Independent Lighting Design

The magazine in your hands has been out since 2005. That's no small thing: you're now reading its 44th issue. Back then, the number of firms offering “independent lighting design” consultancy was zero. Today, going by the offices' own declarations, there are 7 (my apologies in advance to any I don't know about). Counting the designers who work in these offices of different sizes, you could say there are 30 to 40 “independent” lighting designers in total. Since day one I've talked about why lighting design matters and why we need lighting design as a profession. So I've faced one question many times: who is an “independent” lighting designer? Who decides what “independent” means, the word I've stressed since the start of this piece? How do we know someone is “independent”?

Let me say my conclusion up front. As I've written a few times before, I still think this can only be defined by a person's own declaration. Any definition set by higher bodies loses its meaning inside professional life, and fast. Before I go on, I also recommend the piece on this subject by lighting designer Mustafa Seven, who is also a dear friend: (Link: http://kisalt.com/seven).

The adjective “independent” is usually read as “brand-independent”. That is, the designer should look after the needs of the project and the interests of the client, and nothing else, throughout the process. Any other motivation damages the designer's “independence”. I want to stress this, because lighting design should not shrink to picking products. Yes, a lighting designer basically decides which products the project will use. But more importantly, they define the relationship between the user and the space at night, in the dark. And in doing that, their most important duty to the user is to create spaces where people feel good. So we should define the job not by engineering calculations alone, or by a purely function-based approach, but by the goal of creating better places to live. That is where the future of lighting design lies anyway. On this point, I recommend Christopher Cuttle's article, which questions lighting standards and offers professionals in the industry a new approach: (in English: http://kisalt.com/cuttle).

Now that I've defined it this way, let's look closer with a few examples. There are two classic cases in front of us, and they hold not just for Türkiye but for the whole world: designers who already work for a distributor or a manufacturer, and designers who call themselves independent lighting designers but take a commission on the products they use.

The designers in the first case also put their names to lighting design projects, but it's very hard to say they look after the needs of the project and nothing else. At the simplest level, their product range is limited to what that one company carries. Even if they can source from other manufacturers or distributors, choosing to do so when they don't have to would be unfair to their own employer, first of all. Stock and sales worries are always in front of them, as a fact of life. Their workload is also much heavier than other designers'. Anyone in the business knows that in our industry, design work is usually free. Almost every project travels a long road between manufacturers and distributors and ends up as a quote. So a designer may sometimes get pulled into more than one project in a single day. And sadly, they see a design they worked on actually get built only a few times a year. A new trend I've been hearing about for a while makes more sense to me. Now a fee is charged for the design, and if the company also supplies the products, the whole design fee comes off the invoice. You could even call this good news, at least because it teaches the client that nothing in this life is free: even when something looks free, its costs are hidden somewhere else.

The situation for the designer in the second case is not very different. Their motivation is shaken at the root, because in today's economy, nobody would find it very strange if they chose the product or brand that pays them more commission. Of course, the realities of life slap us in the face here too. The designer has to explain what they do to clients who have never really made peace with paying for design, and then bill what the service is worth. That is quite a feat. Also, when everyone knows full well that architects work on commission, arguing about commission for lighting designers, who don't even have signing authority yet, is not a very realistic position. Please don't read any of this as me trying to present commission as something reasonable. I'm only trying to take a realistic picture.

Another example, if an extreme one: a lighting designer who says “I only design with LED” is not “independent” to me either. Just like in the other cases, what they focus on is not the user experience or the client's interests.

Being “independent” matters, and it matters too much to be hollowed out for marketing.
It matters, because only then can lighting designers put their names to designs that improve our quality of life and get people talking.
It matters, because only then can the lighting design profession reach the respected place it deserves.
Anyone who achieves this is an “independent” lighting designer to me. The projects they sign prove it anyway.

Stay with the light until our next issue…

Emre Güneş
Professional Lighting Design Türkiye