concepts that use AI as a stylistic filter or productivity tool, this work emerged from a custom-built process of human–machine collaboration — using AI models I personally trained on a deeply curated, multidisciplinary archive of architectural, fashion, and narrative references. It’s not based on trend or replication, but on building a new aesthetic system from the ground up — one that merges logic and mystery, geometry and myth, the ancient and the speculative. Every element in the design is part of a larger inquiry into how form can carry intelligence, memory, and emotion — not through functionality, but through presence. The result is a piece that doesn’t just resemble something — it suggests something: a world, a language, a question. That’s what makes it different.
: The name of this design, like much of my work under Formzee, was chosen to reflect atmosphere rather than function. I often think of names as portals — not labels, but invitations into a world the design suggests. In this case, the name came intuitively, during a moment in the process when the form started to feel alive — as if it had its own mythology, something both remembered and yet to be discovered. Sometimes the names I choose are invented words, hybrids of languages, or symbolic references. They’re meant to evoke a feeling rather than explain the piece — like a fragment from a forgotten narrative, or the title of a story that hasn’t been written yet. For me, naming is part of the design. It gives the work a voice.
: For this project, I used a combination of computational design tools, generative AI workflows, and traditional post-processing software. The core of the process involved: Custom-trained AI models built using Stable Diffusion and ComfyUI, trained on a curated dataset of my own visual archive. Blender for 3D modeling, form refinement, and spatial exploration. Grasshopper (with Rhino) for parametric studies and structural logic. Photoshop and After Effects for visual polishing, sequencing, and compositional layering. These tools weren’t used in a linear pipeline — they interacted fluidly. AI outputs informed spatial modeling, which in turn fed back into visual refinement. The process was less about finishing a single object and more about generating a living system of form, atmosphere, and narrative.
: The most unique aspect of this design is its origin: it wasn’t manually designed in the traditional sense, but emerged from a custom-built dialogue between human intuition and machine learning. Every form, texture, and structure came through a process I developed — training AI models on a personally curated archive of architectural, fashion, and mythological references. Rather than aiming for a final object, the design functions as a living artifact — one that reflects a system of thought, memory, and computation. Its uniqueness lies in how it feels both ancient and futuristic, structured yet fluid, familiar yet unplaceable. It’s not trying to fit into an existing aesthetic — it’s proposing its own. That sense of otherworldliness, born from an experimental human–machine process, is what makes this piece truly singular.
: This design was developed independently as part of my solo research practice, but it was far from an isolated process. While I didn’t collaborate with other individuals in a formal team structure, I did collaborate in a different sense — with the systems, tools, and technologies I’ve spent years building and refining. The “collaborator” in this case was a set of custom-trained AI models — built on specialized datasets and refined through my own iterative feedback. I also drew on a range of technical platforms like Grasshopper, Blender, and ComfyUI, which required not only design sensitivity but also technical fluency in computational systems. So while there were no external collaborators, the process itself was highly interdisciplinary — involving architecture, fashion, coding, visual art, and machine learning — all filtered through a single vision.
: Technology was central to this design — not just as a tool, but as an active co-creator. I used custom-trained AI models to generate visual and structural possibilities that I would not have imagined on my own. These models were trained on a curated archive of references from architecture, fashion, and myth, allowing them to speak in a language unique to Formzee. The design emerged from an iterative dialogue between human intention and machine response. Technology provided variation, unpredictability, and a kind of aesthetic intelligence — while I acted as editor, curator, and narrator. It wasn’t about automation or efficiency; it was about discovery. In that sense, technology didn’t just assist the design — it shaped its identity. It allowed the work to exist in a space between disciplines, between authors, and between realities.
: Yes, this design was deeply influenced by data — not in the traditional statistical sense, but through aesthetic and symbolic data. I built and trained custom AI models using a carefully curated dataset composed of architectural forms, fashion photography, cultural symbols, and mythological imagery. This visual data acted as a kind of encoded memory — shaping the tone, geometry, and logic of the design. The research process combined computational experimentation with conceptual inquiry. I studied historical ornament, anatomical structures, ritual garments, and speculative architecture to build a framework of meaning. I also explored how certain formal archetypes repeat across cultures and eras — then translated those patterns into machine-readable language. In that way, the design is a synthesis of coded information and poetic research. The machine processed the data, but the meaning came from how that data was chosen, interpreted, and reassembled through the design process.
: One of the main challenges was navigating the unpredictability of working with generative AI. Because I was using custom-trained models, the outputs often surprised me — sometimes in beautiful ways, and sometimes in ways that completely disrupted the visual direction. Learning to treat that uncertainty as part of the process — rather than a problem to solve — was both creatively rewarding and mentally demanding. Another challenge was curation. The AI generated hundreds of variations, and refining those into a single coherent design language required a deep balance between intuition, structure, and narrative consistency. It wasn’t just about choosing what looked interesting — it was about selecting what felt alive and aligned with the world Formzee seeks to build. On a technical level, the process required managing large datasets, long training cycles, and highly iterative feedback loops between software platforms — from ComfyUI to Blender to Grasshopper. Maintaining creative clarity through that complexity was a challenge in itself. But each of these obstacles became part of the design — shaping not just the outcome, but how I understand authorship, form, and collaboration with intelligent systems.
: I decided to submit this design to an international competition like A’ Design Award because I saw it as an opportunity to place Formzee within a broader cultural dialogue — beyond academia, beyond social media, and outside the constraints of commercial expectation. Since Formzee is an independent, non-commercial research project, I wasn’t looking for exposure in the traditional sense. Instead, I wanted to test whether a concept born from experimental human–machine collaboration could resonate in a global design context — one that spans disciplines and values both innovation and meaning. Submitting to this competition was a way to share not just a design, but a way of working — to invite others into a process that blurs boundaries between fashion, architecture, narrative, and AI. For me, it was less about recognition and more about connection — with other designers, thinkers, and platforms that are also exploring what design can become.
: This project taught me to let go of control — to embrace unpredictability as a source of meaning, not just noise. Working with AI-generated outputs forced me to sharpen my instincts: I had to learn not just how to generate, but how to listen — to patterns, to form, to emotional tone hidden in unexpected details. Technically, I deepened my understanding of dataset curation, prompt engineering, and how to guide AI systems with intention without limiting their creative potential. I also refined my ability to move fluidly between tools — from ComfyUI to Blender and Grasshopper — while maintaining a cohesive aesthetic and conceptual thread. But more than anything, this work reminded me that design isn’t just about making things — it’s about building language, shaping presence, and staying open to the unknown. It helped me grow not just as a designer, but as a thinker and storyteller.
: I’d simply like to emphasize that Formzee exists outside traditional design frameworks — it’s not a business, a brand, or a service provider. It’s a space for experimentation, intuition, and inquiry. The work isn’t driven by trends or markets, but by curiosity: How can we collaborate with machines to imagine new aesthetic languages? What happens when design becomes emergent rather than imposed? Much of what I create is meant to provoke questions, not deliver answers — to feel like a glimpse into a future logic or forgotten mythology. If anything, I hope this project shows that design can be a form of research, poetry, and discovery — and that even without commercial intent, it can hold cultural and creative significance. Thank you for creating space for that kind of work.
