Semantic Forms: Design Lab Project 5

Bryce Li
5 min readMay 13, 2021



In this iteration, I focused on capturing the axises of around the shell that were formed by dots. The angles of these aforementioned shells were intriguing to me– I was interested in how they stacked on top of each other. Combined with notational sketches, I observed these moved together. However, I chose not to depict the inner portion of the shell.

Some issues that were brought up were the proportional and spatial relationships of the axes. I think some of these issues were from the focus on the dots, which I was moving around the shell to match patterns without changing the fundamental structure.


In this iteration, I focused less on the dots on the surface and more on the general structure of the shell. I think the most successful element was the inner side of the shell- although it wasn’t as thin as the original counterpart, the curves formed by the shape were accurate. However, the rotational ridges here were too exaggerated, and the axis of the upper end of the shell was not not properly aligned in relation to the rest of the shell.


In this iteration, I focused on the primary surface planes of the mouse. Analyzing the mouse, I saw “ribbon” like surfaces that were defined by hard angles between different components of the mouse. For example, the front surface of the mouse was a separate form that joined with top curved surface at the back of the mouse. I also saw how the bottom section of the mouse also had this planar relationship, and I sought to capture these edges in my model to establish relations between these planes.

For my shell, I tried a different method of establishing the curve of the ridges through a line and adding them surface of the shell. This improved the proportions of the positions of the ridges, but there was still difficulty communicating the shell at certain angles due to the flatness and inconsistency between the ridges and the rest of the shell.


In this model, I wanted to establish two main relationships within the mouse: the edges of the mouse, the angle of planes within the mouse and the curvature of the lower plane. In my previous model of the mouse, I focused on these planes and edges that established them. To translate this, I used the shape of paper to show these edges that would imply the shape of these planes.

Another feature of the mouse was this curving plane at the bottom — there was curve towards the middle of the mouse and a curve upwards at the end. I was able to capture this movement by curving this piece of paper. I also focused on the angles, which were defined by the sweep of the main curvature of the mouse.


In this iteration, I focused on remaking my mouse in paper. This time, I wanted to include the form of the frontal plane that curved around the mouse. In addition, I added more angular planes to fill in more information about the mouse.

I also changed the shape of the clay mouse. One thing that came up during class was the proportions in the front of the mouse — it was too tall at the very end. When reevaluating the side profile and looking at the curvature of the mouse, I was able to make the front of the mouse to be more accurate.


I had a final revision of my mouse in this version. One of the biggest differences was that I carved out a large from that shaped the ridges, and from that a I subtractively removed the negative space between the ridges. This made a more cohesive form with the rest of the shell, and also made it a lot cleaner.