CMF reference library (Part 2)

For years, CMF in appliances has been treated as a project step that you “do” for each SKU and then restart. I find that approach to be wasteful. It doesn’t compound. I want to change that.

I want CMF to become a system capability at Native that gets sharper with every product we build.

This is my personal CMF study map built from courses, books, and weeks of research rabbit holes. This is also a rough thinking in progress plan for how to structure, and eventually operationalise it.

1. CMF today vs. ambition

In traditional appliance design, CMF (Colour, Material, Finish) sits in a linear project pipeline:

Trend scan → Moodboard → Sample sourcing → Specification → Handoff to engineering.

This is the broader theme leaving out the details & nuances of each step. Every new product restarts from scratch. I want CMF to behave like a living operating system and move from craft to compounding capability

2. Capabilities goals

1. CMF DNA library

The core is a digital record of every colour, material, and finish we’ve ever used where each entry tagged with:

• Emotion: trustworthy white, warm metallic, tech matte black

• Performance: gloss retention, scratch resistance, UV ageing

• Manufacturability: moulding process, coating vendor, cost

If this works, every new SKU begins with a proven, high-confidence palette.

2. Digital CMF sandbox

A shared digital workspace where designers can simulate and remix finishes.

• Integrate KeyShot + PBR Material Library (or equivalent)

• Simulate light response (roughness, reflectivity)

• Maintain a “Virtual CMF Wall” or something like Dyson’s physical room.

• Quick pre-visualisation before requesting any sample.

If this works then we'll iterate faster, have stronger visual continuity and less wasted physical samples.

3. CMF validation framework

How to turn taste into a measurable system? We could create a Native Finish Scorecards and rate between 1-5pm

1. Visual Cohesion: Harmony under different light temps (warm / neutral / cool)

2. Durability: Scratch, rub, UV, and chemical resistance

3. Manufacturability: Coating stack-up, gloss delta, tolerance

Over time, this becomes the Native Finish Index. If this works, we'll be able to take defensible and repeatable CMF decisions that are not subjective.

4. CMF vendor repository

• Convert one-time supplier relationships into a long-term ecosystem.

• Maintain a searchable database for vendor capability, lead times, process and process reliability.

• Build long-term partnerships with 5–6 trusted material partners for each domain (paint, resin, coating, metal, plastic).

• Rapidly source and use pre-approved finishes instantly.

• 
  

5. CMF evolution

We know that trends come and go but, the brand DNA should:

• Track global trend reports (WGSN, Peclers, FranklinTill, Colour Hive)

• Translate macro ideas → Native language.

• E.g. “Bio-polished minimalism” → Matte + soft neutral whites for Indian kitchens

• E.g. “Quiet luxury” → Low-lustre metallics, warm light textures

• “Hyper-efficiency” → Simplified component colour blocking

• Maintain a “Trend ↔ Brand Map” so evolution is intentional, not accidental.

3. Who’s done this well

• Dyson maintains a permanent CMF Design Language team that spans all SKUs.

• Apple has a strict internal code for every finish which they have reused and iterated for years.

• Polestar has an unified “Material Architecture” that defines visual & tactile continuation through their products.

• Logitech established a CMF operations database linking design and vendors data.

4. Future extensions

Once the foundation is stable, I could extend it in three directions:

1. A predictive layer for AI-assisted CMF recommendations that suggest finishes by durability, visual harmony, or cost.

2. A virtual CMF lab with a physical library (or, AR-based) for internal and user validation.

3. A public database of CMF finishes built for Indian homes.