Thank you, Jeff I am sorry that I couldn't attend your presentation. We talked in studio quite extensively, so I don't have much more to say about your thesis/ strategies, etc. My comments will be more about the presentation of your ideas, as I only have visuals to deal with. Considering how limited you were with the number of slides, I find it strange that you provide repetitive information (slides 7 and 8), as well as 6 (the floor plan): that could have all been condensed in, potentially one slide. Your exploded axonometry is detailed enough so the viewer can understand all the components of your building without extracting them and repeating them on the side. Also, we can really understand the space you created for the axonometry as well, so we don't really need the traditional floor plans. However, what you don't spend too much space in your presentation is that TIME component that you establish as the core of your thesis. I wish I could see more variations (at least a larger drawings) of potential metamorphosis of your building in relation to time, both in exterior/form and in interior organization of spaces. This way, you would be able to test and prove, even on the level of the conceptual design, your hypothesis.
I also find your final, money shot quite interesting: the neighbouring houses look like that for at least 150 years - we keep building them to look like homes from Victorian era for whatever reason (that is a theme for another discussion).
But, then, aren't these houses proving your point? :)
Hey jeff, stumbled upon this multi-core building. Might help you out Multifunk - Ana-Architeckten I hope your fluent in Dutch http://www.ana.nl/multifunk.html
Thank you, Jeff
ReplyDeleteI am sorry that I couldn't attend your presentation.
We talked in studio quite extensively, so I don't have much more to say about your thesis/ strategies, etc. My comments will be more about the presentation of your ideas, as I only have visuals to deal with.
Considering how limited you were with the number of slides, I find it strange that you provide repetitive information (slides 7 and 8), as well as 6 (the floor plan): that could have all been condensed in, potentially one slide. Your exploded axonometry is detailed enough so the viewer can understand all the components of your building without extracting them and repeating them on the side. Also, we can really understand the space you created for the axonometry as well, so we don't really need the traditional floor plans.
However, what you don't spend too much space in your presentation is that TIME component that you establish as the core of your thesis. I wish I could see more variations (at least a larger drawings) of potential metamorphosis of your building in relation to time, both in exterior/form and in interior organization of spaces. This way, you would be able to test and prove, even on the level of the conceptual design, your hypothesis.
I also find your final, money shot quite interesting: the neighbouring houses look like that for at least 150 years - we keep building them to look like homes from Victorian era for whatever reason (that is a theme for another discussion).
But, then, aren't these houses proving your point?
:)
Hey jeff, stumbled upon this multi-core building. Might help you out
ReplyDeleteMultifunk - Ana-Architeckten
I hope your fluent in Dutch
http://www.ana.nl/multifunk.html