|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1909
Location: Miami, Florida
|
 Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 4:39 pm Post subject: |
    |
|
| Quote: | | if both the client and the architect wanted a design which was impossible to engineer structurally... |
Impossible to engineer? I take that as something that was designed by the architect that is physically impossible to build with current methods, materials and technology...which means the architect "failed", in the first round. Design is always about the investigation of spatial qualities, and new forms may push the envelope...it's a two way street really: the architect imagines beyond the limits and engineer tries to match that new realm. However, when a design is impossible, the architect MUST find ways to approach the design in a different way that still meets the set of criteria outlined by client and the physical properties known to mankind in the 21st century...not to mention, often the complex structural solutions simply cost an extravagant amount of money that the client is typically the one who begs for simpler designs...
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Sat May 26, 2007 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry to say, but I find this a very limited and cemented entrance to the new things.
You sort of already decided that it is and alway's will be the architect, who's only obligation, is to emagine something --- and don't question if this just mean that the spoiled can or can not put quality into the creation. I say that architects shuld stay out of this creativity ,while the whole way of handeling these things obviously relive the born with a silver spoon, from any responsibility as when any weaving fantasised spetaculatum , with no roots in the real world is to become a real arts piece , if just the lazy and stupid engineer would deliver the foundations, then everything would render, render the Emporors clotches.
Sorry ,but architecture became something absolute opposite the creative process, it became a smooth social comford and the honest work of the artist, became the pray. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Architect
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 184
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
P.C., 99.999% of architects don't know what the hell Architecture is anyways - so yeah, I can always understand where you're coming from. Lol, most of them are pushed by the client.
But...
Raw pure 'Architecture' is a matter of understanding the difference between having a human being 'contained' or 'sheltered' - and all of that understanding can easily be seen in how the architect designs it's 'loads'.
Okay?
This basic fundamental understanding of Architecture is NOT, I repeat, NOT, within the abilities of the 'computer' nor is it within the abilities any fuckn' engineer for that matter - engineers are to be employed, that's it that's all.
And while I'm at it, your understanding of how space is to be structed is equal to putting a human being in prison/container. You have NO idea of how to shape/work with space using structural loads.
In other words P.C. - you contain a human being. And that my friend - is the worse thing you can do.
Take care... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Acturly I did spend 3 years at the architect acadamy .but I regred that there I was I who was terrified --- it seemed architecture did not deal with nice houses creativity, finding a attitude towerds all these new tools , not at all.
It was like they emagined a house as being surfaces, what your eyes would meet and the feel of that, what met your eyes , went no further than that of trend and expression of religion so to say. Now please understand that my background was ships ancd boats, and compared "strength" and structural ability please remember that most boats would soon break away case the same structural idears was used as in houses. But true, I was quite disapointed and my greatest disapointment was realy the arogance -- arogance towerds the very materials, the people who was supposed to live under those condisions was rather dollies than real people , and very very little real creativity acturly came from the fact, that most of the other student, would know how to put two pieces of wood together in a way making them both strong and pritty. ---- Acturly none of that was around, if any theoretic project was discussed and there was a problem about it, then the laugh engineer shuld save the spoils and do it as othervise it was the engineers foult that the thing didn't work. It could newer be the student foult that he know less than nothing about what the sketches spetaculated , the inspiration would newer be from the materials or the materials abilities their difference or from the oppotunities of hands-on knowleage and, at the same time they praised Barcelona the further away from the core feel they came, the more romantic about the basic construction of what, they know nothing about.
Remember I newer tried to even call myself an architect --- there could be many resons --- but first of all I simply don't want to join the arogance that lead to these of today's dead-ends, the arogance towerds the computer to only to protect the sad facts that even this wonderfull tool, is just used to continue out the old dead-end where nothing realy is new, where everything been already re-invented so many times , now tell me something ---- if I didn't have a good feel about a structure , would you then think I would be able to build, and project a boat ? Something asking so much more feel and knowleage than the lame attemts of new construction technikes you see today ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
But please don't forget, --- or if that is the problem that you havn't realised this yet --- that all I am doing is promoting a method that will bring just any form ,that will replace any other materials and structure .
I said so many times that I am not an architect so therefore it is difficult to see, how critic about my ability as architect, shuld in any way deal with the method I progress. 3D-H replace the brick or the chaos space rods and do it by the computer , that has nothing to do with my ability as architect --- but it seem that all arguments against 3D-H deal with my abilities to use trend words, newer has there been real arguments but only those that define architecture as what it growen into.
Ontop I said it so many times that I am not an architect and with the hate I met from people claiming to be architects, Well here we reached that far, that you rather see your friend in a sabwood ,poor build house that would be a proven ruin by first blow from nature --- and at the same time this is to proudly protect against new smart technikes, new structural possibilities and engineered shalters in ANY form ---- rather the old proven bad craftsmanship that is growing vorse , than realising new visions becaurse , well becaurse these silli things you say about me, without knowing me, without understanding that 3D-H work better than most of what it replace and why, everything is rather made into some sort of attack towerds your emagination of me and my doings , this realy are a strange discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
"this basic fundamental understanding of Architecture is NOT, I repeat, NOT, within the abilities of the 'computer' nor is it within the abilities any fuckn' engineer for that matter - engineers are to be employed, that's it that's all."
I think you shuld refrase this --- that this ability is not presant within the ability of the computer, do not mean it stay like this forever.
And don't fall into the dark hole of static that everything must stay as it is and nothing muse ever change, as architecture IS changing, --- but that don't mean that your expertations is right --- there are not just one way things can evolve, and who say that becaurse you can state that today the mashin can not do this or that, then this is the order of things ?
There are no gurantie that the mashin must be unhuman ,in fact the mashin could turn out to become the most human --- or would you say Disney Concert hall is a human inviroment, that any of the spetacular project architecture consist of today, is in any way human ????
"And while I'm at it, your understanding of how space is to be structed is equal to putting a human being in prison/container. You have NO idea of how to shape/work with space using structural loads."
Why do you start attack me pesonal instead of using a relevant example ????
"In other words P.C. - you contain a human being. And that my friend - is the worse thing you can do."
Well please refere what Stararchitecture these day's are about --- is it about providing and delivering what I promise ; a relive for designers , a gurantee that the structure will not fail as the computer calculated it, who of the celebrated Stararchitects of today have offered a vision for those who lost their homes , who of these can come up with a system that mean a revolution in construction, in projecting, in costs new jobs, real new architecture ???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thomasdbiggs
Joined: 07 Jun 2007
Posts: 8
Location: Oakland, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Many architects and engineers for that matter are so fortunate as to studied both areas of expertise in college. I know several Architects that have a civil engineering degree. This is what I would refer to as a very powerful combination. Not only does it open up a lot of employment possiblities, but you can save a lot of time in coordination with the engineer, and visa versa. (I also know engineers who are very good architects).
This approach makes sense when you consider the degree to which these professions are bound:
Architects are concerned with how the space feels, and performs.
Engineers are concerned with the "bones" that make the space.
<<The caveat comes when you realize that the structure IS PART OF the space>> Ancient Greeks knew this, and many recent amazing modern built works are testimony to how important this principal is.
As an architect, I have always studied structural engineering, becuase the possiblities are endless when you know how to generate the math behind structures. City building officials need to see the numbers in order to let you build them.
My advice, is to go with your heart. Team up with an engineer, and together form a business that makes amazing built forms. Or, if you are fortunate, also persue both curiculums so you are even better prepared.
_________________
Thomas Biggs
Biggs Group Architecture
www.biggs-group.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
birgco
Joined: 01 May 2007
Posts: 286
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:08 am Post subject: When the engineer |
|
|
Pssssssst, PC, I want to let you in on a little secret, ( I have to whisper because I'm afraid they will hear me). You see, there are a few people on this forum who a very, very, very smart. They are so smart, that they can make really, really outrageous statements, personal attacks, etc., and because they are so very much smarter than everyone else....... they believe that they don't have to back any of their opinions with facts. Yes, those pesky little annoyances called "facts". Now I admit, that not every discussion requires them, but it makes your argument a whole lot more intelligent when you can sprinkle a few of them in here and there. Okay, I have to go now, in case they find out I've been here .......................keep the faith...... see you later.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
"<<The caveat comes when you realize that the structure IS PART OF the space>>"
I like that very much , fact is that the whole trouble with modern architecture came with the arogance towerds structure , ------- I agrea that these day's I find much more pleasure in old projectors and I realise that the hands-on pleasure are what must again be added without that, there are no art. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P.C.
millennium club
Joined: 26 May 2004
Posts: 2163
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I must say I newer understood why my aperance and contribution sparked these often strange reply --- My nature are a positive aproach and my interest in these things , come solely from how I am and where my values are. For me secrets was handy when I was a draftsman . trade secrets that protected a particular skill ,or a process invested by a lot of time experimenting ,--- and I agrea this rather oldfasion protectivism ,but here I newer "participated" with this, my aproach alway's been that of sharing and openly do this in a positive spirit ; you are welcome to read back , and you will find strange replies to this my nature of sharing. still as this is a fora and the issue shuld be sharing to profit architecture ofcaurse I thought about the nature of these replies to --- I shared my thoughts about these to, but realy I newer found any pleasure dealing with some particular reflections to my idears or innovations ,in fact I found many of these very depressing, not for me but in my mind about these characters who obviously do not find it happy to realise the fantastic options but one thing I newer understood, is why to emty your mind for positive thinking, by fighting others and in particular as you say, why do just that with no facts or doing it uncovering yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
