During presentation the threshold came up as an element I should go back to. The connection of the footprint of the space, to the pattern that greets you as you enter was missing the threshold. I went into sketchUp to figure out how to make it fit without causing a cave, closed feeling at the entrance. I still found myself maintaining the open entrance. It was interesting to explore the possibility of enclosing the entrance through sketchup.

The challenge with the texture is precisely how to take what was at first mainly a graphic construct and manipulate it for formal purposes.

Also, get much more specific about material, connections, etc when describing the ephemeral/haptic components, and use good lineweight/type, transparency, montage, etc to add information describing the supporting volume, context, etc…

Continue to get more specific about material properties- thickness, form, joint… color, texture.

I think I mis-re-labeled this as Exercise 09, b/c I don’t see this series demonstrating the enclosure constraints (turn corner to enclose + create edge, meet ground + create overhead plane). I’ll look for this criteria in your next post, right?

Use lineweight, linetype, layers, transparency in your effort to add add’l context to your construct here.

The elevation isn’t an elevation in terms of a frontal view of the space. It is the pattern or part of the pattern used for the perspective minus the program element.

Here is his exact response if that helps: Elevation of each single pattern module (vs in the perspective drawing, you may have applied many instances of the module to make your surface).

Hope that helps.

http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/games/deaa/?cpg=143H

The two images placed side-by-side intend to give the simultaneously viewpoints of both the declining and rising experience. The layered images are shots taken from the viewpoint of a walker as he/she walks through each passageway. As the walker passes through the space, the viewpoint images become less transparent and smaller. The final point in the experience is the center and most vibrant image. It is the smallest shot because from the beginning point that place in the passage looks far because of the rules of perspective, but it is bright because that’s where he/she is intending to go. I wanted to give the sense of time and crossing a space by creating a sequence of layers that rise or lower depending on the pathway chosen.

The passageways are the extended planes and volumes from the conductor’s baton as it rises to motion a crescendo and lowers to motion a decrescendo. I wanted to create this swinging motion and transform it into a human experience. These are two passages placed in an environment with organic tones, but architectural walls that enhance the incline experience through lines and forms that direct towards the apex or bottom of a path.

http://arnoldarchthesis.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/ilsp_wf-converted.jpg
http://arnoldarchthesis.wordpress.com/

if this is your experiential perspective, a sense of scale and quality could be provided by a more explicit re-presentation of the activity the threshold supports, perhaps some context as to what the threshold exists “between” spatially (remembering depth cues, framing, layering), and some graphic device that offers a sense of the site constraint. it’s been suggested before to orient the experiential view from some ground plane.

how can your study of figure ground transformations continue to define and transform the threshold construct? there are some strong “white space” relationships represented (sometimes like cutouts projecting depth, sometime more like field conditions subverting layered relationships…); how does the “black space” work…? what does it mean when the black space is greyed?

Re-present & test program/activity.

Work with, and re-present, the site constraints.

Lots of lines; have a lot of opportunity for tones, layers, transparencies via many different tool / software options. *How can you allow the software environments affect the continued development and REFINEMENT of this threshold place?

1 The hand-drawing, and the process of scanning/photographing/digitizing should be treated like any other digital media process, and incorporation of that content should receive the same cross-platform translation awareness we’ve practiced through the term. Make sure each step is one of edit & development; a bad sign would be an attempt to replicate what was created in one platform in another without a necessary and deliberate affect.

2 Be clear between the analytical and experiential drawings. Each have a specific, different purpose – take advantage of the opportunity.

3 In all drawings, make sure your important simple steps (rules/structures/ideas, program, SITE, editing process, translation process, media process, tool influence) are presented clearly for presentation. Simple = clear; lots of clear = complex (often good!); vagueness = complicated (often not desired).

4 As always: point, line, planes; wireframes, tones; layers, transparency, frames; deep space, shallow space, depth cues.

More to come! Drawings will now become a digital interpretation once again.

I would greatly appreciate ANY feedback and/or suggestions…Thanks!

We can discuss in class the conversion issues.

Thanks for the feedback!

The portal is reminiscent of the connector between the east + west wings of the nat’l gallery… or maybe even Rem Koolhaas’s IIT Student Center (two links below).

http://www.rachelleb.com/images/2006_09_02/rem_koolhaas_rb.jpg

http://www.google.com/images?rlz=1C1GGGE_enUS383US384&q=IIT+koolhaas&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=j8etTIaTNoPGlQf528CGBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CCIQsAQwAA&biw=1096&bih=895)

Make sense?

I guess what I was going for was a pure representation of the linear motion. By changing the intervals, that line is not as clean.

some great examples of unconventional “sitting”… looking forward to see what you chose to work with.

what you COULD adjust, though, is the measuring of the distance as you spaced the time intervals. for instance, between #3 & #4, the left planted foot is probably in the same spot, rather than slid 18″ forward; or the last four frames may actually share the same “root” via the planted left foot (as the right hand swings broadly and the right leg kicks back and around).

When you “chart” the space of the movements, the spatial information of the drawings will depend on your control of line, layering, transparency, etc.

Imagine you need to create a drawing that you’ll then use to 3-dimensionally model. What info will you need to describe every key point at every interval? What can be edited out?

Also, I’ll be interested to see the approach and pivot! The approach portion is going to create some intense overlap as it also describes the deep axis.

Hm, I was expecting something from a performance. It could literally be a segment from anything. For example, see 0:48-0:59 on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aHP3wGO_DU

As for blurry, all you’ll need to see are the key points on the figure (in 3-D of course) and leverage illustrator’s scaling capabilities to make the drawing the size you need.

Also, the example video is already from particular constructed three-dimensional view, so you’d already be working in a better perspective scenario for your drawings.

That said, two issues to focus on:

First- both of these images are lacking in the third dimension, a critical component to a perspective drawing.

Second- I think there is a step missing editing between the action figure diagram and the second series of drawings. See the comments on Shereeta’s post- can you identify a finer set of key points, segments, elements that you wish to track, and how do you track them when they are behind or overlapped with a prior step?

The analytical perspective needs another level of editing- can you identify the key points or segments, in THREE DIMENSIONS, that create the VOLUME and form of the space of swinging?

The diagram you currently show is elevational, frontal, describing predominantly only two planes. The goal of both perspective drawings is to describe in three dimensions. Use new tools (especially in illustrator) to describe front / middle / back of the form.

looking forward to the drawing describing the original place TRANSFORMED! it’s come quite a long ways already through this little series…

You were trying some interesting analytical techniques in photoshop last week- make sure you return to that study in the creation of your final drawing re-presenting the place TRANSFORMED. (question- what kind of place have you made new? what are it’s qualities, who uses it, when, etc?)

1 How do you translate the particular relationships of joinery you discovered (i.e. “no glue”… were they incision? intersections?) in to the line, tone, and image collage? Maybe through tools like transparency or layer filters, or perhaps line weights, colors, or types…

2 What is the character of the NEW, TRANSFORMED space? What kind of place is it Now? What takes place there, for whom, what is the “atmosphere”? (Convey through drawing…)

(bonus 3: Each of the photos are generally from the same perspective. What does the model look like rotated? Zoomed in? Are there any new “secret spaces” discovered? Can those new/discovered spaces be re-presented in the new drawing?)

try starting your drawing before you edit the model again. (if the base plate is a default frame, and you know your model can translate the base plate, then perhaps the drawing frame is modulated…)

#8 & #9 – awesome. how can we perceive those layers deeper layers behind the top three? if we’re seeing the “honeycomb” from the side, how can we also engage the horizontal relationships at the same time- maybe the drawing can use different linetypes to describe the layers foreward, behind, rotated, overlapped, masked, etc…

1- be suspicious of pancaking pieces together, since it gives away the opportunity for two planes to actually make space in your pursuit of modeling different degrees of depth. (another way to think of it is you essentially have two pieces trying to occupy the same layer, which may not be the most effective use of the few elements you have) (see your diagonal line piece on the large vertical plane…)

2- the framing of the model is losing the foreground cues of the original image. what elements or devices in the original image were setting up that strong middle ground volume we discussed? maybe the edits are made by the introduction of another rule system you looked at, like “line”.

3- my favorite part at the moment is the left side. i’d love to see what could happen around that corner…

4- what if you started your final translation drawing/diagram of the model before you went back to make revisions to the model? (save/share your drafts!)

Model 1: I thought of the building as a series of vertical planes that intersect with the planes of the horizontal atmosphere.

Model 2: Here I thought about the space between the exterior frame of the building and its setback facade. I transformed this space into volumes and then inverted them onto the exterior of the frame.

Also, as the assignment sheet says, think about rules as verbs or actions or tool functions.

Hope that helps.

Take a look at my exercise02 sample images post. There is elaboration there. Also, look at the comments on your colleagues’ posts, especially Renee, Nicole, and Shereta.

Also, don’t forget the role of the simple description of each panel as part of the layout.

As I said, it looks like you’re working well. Keep it up!

Should rule 3, however, be a greater evolution of the image and make better use of the program?

Rule 2: (Uses all parts born by Rule 1) I am assembling a new architecture using each layer, as created in rule 1 by their application, which was cutting and increasing scale. Rule 3 is to re-configure a new architecture by matching up line and edges. Nothing can be rotated, manipulated or re-scaled to fit. Sort of like playing tetras but considering the overall composition and the requirement to use each layer created by Rule 1.

good work. keep going.

also, check out the work at TheVeryMany, script-based parametric & computational design leveraged by digital fabrication capabilities, i.e. simple premises modified by simple rules to the point of creating complex systems- the idea of “a priori” is supplanted by prototyping and versioning feedback loops:

http://theverymany.com/2010/01/14/100114_bewiwi_2010/

TOTAL: 2 rules, 3 iterative studies per rule, 1 final combo transformation. remember the element of clear descriptive text (describing each iteration) incorporated as part of the presentation.

The diagrams in this case are drawings that use abstraction to describe underlying compositional structures. In other words, using graphic techniques (points, lines, planes, for example), diagrams help dissect a composition. We’re interested in finding what the primary organizational rules are (repetition? grid? layering?) that are important to each composition, to the point that the analysis might suggest transformations to the design.

Each rule series might start with a straight forward graphic “diagnosis”, tracing directly on top of the image, or masking and re-organizing the key constituent parts, for example.

[Perhaps I should point out: a "rule" that is an organizing strategy for a composition or space is indeed an abstract thing. There are many different examples we can point to that utilize "grid" as a fundamental ordering device - "rule". Yet the variation among those examples can be quite wide, as the abstract rule is applied uniquely to the context of each situation. We can find examples of "grid" in a floor plan of a museum, or in the layout of a newspaper spread. We may see a lot of overlap across the class in terms of found rules- the goal is not to find a unique device, just the most essential systems at work. How they're applied, and then explored, in each condition will vary.]

The second and third iterations should explore each rule through graphic manipulation, or perhaps just through a different graphic technique, to begin to draw conclusions about how each rule functions. You’ll want to clarify what graphic tools / manipulations might work inherently well with each of the compositional rules. A good “end” to each rule analysis series may be the point where you’ve discovered to what extent the rule can be manipulated to the point that the rule is maybe reversed, or inverted, or re-modulated, or transposable to other conditions, etc.

The last step is to APPLY your new understanding of the rules, both how they work in the original image and how you can manipulate them, to re-imagine the space described in the original as a NEW space, a TRANSFORMED place, conceived of primarily through your re-presentation of the original rule sets.

Each rule series might start with a straight forward graphic “diagnosis”, tracing directly on top of the image, or masking and re-organizing the key constituent parts, for example.

[Perhaps I should point out: a "rule" that is an organizing strategy for a composition or space is indeed an abstract thing. There are many different examples we can point to that utilize "grid" as a fundamental ordering device - "rule". Yet the variation among those examples can be quite wide, as the abstract rule is applied uniquely to the context of each situation. We can find examples of "grid" in a floor plan of a museum, or in the layout of a newspaper spread. We may see a lot of overlap across the class in terms of found rules- the goal is not to find a unique device, just the most essential systems at work. How they're applied, and then explored, in each condition will vary.]

The second and third iterations should explore each rule through graphic manipulation, or perhaps just through a different graphic technique, to begin to draw conclusions about how each rule functions. You’ll want to clarify what graphic tools / manipulations might work inherently well with each of the compositional rules. A good “end” to each rule analysis series may be the point where you’ve discovered to what extent the rule can be manipulated to the point that the rule is maybe reversed, or inverted, or re-modulated, or transposable to other conditions, etc.

The last step is to APPLY your new understanding of the rules, both how they work in the original image and how you can manipulate them, to re-imagine the space described in the original as a NEW space, a TRANSFORMED place, conceived of primarily through your re-presentation of the original rule sets.

kind of strange how oversized the tube rail is, while the fence preventing falls down in to the Thames looks diminutive!

have fun. make sure to articulate your rule investigation (writing component).