Monday, May 18, 2009
What Is An Animated Space?
We will discuss this in the studio today. Please observe the differences in-between a dramatic person, a person in dramatic act, and the drama as delivered by Placido Domingo's voice other than his very act of singing.
EXP - 2 FEEDBACKS
The intention of publishing the feedback below is so that all students can benefit by understanding the strengths and weaknesses of a range of projects. Please take the time to review other student's work with these comments in mind. If you have any questions or would like any further clarification don’t hesitate to ask me during the studio session.
Ashneil
No Show
Barno
Key strength of the scheme:
The playfulness in making shapes and spaces. This is a bold solution that can. The application of textures is confidant and effective and it compliments the volumetric main spaces. Ingenious idea to use sculptural like elements (stairs, totem like column, pyramid shape lighting fixture) for the definition of place in space. The sketches are delightful but need more vigor and intensity.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The movement sequence in the UT environment doesn’t bright forth the quality of each “room”. The overall scheme lacks dynamism and in need of more development.
Belle
Key strength of the scheme:
Dynamic composition using element of circulation and the spiralling stairs enhance this impression.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lacking main focus on the whole scheme. Need more effort in editing down the number of stairs. The travelling routes get to be confusing and this can be improved by the application of textures according to zones. The axonometric sketches are studiously drawn but lack imagination. The 2nd set of textures can’t be click enlarged and that is a drawback.
Berlen
Key strength of the scheme:
The comprehension of scale even in the virtual realm. This has been intelligently obtained by way of organizing the interlocking volumes and the open and semi-open spaces inbetween. The spatial experience is oriented by the visual sequence of openings, inside/outside and lights. The axonometric sketches are superb in imagination and with technique. They are at once idiosyncratic and uncannily beautiful.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The apparent disengagement with texture application. You can try to use texture in a way that the surface ceases to be a plane.
Diarne
Key strength of the scheme:
The attempt to create differences with very minimal spatial definition.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
There is not enough work done in this experiment. The axonometric sketches are lacking in interlocking shapes and the line quality is general low. The main panel of the 5 captured images has been consistently rendered from the first draft to the final project. There isn’t any design development other than further rendering of the surfaces. Please engage with the weekly assignment and do more exercises.
DK Fawad
Key strength of the scheme:
The deliberate act to represent all of the ideas drawn from the client’s quotes. Some of the spatial sequences in the UT environment are strangely beautiful and with lots of visual clues. The axonometric sketches are compulsive and full of energy. The composition of spatial elements has been greatly improved since E1.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The 36 textures are overtly simplistic in terms of its degree of gradient. They are short of diversity at the same time. Please observe good examples for improvement.
Ella
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in every labs based on the ideas drawn from each client’s quote. The spare rooms are juxtaposed with the beautiful black strokes frozen in the transparent low walls. The captured images defy the generally artificial “look” of the UT environment. This is a critical manipulation of the digital tools. The textures and axonometric sketches are unique and with engaging spirit.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The final project is not ambitious spatially. You can still do an UT map that is critical of the medium yet expressing the richness of architectural experience.
Henry
Key strength of the scheme:
The dynamic balance between the “floating” lab and the embedded one. Many interesting features not only ornate the spaces but orient the movement in the UT environment. The imaginative use of texture in Nobel’s office and its formal composition. Axonometric sketches are vigorously studied.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The 36 textures haven’t shown the process of gradient clearly. Please look at them and try to see the pattern in a sequence so you can improve the effect next time.
Irene
Key strength of the scheme:
The axonometric sketches are forcefully composed and drawn with a distinct style. Some of the surfaces in the UT environment show interesting juxtaposition.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The ramp of your project is basically flawed and hard if not impossible to move through it even in virtuality. The environment in general is overtly chaotic and in need of editing.
Jazy
Key strength of the scheme:
The shear energy engaged in and complexity of the project are appreciated. The vigorous development from the earlier drafts to the final gigantic environment is welcomed. The interior space for Campbell’s lab is well integrated and spatially interesting.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Too many features that are just for visual purposes. Try to develop spatial organization and a certain overlapping of the circulations. The colors are too busy and super hyper. Try to exercise constraint so as to develop a sense of taste.
Katy
Key strength of the scheme:
The design development has been demonstrated in a series of fine axonometric sketches. The ideas drawn from each client’s quote are sound and have been carried forward in the design of the space. Persistent gradients in texture sketches.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
You must get into the UnReal environment! This is the major flaw in your submission! Please ask for help if you don’t know how to do it.
Keena
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in the spatial organization and the rendered ambiance that has been informed by each client’s quote. The scale is proper and the application of textures and lights are skilful. The sketches are superbly done especially the axonometric ones.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The UT environment is composed mainly by conjoining boxes/rooms. Even though they are sufficient but the design possibilities haven’t been fully investigated and experimented. The ramps are just there for functional purpose and short of expression.
Maria
Key strength of the scheme:
Dramatic application of architectural elements: spiral stair, repetitive gates for path, lighting effect.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The connecting ramp is too generic and not visible from the captured images. The UT environment lacks spatial highlights leading to a rather bland experience. Try to integrate your rooms and create overlapping area that does not necessary sit at the same floor level.
Michael
Key strength of the scheme:
The spatial sequence of the external lab. The application of textures and the composition of volumes within a large space. The sketches of parallel projection are highly stylized and with diverse combinations.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The textures lack process of gradient. They need to show the range from Dark to Light instead of Dark and Light! The captured images of the final project, although nicely organized into 2 panels, haven’t expressed your UT environment comprehensively.
Miller
Key strength of the scheme:
The scale and proportion of Cousteau’s lab have been properly achieved. Textures have been effectively applied. The process of design development has been vigorously engaged.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The encaged ramp, although beautifully envisioned, hasn’t been shown effectively in the captured images. The glass ramp is too transparent to a degree that it is almost not there. The embedded lab for Nobel has been put together by a series of conjoining rooms and they lack spatial varieties even though great care has been applied. The textures need more patterning instead of just using one composing method: density. Otherwise, a promising submission.
Natalie
Key strength of the scheme:
Stylized axonometric sketches. The UT environment has been scaled properly and clearly oriented in space. The design ideas are well discussed and illustrated. Effective use of red color to indicate paths in the map.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The ramp is not dramatically realized based on your design idea. The emphasis of a slanted surface is always about its continuity from the floor and the movement it alludes to. The expression of a ramp works best as a straight line instead of a spiralling, wide + “textured” surface. It connotes stillness instead of sliding movement.
Nick
Key strength of the scheme:
The application of textures onto main circulations. The system of movement that connect each rooms is visual comprehensible from the captured images and before entering into the UT environment. This helps one’s orientation in the virtual. Using drawing to solidify design ideas.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The skills in drawing and developing interlocking volumes are poor even though signs of engagement are there in the sketches. Please observe the good examples and practice more. The capacity to conjoin “shapes” in a expansive way can help you comprehend the “secrets” of creating dynamic spatial sequence.
Patrick D
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in spatial organization as signified both in the 18 axonometric sketches and the final captured images. Effective yet minimal employment of ascending steps to enhance the “lightness” of Cousteau’s lab.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Not enough energy in the development, organization and experience of UT environment. The possible means of design that group each spatial elements together to form a larger integration haven’t been explored. This is a major flaw. Please continue to make progress in E3.
Patrick S2
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in articulating design ideas generated from each client’s quote. A comprehensible design development that shows fine tuned mastery in volumetric composition. Strong axonometric sketches.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Although the spaces have been carefully rendered but their architectural effects haven’t been further dramatized. There is a tendency to engage the design of a “room” via perspectival view, say through the aiming tip of the virtual gun. Try to “see” your design in mind’s eye first before visualization. The 36 textures are short of the patterning variety. They are all about density.
Sarah
Key strength of the scheme:
The design development signified by the series of axonometric sketches demonstrates engaging vigor. The final UT environment is clear strung together via a central circulation loop.
The textures are interesting employing different organic patterns.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The spatial sequence and further development of the dramatic effects in certain area of the UT map. The trick is to do a well proportioned environment with a lot of spatial highlights achieved through organization, imagination and the creation of ambiance.
Serena
Key strength of the scheme:
The meeting place is simple but effective and served as the conjoining space both spatially and functionally. The axonometric sketches are quite an improvement and they have shown their effects in your UT environment. The desire to perfect has emerged in this experiment.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Although the spatial organization shows certain level of imagination, more understanding in the essence of a beautiful space is needed. Please study more of the precedents and try to capture what makes architecture move! Good progress.
Tri
Key strength of the scheme:
This is such a delightful journey of yours in virtuality! Even though the UT environment doesn’t have the heap of UnReal excitements that one would like to see using this engine, but the shear joy in the making of architectural space is appreciated. Well drawn sketches and slow delivered ideas combined with a cool mind of an architect, this experiment should lead you to a more dynamic and “gravity-free” environment in E3.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The audacity in motion, perhaps. Try to break loose all constraints and turn the visual richness in your space into action packed kind of animated space.
Ashneil
No Show
Barno
Key strength of the scheme:
The playfulness in making shapes and spaces. This is a bold solution that can. The application of textures is confidant and effective and it compliments the volumetric main spaces. Ingenious idea to use sculptural like elements (stairs, totem like column, pyramid shape lighting fixture) for the definition of place in space. The sketches are delightful but need more vigor and intensity.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The movement sequence in the UT environment doesn’t bright forth the quality of each “room”. The overall scheme lacks dynamism and in need of more development.
Belle
Key strength of the scheme:
Dynamic composition using element of circulation and the spiralling stairs enhance this impression.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lacking main focus on the whole scheme. Need more effort in editing down the number of stairs. The travelling routes get to be confusing and this can be improved by the application of textures according to zones. The axonometric sketches are studiously drawn but lack imagination. The 2nd set of textures can’t be click enlarged and that is a drawback.
Berlen
Key strength of the scheme:
The comprehension of scale even in the virtual realm. This has been intelligently obtained by way of organizing the interlocking volumes and the open and semi-open spaces inbetween. The spatial experience is oriented by the visual sequence of openings, inside/outside and lights. The axonometric sketches are superb in imagination and with technique. They are at once idiosyncratic and uncannily beautiful.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The apparent disengagement with texture application. You can try to use texture in a way that the surface ceases to be a plane.
Diarne
Key strength of the scheme:
The attempt to create differences with very minimal spatial definition.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
There is not enough work done in this experiment. The axonometric sketches are lacking in interlocking shapes and the line quality is general low. The main panel of the 5 captured images has been consistently rendered from the first draft to the final project. There isn’t any design development other than further rendering of the surfaces. Please engage with the weekly assignment and do more exercises.
DK Fawad
Key strength of the scheme:
The deliberate act to represent all of the ideas drawn from the client’s quotes. Some of the spatial sequences in the UT environment are strangely beautiful and with lots of visual clues. The axonometric sketches are compulsive and full of energy. The composition of spatial elements has been greatly improved since E1.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The 36 textures are overtly simplistic in terms of its degree of gradient. They are short of diversity at the same time. Please observe good examples for improvement.
Ella
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in every labs based on the ideas drawn from each client’s quote. The spare rooms are juxtaposed with the beautiful black strokes frozen in the transparent low walls. The captured images defy the generally artificial “look” of the UT environment. This is a critical manipulation of the digital tools. The textures and axonometric sketches are unique and with engaging spirit.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The final project is not ambitious spatially. You can still do an UT map that is critical of the medium yet expressing the richness of architectural experience.
Henry
Key strength of the scheme:
The dynamic balance between the “floating” lab and the embedded one. Many interesting features not only ornate the spaces but orient the movement in the UT environment. The imaginative use of texture in Nobel’s office and its formal composition. Axonometric sketches are vigorously studied.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The 36 textures haven’t shown the process of gradient clearly. Please look at them and try to see the pattern in a sequence so you can improve the effect next time.
Irene
Key strength of the scheme:
The axonometric sketches are forcefully composed and drawn with a distinct style. Some of the surfaces in the UT environment show interesting juxtaposition.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The ramp of your project is basically flawed and hard if not impossible to move through it even in virtuality. The environment in general is overtly chaotic and in need of editing.
Jazy
Key strength of the scheme:
The shear energy engaged in and complexity of the project are appreciated. The vigorous development from the earlier drafts to the final gigantic environment is welcomed. The interior space for Campbell’s lab is well integrated and spatially interesting.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Too many features that are just for visual purposes. Try to develop spatial organization and a certain overlapping of the circulations. The colors are too busy and super hyper. Try to exercise constraint so as to develop a sense of taste.
Katy
Key strength of the scheme:
The design development has been demonstrated in a series of fine axonometric sketches. The ideas drawn from each client’s quote are sound and have been carried forward in the design of the space. Persistent gradients in texture sketches.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
You must get into the UnReal environment! This is the major flaw in your submission! Please ask for help if you don’t know how to do it.
Keena
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in the spatial organization and the rendered ambiance that has been informed by each client’s quote. The scale is proper and the application of textures and lights are skilful. The sketches are superbly done especially the axonometric ones.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The UT environment is composed mainly by conjoining boxes/rooms. Even though they are sufficient but the design possibilities haven’t been fully investigated and experimented. The ramps are just there for functional purpose and short of expression.
Maria
Key strength of the scheme:
Dramatic application of architectural elements: spiral stair, repetitive gates for path, lighting effect.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The connecting ramp is too generic and not visible from the captured images. The UT environment lacks spatial highlights leading to a rather bland experience. Try to integrate your rooms and create overlapping area that does not necessary sit at the same floor level.
Michael
Key strength of the scheme:
The spatial sequence of the external lab. The application of textures and the composition of volumes within a large space. The sketches of parallel projection are highly stylized and with diverse combinations.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The textures lack process of gradient. They need to show the range from Dark to Light instead of Dark and Light! The captured images of the final project, although nicely organized into 2 panels, haven’t expressed your UT environment comprehensively.
Miller
Key strength of the scheme:
The scale and proportion of Cousteau’s lab have been properly achieved. Textures have been effectively applied. The process of design development has been vigorously engaged.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The encaged ramp, although beautifully envisioned, hasn’t been shown effectively in the captured images. The glass ramp is too transparent to a degree that it is almost not there. The embedded lab for Nobel has been put together by a series of conjoining rooms and they lack spatial varieties even though great care has been applied. The textures need more patterning instead of just using one composing method: density. Otherwise, a promising submission.
Natalie
Key strength of the scheme:
Stylized axonometric sketches. The UT environment has been scaled properly and clearly oriented in space. The design ideas are well discussed and illustrated. Effective use of red color to indicate paths in the map.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The ramp is not dramatically realized based on your design idea. The emphasis of a slanted surface is always about its continuity from the floor and the movement it alludes to. The expression of a ramp works best as a straight line instead of a spiralling, wide + “textured” surface. It connotes stillness instead of sliding movement.
Nick
Key strength of the scheme:
The application of textures onto main circulations. The system of movement that connect each rooms is visual comprehensible from the captured images and before entering into the UT environment. This helps one’s orientation in the virtual. Using drawing to solidify design ideas.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The skills in drawing and developing interlocking volumes are poor even though signs of engagement are there in the sketches. Please observe the good examples and practice more. The capacity to conjoin “shapes” in a expansive way can help you comprehend the “secrets” of creating dynamic spatial sequence.
Patrick D
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in spatial organization as signified both in the 18 axonometric sketches and the final captured images. Effective yet minimal employment of ascending steps to enhance the “lightness” of Cousteau’s lab.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Not enough energy in the development, organization and experience of UT environment. The possible means of design that group each spatial elements together to form a larger integration haven’t been explored. This is a major flaw. Please continue to make progress in E3.
Patrick S2
Key strength of the scheme:
Clarity in articulating design ideas generated from each client’s quote. A comprehensible design development that shows fine tuned mastery in volumetric composition. Strong axonometric sketches.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Although the spaces have been carefully rendered but their architectural effects haven’t been further dramatized. There is a tendency to engage the design of a “room” via perspectival view, say through the aiming tip of the virtual gun. Try to “see” your design in mind’s eye first before visualization. The 36 textures are short of the patterning variety. They are all about density.
Sarah
Key strength of the scheme:
The design development signified by the series of axonometric sketches demonstrates engaging vigor. The final UT environment is clear strung together via a central circulation loop.
The textures are interesting employing different organic patterns.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The spatial sequence and further development of the dramatic effects in certain area of the UT map. The trick is to do a well proportioned environment with a lot of spatial highlights achieved through organization, imagination and the creation of ambiance.
Serena
Key strength of the scheme:
The meeting place is simple but effective and served as the conjoining space both spatially and functionally. The axonometric sketches are quite an improvement and they have shown their effects in your UT environment. The desire to perfect has emerged in this experiment.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Although the spatial organization shows certain level of imagination, more understanding in the essence of a beautiful space is needed. Please study more of the precedents and try to capture what makes architecture move! Good progress.
Tri
Key strength of the scheme:
This is such a delightful journey of yours in virtuality! Even though the UT environment doesn’t have the heap of UnReal excitements that one would like to see using this engine, but the shear joy in the making of architectural space is appreciated. Well drawn sketches and slow delivered ideas combined with a cool mind of an architect, this experiment should lead you to a more dynamic and “gravity-free” environment in E3.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The audacity in motion, perhaps. Try to break loose all constraints and turn the visual richness in your space into action packed kind of animated space.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
EXP - 1 FEEDBACKS
The intention of publishing the feedback below is so that all students can benefit by understanding the strengths and weaknesses of a range of projects. Please take the time to review other student's work with these comments in mind. If you have any questions or would like any further clarification don’t hesitate to ask me during the studio session.
Ashneil
No Show.
Barno
Key strength of the scheme:
Dynamic composition of the spaces and the animation captures it. The “circulation loop” starting from the underground horizontal space strings all the volumetric “objects” together. Good + simple strategy that works.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Presentation of your works. You must scan your sketches! The animations havn’t shown the process of your design development.
Belle
Key strength of the scheme:
The fluidity of imagination and the joyfulness in the making of space. The Gallery serves as the meeting point for two curvy motifs: one compressed and one floating. All these demonstrate that you have great potential in design.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Editing, if any. Animation 4 moves too hastily and needs a narrative structure. Animation 2 + 3 could be edited into one sequence.
Berlen
Key strength of the scheme:
The imagination and integration of spaces into one continuous experience in the landscape with a sense of control and joyfulness. Excellent line work in all sketches paired by thematic varieties.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
I would like to see more development in the interiority of space: the positioning of the body, the definition of the micro-environment, the contrast between inside and outside. This concern for interiority can also help you edit down the over-scaled final project.
Diarne
Key strength of the scheme:
Show process of development. Sketches of section & texture are intense, creative and show enough varieties.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t taken the more challenging sketchUp 3D model, showing a partial hemisphere, for final development. The 2nd animation shows incomplete sectional view. More focus on the development of an idea.
DK Fawad
Key strength of the scheme:
Persistent in design development by perfecting the use of SketchUp tools. Boldness in spatial conception. The animated sequence for stair is a very beautiful experience in space.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Integration of spatial sequence with the volumetric objects. Lack understanding of what constitutes inside and outside in architecture. It is a common problem among first year students.
Ella
Key strength of the scheme:
Transformation from model 1 to 2: from rectilinear composition to curvaceous volumetric formation. Persistence in the attempt to master 3D modelling skills. Strong sense of beauty when it comes to the overall composition of objects.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The architectonic aspects of the final project are not clear at all: inside/outside, form/space, structure/partition. These are common problems for 1st year students. The animations need better narrative structure and organization.
Henry
Key strength of the scheme:
Great sensibility in constructing the ambience of the spaces through texture and colour. The movement bit of the representation is fluid and sophisticated in “Walking in the Studio” animation.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Integration between the total-view object and its internal micro-environment is lacking. Line quality of sketches in general needs improvement.
Irene
Key strength of the scheme:
The stair has been developed in detail and effectively situated into your project. The ambience of the interior spaces is well represented by textures and the artworks exhibited. The texture sketches show various patterns and they are imaginative.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Animations lack structure and are in need of steady procession. The design development bit of the experiment is weak and you need to take a more ambitious approach for your next experiment. The sectional sketches lack alternative. Otherwise, a good 1st submission
Jazy
Key strength of the scheme:
With persistence and perseverance, your pursue for a better solution has been productive. The structural composition of the above ground space is impressive showing dynamic composition and rich materiality. The stairs are meticulously studied and represented.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The connection between above and below ground studios is at a rudimentary stage and needs further integration. This is a common problem for the 1st year student.
Katy
Key strength of the scheme:
Sensitive to shapes and in creating appealing objects with different materialities. The formal imagination is rich. Good studies of stairs.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The 3 animations show incomplete interior views and often they morphed into sectional procession that creates confusion. Must learn how to structure your visual narrative and sequence by using Storyboard technique. Line quality needs improvement in all sketches. Overall spatial integration is lacking and that is a common issue for all students in our group.
Keena
Key strength of the scheme:
Elegant and composed in the creation of objects. Beautiful sketches with great care in line quality. The interior spaces show highly effective use of textures. Capable of design development.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lack ambition in further experimenting your ideas and possibilities in space regardless of a strong start. The animations need editing and better visual structure.
Maria
Key strength of the scheme:
The colour scheme and application of textures in the interior spaces are effective. Details rendered on the walls for display add quality to the gallery space. Texture sketches are carefully drawn up and show enough varieties.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t explored the spatial possibility for stairs. They are employed mainly a s a functional object in your project instead of a device to create spatial events through movement. The “stacking” of 3 spaces into 1 object is too simplistic and lineal.
Michael
Key strength of the scheme:
Boldness in idea and representation. There is a strong focus in the compositional aspect of the project in both options. All the elements in the project: rooms, stairs, levels, front & back, object in landscape; were tightly woven together forming a properly scaled “building”. Sectional sketches are well rendered and each shows some aspects of architectonic possibility.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Not ambitious enough in the experimentation. You’ve chosen the more “static” model for final development. Need to explore the dynamic aspect in space by way of movement. Need more “patterning” in texture sketches.
Miller X
Key strength of the scheme:
Structural boldness and fluid movement in the final project.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The descriptive aspects in EXP-1: your chosen words were not fully integrated into your project and hadn’t been clearly documented and followed through in the developmental process. This has contributed to the singular result in your final project: megastructure; and lacking further articulation of the spaces it has brought forth.
Natalie
Key strength of the scheme:
Overall presentation and organization in your uploads are strong and comprehensive. The process of design development has been well documented. Texture sketches are beautifully executed with lots of varieties. A rather challenging approach to bring in landscape as part of the experiment.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The integration between the built-object, ground level, surrounding landscape and the underground spaces. Some of the images show great potential but they are under-developed. The objects need to “open up” at certain juncture for better spatial result. This is a general tendency for 1st year students. You can improve your design “tool box” by studying more canonical cases.
Nick
Key strength of the scheme:
The attempt to “texturize” everything! Creative application of software to achieve particular result in stair exercise. The quality and variety in texture sketches.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lacking vigour in the developmental aspect of your project. SketchUp has been used more as a drawing device instead of the vehicle to explore spatial possibilities. The sectional sketches lack architectonic connotation. Too much focus on the 2D aspects of the experiment. The animation upload has been shrinked!
Patrick D
Key strength of the scheme:
Effective application of textures as shown in the 3rd captured images.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Total lack of engagement with the process. The application of SketchUp in both the development and visualization of your final project is at the rudimentary level. Need to spend more time in mastering the skills in drawing and design development.
Patrick S
Key strength of the scheme:
The overall presentation and organization of the uploads are highly successful and comprehensive. The whole project is well composed, developed and imaginatively rendered: the colours, textures and the sequence of movement in spaces. Sketches show great variety in patterns and care in line work. The 3 animations have employed 3 kinds of viewing process to present the final project instead of just another repetition of the same.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t explored the possibilities to integrate your 3 spaces in a dynamic way. For instance, breaking up the complex interlocking sub-bits contained in a “box” at the above ground level, and by inserting a system of walkways, steps and platforms, you can create an “organism” instead of the present “squatting” rectilinear box.
Sarah
Key strength of the scheme:
Playful and sophisticated design in stairs, especially the one at the underground space leading to the in-between gallery: the scale, its spatial potentiality, extended motifs of “step” as multi-purpose fixtures in space. One of the rear cases that have taken “ascending” theatrically.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The balance between volume and mass at the upper level. The 3 conjoined doughnut shape volumes have been arbitrarily put together.
Serena
Key strength of the scheme:
Meticulousness in texture sketches and the highly dramatic application of them in the interior spaces. Sketched out different approaches in the conception of stair.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The general solution for this project is overtly one track minded and lack alternatives. The animated “boxes” of space lacks architectonic elements: wall + floor thickness, proper openings, relations between inside and outside. More spatial experimentation in your next EXP!
Tri
Key strength of the scheme:
Strong sensitivity in graphic design. The overall uploads are measured and sophisticated in spatial organization and design. The texture sketches are one of the best in terms of their line quality and varieties. The red “ribbon” like element ties the 3 levels of space together both structurally and symbolically. This is a good solution without imposing an overwhelming scale in the final project.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Could be more ambitious and exploring more detailed relationship between inside and outside of a constructed object.
Ashneil
No Show.
Barno
Key strength of the scheme:
Dynamic composition of the spaces and the animation captures it. The “circulation loop” starting from the underground horizontal space strings all the volumetric “objects” together. Good + simple strategy that works.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Presentation of your works. You must scan your sketches! The animations havn’t shown the process of your design development.
Belle
Key strength of the scheme:
The fluidity of imagination and the joyfulness in the making of space. The Gallery serves as the meeting point for two curvy motifs: one compressed and one floating. All these demonstrate that you have great potential in design.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Editing, if any. Animation 4 moves too hastily and needs a narrative structure. Animation 2 + 3 could be edited into one sequence.
Berlen
Key strength of the scheme:
The imagination and integration of spaces into one continuous experience in the landscape with a sense of control and joyfulness. Excellent line work in all sketches paired by thematic varieties.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
I would like to see more development in the interiority of space: the positioning of the body, the definition of the micro-environment, the contrast between inside and outside. This concern for interiority can also help you edit down the over-scaled final project.
Diarne
Key strength of the scheme:
Show process of development. Sketches of section & texture are intense, creative and show enough varieties.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t taken the more challenging sketchUp 3D model, showing a partial hemisphere, for final development. The 2nd animation shows incomplete sectional view. More focus on the development of an idea.
DK Fawad
Key strength of the scheme:
Persistent in design development by perfecting the use of SketchUp tools. Boldness in spatial conception. The animated sequence for stair is a very beautiful experience in space.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Integration of spatial sequence with the volumetric objects. Lack understanding of what constitutes inside and outside in architecture. It is a common problem among first year students.
Ella
Key strength of the scheme:
Transformation from model 1 to 2: from rectilinear composition to curvaceous volumetric formation. Persistence in the attempt to master 3D modelling skills. Strong sense of beauty when it comes to the overall composition of objects.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The architectonic aspects of the final project are not clear at all: inside/outside, form/space, structure/partition. These are common problems for 1st year students. The animations need better narrative structure and organization.
Henry
Key strength of the scheme:
Great sensibility in constructing the ambience of the spaces through texture and colour. The movement bit of the representation is fluid and sophisticated in “Walking in the Studio” animation.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Integration between the total-view object and its internal micro-environment is lacking. Line quality of sketches in general needs improvement.
Irene
Key strength of the scheme:
The stair has been developed in detail and effectively situated into your project. The ambience of the interior spaces is well represented by textures and the artworks exhibited. The texture sketches show various patterns and they are imaginative.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Animations lack structure and are in need of steady procession. The design development bit of the experiment is weak and you need to take a more ambitious approach for your next experiment. The sectional sketches lack alternative. Otherwise, a good 1st submission
Jazy
Key strength of the scheme:
With persistence and perseverance, your pursue for a better solution has been productive. The structural composition of the above ground space is impressive showing dynamic composition and rich materiality. The stairs are meticulously studied and represented.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The connection between above and below ground studios is at a rudimentary stage and needs further integration. This is a common problem for the 1st year student.
Katy
Key strength of the scheme:
Sensitive to shapes and in creating appealing objects with different materialities. The formal imagination is rich. Good studies of stairs.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The 3 animations show incomplete interior views and often they morphed into sectional procession that creates confusion. Must learn how to structure your visual narrative and sequence by using Storyboard technique. Line quality needs improvement in all sketches. Overall spatial integration is lacking and that is a common issue for all students in our group.
Keena
Key strength of the scheme:
Elegant and composed in the creation of objects. Beautiful sketches with great care in line quality. The interior spaces show highly effective use of textures. Capable of design development.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lack ambition in further experimenting your ideas and possibilities in space regardless of a strong start. The animations need editing and better visual structure.
Maria
Key strength of the scheme:
The colour scheme and application of textures in the interior spaces are effective. Details rendered on the walls for display add quality to the gallery space. Texture sketches are carefully drawn up and show enough varieties.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t explored the spatial possibility for stairs. They are employed mainly a s a functional object in your project instead of a device to create spatial events through movement. The “stacking” of 3 spaces into 1 object is too simplistic and lineal.
Michael
Key strength of the scheme:
Boldness in idea and representation. There is a strong focus in the compositional aspect of the project in both options. All the elements in the project: rooms, stairs, levels, front & back, object in landscape; were tightly woven together forming a properly scaled “building”. Sectional sketches are well rendered and each shows some aspects of architectonic possibility.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Not ambitious enough in the experimentation. You’ve chosen the more “static” model for final development. Need to explore the dynamic aspect in space by way of movement. Need more “patterning” in texture sketches.
Miller X
Key strength of the scheme:
Structural boldness and fluid movement in the final project.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The descriptive aspects in EXP-1: your chosen words were not fully integrated into your project and hadn’t been clearly documented and followed through in the developmental process. This has contributed to the singular result in your final project: megastructure; and lacking further articulation of the spaces it has brought forth.
Natalie
Key strength of the scheme:
Overall presentation and organization in your uploads are strong and comprehensive. The process of design development has been well documented. Texture sketches are beautifully executed with lots of varieties. A rather challenging approach to bring in landscape as part of the experiment.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The integration between the built-object, ground level, surrounding landscape and the underground spaces. Some of the images show great potential but they are under-developed. The objects need to “open up” at certain juncture for better spatial result. This is a general tendency for 1st year students. You can improve your design “tool box” by studying more canonical cases.
Nick
Key strength of the scheme:
The attempt to “texturize” everything! Creative application of software to achieve particular result in stair exercise. The quality and variety in texture sketches.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lacking vigour in the developmental aspect of your project. SketchUp has been used more as a drawing device instead of the vehicle to explore spatial possibilities. The sectional sketches lack architectonic connotation. Too much focus on the 2D aspects of the experiment. The animation upload has been shrinked!
Patrick D
Key strength of the scheme:
Effective application of textures as shown in the 3rd captured images.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Total lack of engagement with the process. The application of SketchUp in both the development and visualization of your final project is at the rudimentary level. Need to spend more time in mastering the skills in drawing and design development.
Patrick S
Key strength of the scheme:
The overall presentation and organization of the uploads are highly successful and comprehensive. The whole project is well composed, developed and imaginatively rendered: the colours, textures and the sequence of movement in spaces. Sketches show great variety in patterns and care in line work. The 3 animations have employed 3 kinds of viewing process to present the final project instead of just another repetition of the same.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t explored the possibilities to integrate your 3 spaces in a dynamic way. For instance, breaking up the complex interlocking sub-bits contained in a “box” at the above ground level, and by inserting a system of walkways, steps and platforms, you can create an “organism” instead of the present “squatting” rectilinear box.
Sarah
Key strength of the scheme:
Playful and sophisticated design in stairs, especially the one at the underground space leading to the in-between gallery: the scale, its spatial potentiality, extended motifs of “step” as multi-purpose fixtures in space. One of the rear cases that have taken “ascending” theatrically.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The balance between volume and mass at the upper level. The 3 conjoined doughnut shape volumes have been arbitrarily put together.
Serena
Key strength of the scheme:
Meticulousness in texture sketches and the highly dramatic application of them in the interior spaces. Sketched out different approaches in the conception of stair.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The general solution for this project is overtly one track minded and lack alternatives. The animated “boxes” of space lacks architectonic elements: wall + floor thickness, proper openings, relations between inside and outside. More spatial experimentation in your next EXP!
Tri
Key strength of the scheme:
Strong sensitivity in graphic design. The overall uploads are measured and sophisticated in spatial organization and design. The texture sketches are one of the best in terms of their line quality and varieties. The red “ribbon” like element ties the 3 levels of space together both structurally and symbolically. This is a good solution without imposing an overwhelming scale in the final project.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Could be more ambitious and exploring more detailed relationship between inside and outside of a constructed object.
Monday, March 23, 2009
How Do They Work?
Dead in the Water, 1999, by Fiona Hall(1952- ). 106.5 x 128 x 128 cm.There are two "sections" in this piece of art work: on the top, the standardized, mass-produced polyvinyl chloride pipes with punch holes all over; at the bottom, the family of organic looking sea creatures made out of glass beads and silver wires. These two "sections"-each appears to be encased in a glass box framed by wood membranes, and organized by a plane- allude to a narrative whole as interpreted by J. Ewington in 2005: “filth of cities flowing into the oceans, man-made conduits connecting, but ultimately destroying, the natural world beneath".
However, being an enduring piece of art work, the meanings embedded in it are always complex, multi-layered, and impossible to have a final word. It gives us pleasure and brings forth associations as much as we, the beholders, are capable of "looking" at it and articulating the emotions stirred up inside of us.
Instead of the irreconcilable polemics between the man-made city and the natural system of organism as depicted by Ewington, I see the pairing of mechanical infrastructure(plumbing) and organic life forms(sea creatures) as one symbiotic whole joined together by a sheer plane of transparent synthetic polymer resin. It is not a happy voluntary union, but that's what we have now and we have to make both entities live: the mechanical + the organic.
All that Jazz, 1989, by Rosalie Gascoigne(1917-1999). 131 x 100 cm.Of course this assemblage reminds us of Mondrian’s ‘Broadway Boogie-woogie’(1942-43), 127 x 127 cm:
The differences between them? Many, and easily expanded to a book length. Let's just focus on the materiality for the time being: "How were they made?".Made out of sawn and split soft drink crates gathered onto plywood, All That Jazz is at once an assemblage of found objects and a quilted color field painting. (to be continued...)
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Variations Of A Theme - Stair
1- Stepping Into Terrain
The Ira Keller Fountain, by Lawrence Halprin.
McCormick Tribune Campus Center, IIT, by Rem Koolhaas OMA.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)