The Open Frame is a living prototype that explores how creative expression can be supported without being controlled. It responds to a growing gap between creative desire and the systems that make creativity visible, valued, and impactful systems that often prioritize polish, metrics, and branding over process, experimentation, and presence.

Rather than functioning as a traditional platform, The Open Frame offers a shared infrastructure for youth-led creative expression. Through recurring, open prompts and a collective canvas, participants are invited to contribute creative responses in any form, without ranking, filtering, or performance pressure. Each canvas is witnessed, archived, and then released, making space for new expressions to emerge.

Designed with and for young creatives, The Open Frame foregrounds participation over performance and learning over polish. It positions creativity as a process to be held, not a product to be optimized. By shifting the role of institutions and partners from broadcasters to hosts and listeners, the project proposes an alternative model for engaging youth perspectives. One that trusts creative voice and allows it to exist on its own terms.

This prototype is not a finished solution, but an invitation: to rethink how creative spaces are designed, who they serve, and how expression can be supported without being shaped or owned.

Youth Value Proposition

The Issue 

There is a growing gap between young people’s desire to create and the conditions that support creation. For many young creatives, the issue is not a lack of willingness, but the systems that make creativity visible, valued, and impactful, which often prioritize measurable output, polish, and branding over process and experimentation. As a result, creative work becomes tied to performance, recognition, and comparison, leaving little room for exploration, uncertainty, and personal development.

The Solution

The Open Frame platform responds to this tension by offering a weekly shared canvas where young people collectively respond to an open prompt through any form of creative expression. Rather than ranking or evaluating contributions, the platform provides direction without restriction and visibility without judgment. By creating a recurring, inspiring space to share, witness, and archive work, The Open Frame gives creative practice room to exist, connect, and feel meaningful beyond performance or metrics.

User Archetype

Zoè : The Casual Creator

Zoè is an emerging creative who feels the urge to make things, but doesn’t want their creativity to turn into a performance. They create in small bursts (when a mood, idea, or feeling hits), and they’re most alive when the stakes are low and the space feels playful.

They’re not looking to build a “personal brand.” In fact, traditional creative platforms often make them freeze: likes, comments, follower counts, and pressure to be polished can make even a simple idea feel “not good enough yet.” Zoè doesn’t need more motivation to create , they need conditions that make creating feel safe, light, and worth returning to.

What Zoè is seeking: to feel inspired, connected, and acknowledged without needing to compete or be “the best.” They want a space where unfinished work is allowed, experiments are normal, and sharing doesn’t come with social risk.

Goals

- Express something real (even if it’s rough)
- Feel part of a creative “moment” with others
- Build a habit of making, without pressure

Pain points

- Fear of judgment / comparison
- “If it’s not polished, it doesn’t belong”
- Platforms that reward consistency, branding, and metrics over process

Needs
- A gentle starting point (a prompt)
- Low-friction contribution
- Visibility without evaluation (no likes/ranking)
- A sense of being witnessed, then being able to move on

Quote

“I want to make things without feeling like I’m auditioning.”

User Journey

Landing — “What is this space?”

Zoè arrives with curiosity but also caution. Their first scan is subconscious: Is this going to judge me? Will I be compared?

Design support: the minimal, non-hierarchical layout signals “this is not a performance stage.”

Weekly Prompt — “Okay, I have a starting point.”

Zoè sees the weekly prompt and feels immediate relief: they don’t have to invent an idea from nothing. The prompt is a container, not a rulebook, it creates shared direction while leaving interpretation open.

Design support: short, inviting language that sparks curiosity rather than overexplaining.

Choose Mode : Shared or Private

At this point Zoè chooses how she wants to participate:

Shared Canvas (Public Frame): she joins the collective response with others.

Private Canvas: she creates a small, contained space first , especially when she’s unsure, experimenting, or wants intimacy.

Why this matters: autonomy over visibility reduces pressure. She can create without the fear of “posting.”

Private Canvas — “Let’s do this with my people.”

If she chooses private, Zoè can invite friends (or a small group) into her private canvas. It becomes a “micro-room” for expression: lower stakes, more trust, more play.

Design support: private mode supports beginners, shy creators, and unfinished work.

Enter the Canvas — “I’m not alone.”

Zoè steps into the shared canvas and sees contributions side-by-side. This shifts their mindset from comparison to participation: We’re responding together.

Sign Up — “A small commitment.”

Zoè signs up when they feel safe enough to join. They don’t want a long onboarding or heavy commitment, just enough structure to participate.

Design support: low barrier entry supports “playful + low commitment” participation.

Create : “Let me try something.”

Zoè starts creating in whatever form fits: text, sketch, photo, collage, sound, etc. The key is not quality , it’s presence.

Design support: no metrics + minimal interface friction reduces self-censorship and perfectionism.

Moderation : “The community keeps it safe.”

Safety is handled through community flagging:

If something feels harmful, participants can flag it

Flagged content is reviewed/handled through community rules (without public shaming)

The goal is protection, not punishment , keeping the space supportive and non-toxic

Submit : “I’ll put it into the world.”

Submitting feels like placing work into a shared room rather than posting into an attention economy. 

Design support: visibility without judgment (no likes, no ranking, no algorithmic sorting).

Weekly Publication : “It’s witnessed.”

Zoè sees their work included in the week’s frame alongside others. The feeling is subtle but powerful: my expression counts because it exists here.

Design support: collective witnessing + consistent archiving creates meaning without turning participation into competition.

Archive + Release — “It ends, and that’s okay.”

Each frame is time-bound. After the cycle, contributions are archived and the canvas is released, creating closure and reducing the pressure of permanent visibility.

How the Design Supports the Concept and Use Case

The design of The Open Frame is intentionally minimal, open, and non-hierarchical. Every design decision was made to reduce performance pressure and reinforce the core idea: youth expression should be held, not evaluated.

The design of The Open Frame is intentionally minimal, open, and non-hierarchical. Every design decision was made to reduce performance pressure and reinforce the core idea: youth expression should be held, not evaluated.

1. No Metrics, No Ranking

Unlike traditional social platforms, The Open Frame does not include likes, comments, follower counts, or visible metrics. This removes the performative layer often attached to creative sharing. By eliminating numerical feedback, the design shifts attention away from validation and toward presence and process.

This directly supports the use case of a safe, low-pressure space for creative contribution.

2. The Canvas as a Shared Surface

The main interface centers around a shared “canvas” rather than individual profiles. Contributions appear side by side without hierarchy, algorithmic sorting, or competition for visibility. This reinforces the idea that creative work exists in relation, not comparison.

The shared surface visually communicates collective authorship and mutual witnessing rather than individual branding.

3. Prompt-Based Structure

Instead of open posting, each cycle begins with a thematic prompt (e.g., “Call for Peace”). Prompts provide gentle structure without directing output. This balances freedom and containment, participants are supported by a shared theme but not constrained by format or evaluation criteria.

The prompt system ensures coherence while preserving autonomy.

4. Limited Duration & Archiving

Each Open Frame cycle is time-bound. After the cycle ends, contributions are archived rather than continuously circulated. This design choice prevents overexposure and reduces the pressure to remain constantly visible.

Archiving emphasizes documentation over accumulation. It allows reflection without turning participation into permanent performance.

5. Visual Restraint

The visual identity is intentionally quiet:

- neutral backgrounds

- simple typography

- minimal interface elements

This prevents the platform itself from overpowering the creative work. The design does not compete for attention, it holds space.

6. Partner Hosting Without Branding

When hosted by partners (e.g., Alliance for Youth-Led Futures), the design remains consistent and unbranded. Partners may introduce prompts and feature selected works, but the platform’s structure ensures that youth contributions remain central.

The interface design prevents institutional voice from dominating the creative output.

In Practice

For a young participant, this means:

- They enter a platform without comparison metrics.

- They respond to a prompt in any format.

- Their contribution appears alongside others without ranking.

- Their work is witnessed and archived.

- They are not required to perform, optimize, or sustain engagement.

- The design does not demand attention. It offers containment.

Check Out Our Prototype

You can experience our prototype first hand here: 

https://taffy-direct-25643209.figma.site/

The DDS Exhibition

The DDS exhibition gave us the opportunity to make The Open Frame tangible and experienceable beyond the conceptual level. Presenting the prototype in a public setting allowed visitors to directly interact with the platform, ask questions, and share impressions, turning the project into a conversation rather than a presentation. Through informal discussions, observations, and spontaneous reactions, we gathered valuable feedback and new perspectives. Visitors offered ideas for possible prompts, expressed how they would personally use the platform, and reflected on their own relationship to creativity and pressure. The exhibition therefore functioned as a first real-world test, helping us understand how the concept is perceived outside an academic design context.

Exhibition Setup

To communicate the idea spatially, we positioned our central information poster inside a physical open metal frame. This became both a literal and conceptual translation of the platform: an open structure that provides orientation without enclosing or directing what happens inside it. The frame worked as a strong visual metaphor and an immediate eye-catcher, drawing visitors closer and inviting them to step in front of it, look through it, and engage with the content. Surrounding materials — the interface screen, explanatory texts, and documentation — were arranged to feel accessible rather than authoritative, reinforcing the idea of participation over instruction.

Many visitors responded positively to the platform’s openness. Several described it as “relieving” to imagine a creative space without competition, metrics, or evaluation, and younger visitors in particular expressed that they often want to create but feel unsure where their work belongs if it is unfinished or experimental. Some noted that the weekly prompt structure felt motivating because it provides direction while still leaving freedom in interpretation.

Key Takeaways

The exhibition highlighted that the project resonates especially strongly with people who feel creative but lack a supportive environment. The physical frame successfully communicated the concept quickly and intuitively, and the prototype encouraged conversation and reflection rather than passive viewing. Overall, the exhibition confirmed that there is a real desire for spaces that support expression without pressure, and that The Open Frame can act as a catalyst for dialogue about how creative participation is structured and valued.

Concluding Words

The Open Frame is a proposal for how creative spaces could function differently. By offering direction without restriction and visibility without judgment, it creates a shared environment where young people can express ideas without pressure to perform. The project suggests that creativity does not need to be optimized to be meaningful. It needs to be witnessed, held, and given room to develop. Ultimately, The Open Frame invites a shift from evaluating creative output to supporting creative practice.