Review # 5

Generally positive and shows that quick and dirty is a useful technique for exposing what is good about a scheme and what is less good. Please can you all enter your five lines below to keep Tatjana up to date with what happened and what you are going to do next.


8 responses to “Review # 5

  1. I put out some drawings for the first couple of ‘moves’ made on the ‘amateur field’. The key issue is to not only focus on creating conditions in which design judgements can be made by others, but also showing explicitly where I have made design judgements within the deployment of these minor distortions. The drawings will have to form a sort of ‘reverse archaeology’ – where leftover traces of both the event and the architect’s contribution can be found.

  2. this week I tried to make the drawings more consistent and suitable for the project and present it in a more confident way (although didnt apparently pull it off). Through several itterations of a diagramatic drawing of the concept of mutation/ triggers that I showed last week, I have started to design the building as a system containing a number of elements. Although I ‘quickly and dirtily’ attempted to convert these diagrams into a plan on the site, people felt that there was a missing link and there was more work to be done through the exploration using the diagramatic technique at different scales. I also showed an attempt at a crude spacial section but this level of spacial design is perhaps not relevant to the design of a system and I was advised not to ‘overdo’ this kind of representation.

  3. I spent a large portion of the week visiting examples of hard architecture, park hill being a major example, and from this analysis and experience I built up a set of criteria with which to analyse the inital moves my design made to create space. Through my reserach it became clear that I had not only to inject life into my drawings, but also into the planning of the ‘permanent’ aspects of the design. Comments from the review suggested that I need to work in different scales, and be more ‘designerly’, looking at planning and details with greater attention and thought.

  4. Consensus was that old habits (hard)? have been fallen back upon; embodied in traditional looking sketches rushing toward form and the conception of what a scheme actually is. Softpraxis isn’t a new programme or further cross programming etc. but new methods of operation. This must be ‘found’ in order to proceed.

  5. A quick and dirty sketch model and set of plans revealed that the spatial organisation of the proposal was too cleanly zoned. This could be avoided if the interference layers intersect more frequently creating more interesting and unexpected events. This might be achieved spatially rather than at boundaries. It was suggested that I begin to explore the crossovers in section.

  6. ‘Quick and dirty’ was really useful for getting ideas out of your head an onto (scrappy messy) paper, which can be hard if you are worried about presentation more so than your designs. I presented a some quick ideas for each of my 5 buildings- but struggled with explanation of process, and ordering my sentances (going to have to work on that). Decided that it was very important to split design up, not only in terms of cost of construction/materials in relation to time availiability of buildings, but also in terms as my value as an architect, dividng my time unevenly based on the value of each building (time availiability and function)

  7. I presented the ‘quick and dirty’ implications of my strategy of ‘Tolerance’. The material tolerances were expressed through an adaptable concrete frame with soft zones in timber… Too literal perhaps? Areas of social tolerance are beginning to emerge but require further exploration in a more abstract way (fold out plans were suggested as a possible methodology).

  8. Hannah Lambert

    I tried to design the ‘moments’ of my building with too much conscious though as to the whole design of my building, and drawing in pencil at such a large scale meant i was trying to do everything with it and they became very static poor perspectives, without the right sort of detail. I had drawn up a plan of one floor, which helped get some of the design decisions out, and from which i can pick small areas as true moments and draw them up in a sequence over time in order to develop the design (perhaps as suggested the previous week, but i think i needed to consider the design ideas for ‘quick and dirty’ a little more thoroughly before i could start the sequence and move it forward).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s