Posted by Per Corell on January 11, 2003 at 13:02:51:
In Reply to: Re: Is Digital Design Desirable? posted by Kevin Matthews on January 11, 2003 at 10:22:00:
>Whilst this has apparent benefits in terms of realising initial >design ideas - think Gehry and Bilbao, it is also becoming a >generative tool.
A true direct link producing the actural single assembly part, easy to place and cheaper to produce, then what's wrong building tree times as much when this is the same investment. Now Bilbao is exactly what you se, ---- today with another new building method, the master would have maby produced a different aproach, ----- why is it, anyone allway's blame new methods.
>The example here is mistaken. Frank Gehry designs primarily using >the traditional methods of loose sketches on paper, with most of the >sculptural development done using physical models in non-realistic, >easily worked sketch-moeling materials.
Eh, ---- what's the difference with Solids and Boolean operations subtracting and forming a repersentation with thick enough walls and a much simpler building method, that don't requier 20 different types of beams and fiiting but just one ; sheet materials.
>When the generative design work is largely complete, Gehry's >technical support staff then digitizes the 3D models to use digital >representations for construction documents and sometimes to drive >fabrication of building parts. If we're going to project our >thinking based on examples, let's try to get valid examples to start >with.
Right please replace an army of skilled craftmen, with an exact production of each building frame, NOTE ; cut in plain sheet materials, not bended by hand, as _no bending_ is required with an assembly framework assembly ,forming the actural framework, for whatever structure, in sheet material as only material and one type of N.C. production ; a water or laser cutter.
Now this is very different Robots than at the assembly line , as also here, there are not just one technology.
>Ghery aside, there is a lot of bizzare nonsense design being >generated with free-form computer modeling tools. As long as that's >in the virtual realm, I'm not so concerned. But I'm more concerned >about the potential negative influence of the whacky inhumanity of >some computer-generated virtual architecture on real buildings.
Pancakes allway's get boring, Stalin loved cake buildings ,but when the issue is cost benefit ,there shuld be no doubt, that if we talk 30 year old mesh entity technology, I wonder if I shuld blame the architects ; shuldn't the obvious drawbacks with digital be made good in 30 years ? ---- if so, the technology is no revolution, but maby this is becaurse we made the computer do things how they alway's been done, just with the profit of computers, instead of making the direct link, producing what we dream.
Now it's here ; 3D-H.
>I do see the apparent abdication of sincere critical thinking by >many contemporary studio critics with regard to blob architecture as >a real cause for concern.
So even the tool is here, you don't want students to produce the wonders of the new millinium ; you are afrait they get to good or what ;))
>BTW, the digital work of Gehry's office is mentioned in this current >ArchWeek article...
Love it, even my favorite is Van.D.R. Just wonder why no one want to make money, and why artists is not expected to use the actural options and relevant tools, now they are there.
Free 3D Models