One juror last week was concerned that my original texture lost the “bend” aspect of my project rules. I created a new patter from the original “bend” without eliminating the extremes. I then attempted to show how it functions as a metal fabric, bending over a cylindrical form. Finally, I wanted to show a different perspective of my structure using the new fabric. Last week another juror suggested that I really show how the fabric relates to the construction site that is behind.

the colors in the first one are much better.

I conceived of this page as an additional booklet page/spread.  The jurors either said that they wanted to see the step before my final or wanted to see the steps after the final.  This is to document some of those ideas.  There are further iterations of my final form, just experimenting with the thickness of the profile to see if there’s any significance to be found there.  There is additional contextual and programmatic concepts included above that I might develop further if this becomes a full-fledged spread for the booklet or my portfolio.

Was just watching Greg Lynn’s TED Talk (http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/greg_lynn_on_organic_design.html) Starts off a little unrelated to what we are doing for Exercise 8/Project 2 but at about the 8min mark he discusses his design for a Korean church in Queens. He talks about repeated form without repetition (using Calculus). Each iteration is slightly skewed to created a kinetic pattern on the external and internal structure. The next section on the apartment complex touches upon the part to whole relationship, materiality (steel), and how if one element of the architecture changes, the entire length of the building is altered. Lastly there are some awesome photos of CNC experiments.

The last photo is for Kathryn. It reminds me of the transparent tent form from last night…except in glass.

” [The built environment] should seek less to be an abstraction of the lineaments of the body and more to engage the body’s effective  and affective spectrum. It is a faulty assumption to assume that patterning [the built environment] on the body makes it human. Just as it is a faulty assumption that the body is the pattern of the universe.”

— Atlas of Novel Tectonics, Chapter 14, “Matter”

“Our relationship to architecture is less that of a driver to a vehicle than of a consumer to a meal…Le Corbusier makes the argument that posing a problem correctly results in a successful solution, even within an already accepted standard. Rather than seeking a final solution, architecture, in so far as use is concerned, bears a probabilistic relationship to those intentions” (Reiser + Umemoto 196-198).

“We prefer architecture to engage what a body can actually do.  A skateboarding ramp, for instance, is not patterned on a human.  Rather it is an intervening technology that belongs to a totally different pattern of order upon which the human works…it does not represent it.”
Reiser + Umemoto, p 57

Could you explain the part in the assignment where we have 2 drawings 1 elevation and 1 perspective for the model.  I don’t remember you talking about that in class.  Since we are modeling the 3d space do we just make up an elevation?

Thanks,

Shereta

I’m not sure what category this goes under — I will update it as needed.

First page is the original study.  Second page is the edited textures.

I think we’ll all be ready to have a conversation about the homework as well, as I am sure we will have run into some questions, and quite possibly, DISCOVERIES! Of all things! Feel free to suggest another time. The embassy closes at 4pm.

Finnish Embassy
3301 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20008

Feel free to e-mail me or ring me up if you want to meet before hand and walk over.

kathrynzaremba@gmail.com

917.664.0485

From the RISD dorms…

I came across this cool post on ArchDaily about an installation at the Egyptian Pavilion at the Venice Biennale — the work could be a cool example for this current exercise on topologies.

http://www.archdaily.com/85933/egyptian-pavilion-for-the-venice-biennale-invert-studios/

This is a drawing I did for Exhibition Design studio 3 — our project involves concept design for a fundraising package for the National Electronics Museum, located in the BWI area. This week we were tasked to begin developing ideas for the entrance to the exhibition. The ideas shown in this drawing were developed by another classmate and myself.

Once again, a great special thanks to Christine Arnold, Beth Barrett, Ben Callum, Marek Hnizda, Hsiao-weh Leh, and Nandor Mitrocsak for the conversations they lead and constructive points they presented.

Per the jurors criticisms, I’ve reworked my perceptual to experiment with a different view of the object.  This view would be as if you were actually in the space viewing out.  I made edits to my other perceptual because I still like it – and most of the jurors did as well – still incorporating some of their suggestions.  I’ll post that tomorrow.