View Photo Gallery
Patrick Sung has designed Universal Packaging System (UPACKS), a conceptual packaging system that forms to whatever it is that you’re shipping. Although it bends around your package, it is designed to be sturdy and strong. The idea is that no one box fits all. Often times, packaging is wasted to fill and pad empty space in boxes.
I know I’ve received a lot of packages that are way too large for their contents. What do you think about this concept?
[via Yanko Design]
Related Posts
12 Comments
Tyson on 08.09.2010 at 17:54 PM
While I appreciate this from a conceptual standpoint, and an environmental standpoint, it is not at all practical. These packages would be impossible to stack, and thus our square trucks would become the ones filled with packing to take up room. Further, have you ever seen the high cost of “irregular” packages that UPS or USPS charges? It’s the same logic that says we should put canned vegetables in spheres instead of the more traditional shape due to it’s higher space v. volume efficiency despite the fact that they would roll off the shelves.
Jaime (post author) on 08.09.2010 at 19:52 PM
The difficulty and awkwardness of loading also came to my mind.
Sarah on 08.09.2010 at 19:13 PM
I think it is a great idea! It drives me crazy when I get sent something small in an over-sized box. Such a waste of resources, space and money.
tudza on 08.09.2010 at 20:41 PM
The idea is rubbish and this was posted on Yanko ages and ages ago. Old news.
Paul on 08.10.2010 at 00:17 AM
Not practical in the sense of actually sending via post, as many others have mentioned, however it would be a nice gift wrapping idea…
Richard on 08.10.2010 at 01:58 AM
I think it’s a novel idea that means well. The reality is–as someone else mention–irregular packages aren’t practical from a logistics standpoint. Almost the entire automated infrastructure of both FEDex and UPS rely on scanners being able to accurately scan, tag, and reroute packages through terminals via a barcode or QR code. The problem I am seeing (and the reason why flat pack boxes are used now) is that there’s no where for the shipping barcode label to be placed on a flat surface to remain scan-able.
vanderleun on 08.10.2010 at 03:18 AM
How wonderful. Now all packages can look like sharp lumps of feces! That’s modern design in a…. well….
design revolution australia on 08.10.2010 at 05:17 AM
i actually think its quite good. the awkward edges and corners it creates may protect the object that is wrapped inside.
Adam Sturm on 08.10.2010 at 08:04 AM
This is the third or fourth time I’ve seen this, the first probably being half a year ago. Old news. But, I like the idea.
Shae on 08.10.2010 at 15:23 PM
What this is good for, is CHRISTMAS PRESENTS!
What people say about UPS trucks and stacking is true.
But this would be great for taking those vaguely cylindrical misshapen items and turning them into something with sharp edges that is wrappable!
Corrinna on 12.25.2010 at 03:13 AM
i agree that it would not work. although it saves from having to use extra sized boxes they wouldn’t stack or ship well. as inner packaging i could see it more than the outside. shippers wouldn’t be able to ship as many packages and use more fuel. i would rather use a little more cardboard which can be recycled than over using fossil fuels.
Roni on 08.15.2011 at 12:27 PM
Besides the above cons:
1. I wonder if the inherent scores/perforations of the material might weaken the structure of the constructed box?
2. Packaging is about protecting the encased object. Many times, extra air space in a package is desired in order to provide a cushion and barrier that prevents damage. If you take that away and form-fit the packaging to the object, then the packaging is only providing surface protection. Fragile objects will suffer.
Want your image to appear next to your comment? Get a gravatar!Leave A Comment