Question 1
“What is something our industry widely accepts today that future generations of lighting professionals may one day question?”

 

LEELA SHANKER: We’re already starting to question where the life of our designs start and end. In the future, I expect it will be common practice to treat our product and spatial designs as less discrete project choices, and more a continuum of material and energy flows that can have beneficial impacts for a wider circle of stakeholders beyond the immediate client.

JOHN PALK: I’d say it’s the concept of the “throw away fixture”. We have come from decades of simply being able to just replace components and retrofit fixtures. Today we have products which have been created that have to be discarded due to a lack of product serviceability design! While considered “throw away”, this is not a long-term sustainable practice. Many manufacturers and designers are seeking out ways to create sustainable and serviceable fixtures that can be maintained for decades.

ANDREA HARTRANFT: This is a hard question! All of the answers that come to mind I think are already being questioned.  With that in mind, I would say that that landfill design, while already a concern of lighting professionals, will be more widely disparaged by owners as well. Swappable parts will be expected to be available and affordable.

JEFF PARKER: Miniaturization and modularization. Today, we still design many luminaires around the constraints of legacy light sources rather than the possibilities of LED technology. As miniaturization and modularization continue to evolve, I believe future designers will rethink not only how luminaires perform, but what they need to look like in the first place!

RANDY BURKETT: The current LED. There is simply not enough attentiveness to overall LED performance and veracity in long-term applications! Thermal management, power stability, fixture integrity, control compatibility, disposal…all of these are still works in progress. LED luminaires will continue to evolve.

SHARON STAMMERS: LED [laughs]! We moved very quickly into using LEDs ubiquitously without knowing the long-term health effects of it on humans, flora and fauna.

MARTIN LUPTON: I think it is the use of light sources cooler than 3000K in an exterior environment – 4000K LEDs are so widespread in street and urban lighting and, as the knowledge about their impact becomes more commonly known, I hope that it will be questioned more widely in the near future.

CHRISTINA HALFPENNY: Future lighting professionals should question installations of uncontrolled lighting, both indoor and outdoor, to better address excessive brightness, blue light content, and the silos separating lighting design from integrated energy management strategies.

ACHARAWAN CHUTARAT: I think future lighting professionals will ask why people prioritize use of color and brightness over quality of meaningful and sustainable lighting design.

RUSKIN HARTLEY: They will question the concept that brightness equals safety. We treat darkness as something to defeat rather than design with, forgetting that the dark-adapted eye often sees more than a dazzled one.

CHRISTOPHER KNOWLTON: Our quiet acceptance of light pollution and round-the-clock illumination as markers of safety and prosperity. Most civic and commercial lighting still treats darkness as a problem to be eliminated. Future generations, living more directly with the ecological and human health consequences, may look back on today’s default brightness levels as a convenience we normalized long after the evidence turned against us.

AMY OLIVER: Everywhere I go in the world, I see dozens of over-lit projects from every generation. But as we learn more about energy and dark sky science, and people turn toward a more natural ethos, those projects are going to hopefully appear less frequently.

MARIANA FIGUEIRO: Horizontal illuminance as a design criterion. We are vertical species, so we need vertical illuminance!  But we specify based on standards that provide us with recommended light levels on the work plane.

COLLEEN HARPER: Today we still accept that lighting is judged primarily by cost rather than human health outcomes. Future professionals will question light’s biological impact, not just its price.

NAOMI MILLER: Our stodgy high-voltage electrical distribution systems in buildings.

LAUREN DANDRIDGE: One day, designers of all kinds will laugh at how unnecessarily complicated it is to purchase lighting! [laughs]  I strongly hope that the next generation of tradespeople will simplify the process—-for everyone’s benefit.

CHIP ISRAEL: Why are we so passionate about making every project perfect? Every award-winning project loses money. Lighting designers constantly try to educate their ownership and design teams, only to have their recommendations value-engineered out later. Without national support, this enthusiasm could dissipate over time, and lighting would become a basic commodity.

LEE BRANDT: Today we emphasize technical skills and project-based mentorship and perhaps not enough leadership training and legacy. Future generations may question whether we placed enough focus on developing judgment, adaptability, and emotional intelligence alongside design expertise.

ROGIER VAN DER HEIDE: I think that future lighting professionals will question the concept that lighting begins after architecture has been designed! Future generations may treat light, material, space and time as one continuous act of design.

 

---

 

The Author: Paul Pompeo, is president of Pompeo Group, an executive recruitment consultancy in lighting, electrical, and controls.