Sunday, April 27, 2008
PROJECT 2Bv2: ANIMATION
This animation shows the digital counterpart for the second attempt at creating a surface construct from the movie clips. The intent is to create a surface that acts as both frame and object itself. The walls of the "canyons" are meant to act as a framing device. The "hills" being objects. The hills also act as framing devices for the next set of terrain. While the hills are both object and frame, the canyons only serve as frame. The surface was created from a NURBS plane in Maya through use of the sculpting tools; the animation was also created in Maya.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
PROJECT 2Bv1: PHYSICAL CONSTRUCT
These first two images are of the CAD drawing used to make the physical surface construct. These were generated with stills taken out of the movie scene. The magenta represents what was cut through, the green what was etched.
These are photos of the construct. The idea behind it is perceptions of a surface. There are two types of framing at work in the movie scene. Framing done with the ships, and framing done through the view screens on board the ships. Each face is meant to represent one of the two. The top is intentionally left open, an is meant to represent a world view where there is no framing. The bottom surface was the surface meant to be framed.
PROJECT 2Av2: ANIMATION
This analytical animation is much different from the previous version of the project. Rather than interpreting the movie and changing it into something different, this one has overlays over the original scene. The "white" is representative of framing objects, while the black shows objects. The reason the white is in quotes is because of the use of gifs. Since they are index colored based, if a frame did not have white in it, the lightest color was substituted, so the light colors in some frames was meant to be white. An improved version with white white is in the works. This is based on the first scene chosen. There is no sound. The overlays end about halfway through, when the camera changes become more important than what is actually portrayed.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Mark Burry: "Between Surface and Substance"
In the article "Between Surface and Substance," Mark Burry attempts to reconcile the differences between conceptual surface constructs and the intellect and craft of substance. In recent times, digital technology has provided for a separation of surface away from substances. Surface becomes a digital construct, while the crafting of physical form becomes the container for substance. In recent history, just before the advent of digital modeling in architecture, we have Le Corbusier's chapel at Ronchamp and Earo Saarinen's TWA Building. These two buildings represent the fusion of surface and substance, the conceptual molded into physical substance. These two works serve as examples of how to best utilize the technology available today. In the transition from surface to substance, Gaudi's Nave Roof for the Sagrada Familia Church illustrates part of the challenge in turning concept to reality. The mathematical work done to give form to the surface cannot hold to create a surface with thickness. While the exterior is mathematically derived, the interior surface is offset to provide for uniform thickness, and does not follow the same rules. However, this adjustment does not significantly interfere with the realization of the idea. A studio project undertaken by staff and students from Gehry Partners, MIT and the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) to design a reading room for the Melbourne Botanical Gardens illustrates this problem in a more modern way. The designs were done as conceptual constructs. They were realized by those not involved in the design process; however, the conceptual digital models contained intersecting forms containing thin forms not possible in reality. The resolution was the addition of thickness at these thin points that allowed concept to become reality without undermining the concept itself. Deleuze's term "perplication," meaning "cross-foldings" between complex repetitions, illustrates another element of the challenge between surface and substance. Perplications can take form as concept through digital modeling; however, though they can be rendered to look like a realizable surface, these constructs cannot exist in the physical world. The Aegis Hyposurface of dECOi Architects illustrates another part of the challenge. The idea of a wall reacting to it's environment in real time was easy to document in conceptual digital realm. When they won the competition they entered their design in, they were presented with the challenge of how to make their surface reality. In making the form physical, compromises were necessary; one compromise of note is the surface construction. No uniform material can react as the digital construct, but the piecing together of triangular plates with rubber in between made their surface possible. The point Burry is making is that today's digital technology should be used to make the processes that went into Le Corbusier's chapel at Ronchamp and Eero Saarinen's TWA Building easier than they were before, rather than attempting to separate the richness of the concept and the beauty of craft.
As the technologies of digital modeling become ever more sophisticated, there exists great potential to either unite surface and substance, or widen the chasm between. Physical limitations are becoming better understood, and more realizable in the digital world of the conceptual surface. These limitations cap concepts to better hold them to the principals of reality. The potential for the union of substance and surface lies in the ability to remove the bias carried with the word "limitation." The negative connotations of limits can be lifted by the notion that these are not limitations so much as guide points; something to work from, rather than work to. In following the guide points established by physical reality, there is the potential for the conceptual surface to become the kind of well crafted substance that evokes symbolism characteristic of the world and environment in which it occupies, as opposed to serving as a reminder of the limits architects must deal with in the world of construction and design.
As the technologies of digital modeling become ever more sophisticated, there exists great potential to either unite surface and substance, or widen the chasm between. Physical limitations are becoming better understood, and more realizable in the digital world of the conceptual surface. These limitations cap concepts to better hold them to the principals of reality. The potential for the union of substance and surface lies in the ability to remove the bias carried with the word "limitation." The negative connotations of limits can be lifted by the notion that these are not limitations so much as guide points; something to work from, rather than work to. In following the guide points established by physical reality, there is the potential for the conceptual surface to become the kind of well crafted substance that evokes symbolism characteristic of the world and environment in which it occupies, as opposed to serving as a reminder of the limits architects must deal with in the world of construction and design.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
PROJECT 2Av1: IMAGES
These are two stills of moments from the animations in the previous posts.
This image is from the first animation, and highlights the moment when the Reliant emerges into the view of the Enterprise, ending the period of "calm" that takes place in the first half of the animation.
This still is from the second animation, and is taken from the bridge of the Reliant as she pursues enterprise; this is the final moment of the animation, where the Enterprise is visible to the Reliant crew.
This image is from the first animation, and highlights the moment when the Reliant emerges into the view of the Enterprise, ending the period of "calm" that takes place in the first half of the animation.
This still is from the second animation, and is taken from the bridge of the Reliant as she pursues enterprise; this is the final moment of the animation, where the Enterprise is visible to the Reliant crew.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
PROJECT 2Av1: ANIMATIONS
The scene I analyzed for these animations came from the ship battle at the end of Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan. Due to copyright stuff, I can't really post the scenes here. I chose these scenes for several reasons. There are two levels of framing in the scenes; a world view outside the ships, and a framed view through the view screen of the ships. The ships are moved around in ways that take advantage of an environment that has a form which is neither constant or specific. There is sectioning to a small degree in one scene where one ship is hidden away from the other until is "emerges" from a blind spot. Lastly, in both scenes, the camera changes start out slow, like a kind of calm before the storm, then change more rapidly when the two vessels encounter one another.
The first animations are from the scene that starts with the Enterprise unable to "see" the Reliant, even though she lies directly ahead.
This scene is from the perspective of the Enterprise's bridge. The "view screen" frames the view out into "space," as the Reliant emerges from a blind spot created by the environment the ships occupy.
This scene is from the perspective of the underside of Reliant. The engines and the saucer form a frame as the ship pursues the fleeing Enterprise.
This last animation is the complete version. The point to make about the combination is the camera changes. In the first 40 seconds, before the ships encounter one another, there are only 4 transitions, showing that while the viewer can see Reliant moving from one angle, the Enterprise crew cannot. After the encounter in the last 20 seconds, the camera changes twice as fast, attempting to bring forth the chaos that ensues as the Enterprise attempts to get away from the Reliant.
The first animations are from the scene that starts with the Enterprise unable to "see" the Reliant, even though she lies directly ahead.
This scene is from the perspective of the Enterprise's bridge. The "view screen" frames the view out into "space," as the Reliant emerges from a blind spot created by the environment the ships occupy.
This scene is from the perspective of the underside of Reliant. The engines and the saucer form a frame as the ship pursues the fleeing Enterprise.
This last animation is the complete version. The point to make about the combination is the camera changes. In the first 40 seconds, before the ships encounter one another, there are only 4 transitions, showing that while the viewer can see Reliant moving from one angle, the Enterprise crew cannot. After the encounter in the last 20 seconds, the camera changes twice as fast, attempting to bring forth the chaos that ensues as the Enterprise attempts to get away from the Reliant.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Umberto Eco: "Travels in Hyper Reality"
In the essay Travels in Hyper Reality, Umberto Eco discusses issues pertaining to the area of reproductions. Eco begins with a description of holography, and the realism it gives to a three-dimensional representation of two women. Holography and it's potentials allow the creation of a form of hyper reality, in which the representation, or "fake" is more real than original itself. In America, the dedication to the representation of important moments in time, or "memories" provides for places dedicated to them, such as museums, establishing "fortresses of solitude" where, much like that of Superman, people may reflect on the past. The representations attempt to approximate the real to the point of creating a reality better than the original. The representation of Johnson's Oval Office is not only accurate, but made to be prettier and last longer than the original. Taken to the next level, this level of detail not only represents real memories, but "memories" out of the works of fiction. The care to detail given to the Oval Office is passed onto Alice's encounter with the Mad Hatter in Wonderland. The realism of both blurs the distinction between what is a reproduction of reality and a reproduction in fiction. Upon seeing displays of both mixed together can overwhelm the senses and confuse the real and the fake. At the highest level, these hyper realities don't merely attempt bring the real to life, but to make a production that reduces the real to being unnecessary, as in the case of wax reproductions of the Last Supper.
The concept of creating hyper reality has a large showing in architecture. Many would be quick to draw the conclusion that modern technology, specifically digital modeling, is what has made this possible in architecture. However, hyper reality has been present in architecture since artists attempted realistic representations of buildings both existing and non-existing. For architects today, attempts at creating hyper reality are often part of a ruse to show a proposed building in a way better than what could be achieved in the physical world. These hyper realities show an attention to detail ranging from hard edges to clean floors showing no sign of building use. These images are timeless; they will not dirty with use, weather over time, or change configuration because of the whims of the building's owner. At the next level, these pristine models incorporate the fourth dimension, and are able to break the barriers of static imagery. Now, the fake ages as the real, becomes dirty, gets used, and ultimately breaks down. Now the model can imitate all the facets of reality, and at a level better than reality, through the modeling of the ideal. But, hyper reality falls short in one area of architecture; architecture is space making, and one can not physically occupy an image, even if they can plant themselves within with photo software. In the end, hyper reality can represent imagery better than the real, but spatial experience.
The concept of creating hyper reality has a large showing in architecture. Many would be quick to draw the conclusion that modern technology, specifically digital modeling, is what has made this possible in architecture. However, hyper reality has been present in architecture since artists attempted realistic representations of buildings both existing and non-existing. For architects today, attempts at creating hyper reality are often part of a ruse to show a proposed building in a way better than what could be achieved in the physical world. These hyper realities show an attention to detail ranging from hard edges to clean floors showing no sign of building use. These images are timeless; they will not dirty with use, weather over time, or change configuration because of the whims of the building's owner. At the next level, these pristine models incorporate the fourth dimension, and are able to break the barriers of static imagery. Now, the fake ages as the real, becomes dirty, gets used, and ultimately breaks down. Now the model can imitate all the facets of reality, and at a level better than reality, through the modeling of the ideal. But, hyper reality falls short in one area of architecture; architecture is space making, and one can not physically occupy an image, even if they can plant themselves within with photo software. In the end, hyper reality can represent imagery better than the real, but spatial experience.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Monica Ponce de Leon and Nader Tehrani: "Versioning: Connubial Reciprocities of Surface and Space"
In their article "Versioning: Connubial Reciprocities of Surface and Space," the principals of Office dA, Monica Ponce de Leon and Nader Tehrani, define and explain versioning as it applies to the works of their firm. For Office dA, versioning, with its connotations of integration, means integrating surface and space. Surface and space are, more often than not, treated separately from one another. Herzog & de Meuron are architects who have developed highly detailed skins, showing innovation at its best; however, these skins cover off the shelf spaces found throughout modernism. Gehry's development of space has made him a household name in the world of architecture, but he clads these forms with metal panels that have been used for many spatially unimpressive buildings in the modern era. The work of Office dA sets up architectural alibis, where program, site, and fabrication lead to the development of rational systems. Their works are based on arbitrary decisions crafted into strong, rational decisions. The Tongxian Arts Centre project provides and example of this process. The building is cast in concrete, but based off a brick mould. They use a Flemish bond, and remove the headers; in this concrete construction, the spaces left behind become arbitrary, and can be adjusted to break away from conventional building. These adjustments allow for the compression of expansion of not only the wall surface, but the spaces contained within. The surface manipulation defines the space; a relationship where coexistence is essential.
This type of versioning has many potentials in the field of architecture. One of the most important being the reinforcement of symbology in architecture. This level of integration can allow symbols of space and the build form to become more evident. Gehry's work would benefit highly from this design approach. His organic forms would become a more full bodied experience, selling itself for what it is both inside and out, as opposed to being hidden in the metal panels covering other, less symbolic buildings. There are many levels to which this integration can be taken. An extreme case would be the Death Cube K bar described in Anthony Vidler's article in Warped Space. This bar's insect-like cladding reinforcing the idea of corruption the bar stands for. While the symbolism in this example is rather negative, it is the idea of being able to use this level of integration for symbology that is important. In this form, versioning can give architecture the chance to reveal what before could only be hidden within the fabric of space and form.
This type of versioning has many potentials in the field of architecture. One of the most important being the reinforcement of symbology in architecture. This level of integration can allow symbols of space and the build form to become more evident. Gehry's work would benefit highly from this design approach. His organic forms would become a more full bodied experience, selling itself for what it is both inside and out, as opposed to being hidden in the metal panels covering other, less symbolic buildings. There are many levels to which this integration can be taken. An extreme case would be the Death Cube K bar described in Anthony Vidler's article in Warped Space. This bar's insect-like cladding reinforcing the idea of corruption the bar stands for. While the symbolism in this example is rather negative, it is the idea of being able to use this level of integration for symbology that is important. In this form, versioning can give architecture the chance to reveal what before could only be hidden within the fabric of space and form.
Labels:
Architecture,
de Leon,
Monica,
Nader,
Office dA,
Ponce,
Space,
Surface,
Tehrani,
Versioning
Ingeborg Rocker: "Versioning: Evolving Architectures - Dissolving Identities 'Nothing is as Persistent as Change'"
In the article "Versioning: Evolving Architectures - Dissolving Identities 'Nothing is as Persistent as Change,'" Ingeborg Rocker discusses the evolution of presenting ideas in architecture. Frank Gehry and Peter Eisenman are the earliest precursors of the development of technology as a means of informing and altering architectural production. Both architects look at the two pieces of this technology puzzle, the conceptual and programmatic implications of the digital medium; however, neither one of the two consider both at the same time. Rocker defines versioning in architecture that links software configuration management and engineering data management, establishing architecture as a processual data-design, continually processing projection and convergence; architecture evolves through the process of different/ciation. Differentiation is the precursor to any presentation. The precursor of differentiation is different/ciation; behind it, there is nothing. Differentiation is necessary for any difference. Differences are fundamental to evolution in architecture through versioning. Differentiation is part of the process of repetition. Repetition in this instance is not repetition of the same, but repetition of difference. This ongoing repetition is the engine to this evolution of architecture.
Versioning as a system of integration is becoming more prominent in the architecture profession today. This integration of the different design elements is a fundamental of BIM, Building Information Modeling. Versioning and BIM bring together the different members and aspects of the design process to work together and produce a more refined product. At its highest level, the virtual realm of BIM and versioning imitates reality to its details. This is reality in the virtual realm. The difference between reality in the virtual realm and virtual reality is that in the former, all the rules of reality are near perfectly imitated as best as they are currently understood, while the latter typically holds to a specific set of rules aimed at creating one or few specific representations. This reality in the virtual realm allows for a new step in the design process. While versioning and different/ciation in design are not a guarantee for positive developments, the lessons learned through versioning and different/ciation in BIM and other applications can be used to make adjustments to design that were previously only possible through physical construction.
Versioning as a system of integration is becoming more prominent in the architecture profession today. This integration of the different design elements is a fundamental of BIM, Building Information Modeling. Versioning and BIM bring together the different members and aspects of the design process to work together and produce a more refined product. At its highest level, the virtual realm of BIM and versioning imitates reality to its details. This is reality in the virtual realm. The difference between reality in the virtual realm and virtual reality is that in the former, all the rules of reality are near perfectly imitated as best as they are currently understood, while the latter typically holds to a specific set of rules aimed at creating one or few specific representations. This reality in the virtual realm allows for a new step in the design process. While versioning and different/ciation in design are not a guarantee for positive developments, the lessons learned through versioning and different/ciation in BIM and other applications can be used to make adjustments to design that were previously only possible through physical construction.
Labels:
Architecture,
Different/ciation,
Differentiation,
Evolving,
Ingeborg,
Rocker,
Versioning
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Elizabeth Grosz: Architecture from the Outside: "The Future of Space: Toward an Architecture of Invention"
In her essay on the future of space in architecture, Elizabeth Grosz discusses the common ground between the study of architecture and the study of philosophy. This common ground, which forms the basis of her essay, is the idea of the new or virtual, the latent or becoming. Architecture is described as the art and science of the manipulation of space. This manipulation of space must occur through time, and use two kinds of time. One of these kinds of time being time that comes before space and time, the idea of a space-time difference. This difference gives rise to the idea that space does not evolve over time, but that space evolves from time. In order for this idea to hold, the idea of time as a succession from past to present is re-presented as past and present needing to be in contact with one another, existing simultaneously; the present and it's past exist together, present succeeds present, past succeeds past. The past as memory is a virtual representation of that which formed the present. The past is the virtual, while the present is the real. The virtual derives its limits from the real, while the real embodies these limits. The past is dependent on the present and vice-versa. The two must touch in order for one to "travel" to the past, the virtual. To travel to different points in the past, one often must return to the present. It is the dependency the provides for the evolution of space.
To apply this to architecture, one would have to define what constitutes the real in architecture, and what constitutes the virtual. The virtual of architecture is plans, sections, perspectives, etc. The real of architecture is the built environment. The virtual must follow the limits of the built world in order to be viable as a built form. The built world must evolve from ideas represented by the elements of the virtual world. The virtual and real constantly interact. The experiences in the world of the real inform the planning of the virtual, and the experiences in the virtual inform the world of the real, allowing each to evolve. New forms are derived from old forms, adapted to new desires. This reinforces the idea that everything in architecture has been done already, in some way or form, and what is considered "new" is merely an interpretation of that which already exists. The evolution of the virtual is based in the rules of the real. Current technologies allow the virtual to take many new forms through the complex math this technology can utilize. However, the limits of the real, such as the ability of a form to stand through time, remain in place. The virtual adapts to these limits in ways it could not before, and thus allowing the built world to do the same. The real and virtual worlds continue to evolve within themselves, and from each other, constantly molding the ways in which architecture forms space.
To apply this to architecture, one would have to define what constitutes the real in architecture, and what constitutes the virtual. The virtual of architecture is plans, sections, perspectives, etc. The real of architecture is the built environment. The virtual must follow the limits of the built world in order to be viable as a built form. The built world must evolve from ideas represented by the elements of the virtual world. The virtual and real constantly interact. The experiences in the world of the real inform the planning of the virtual, and the experiences in the virtual inform the world of the real, allowing each to evolve. New forms are derived from old forms, adapted to new desires. This reinforces the idea that everything in architecture has been done already, in some way or form, and what is considered "new" is merely an interpretation of that which already exists. The evolution of the virtual is based in the rules of the real. Current technologies allow the virtual to take many new forms through the complex math this technology can utilize. However, the limits of the real, such as the ability of a form to stand through time, remain in place. The virtual adapts to these limits in ways it could not before, and thus allowing the built world to do the same. The real and virtual worlds continue to evolve within themselves, and from each other, constantly molding the ways in which architecture forms space.
PROJECT 1 FINAL: POSTER
This sheet is meant to act as a kind of movie poster to "advertise" for the final animation sequence of project 1. The idea is based off of posters used for movies, in which a major scene / collage representative of the whole of a movie is the largest image on the page, and scene's highlighting the moments of the most important actors in the movie are shown with it. The "major scene" is a still from the final Project 1C animation, while the "actors" are the Project 1A drawings, stills from the Project 1A animation, and stills from the Project 1B animation. This poster also promotes the idea that everything builds upon that from which it followed.
Labels:
final,
Image,
Poster,
project 1,
project 1a,
project 1b,
PROJECT 1C
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)