Posted by Per Corell on March 06, 2003 at 13:55:35:
It is like it is a natur law that whatever I publish I challance somone or even vorse somthing ------ one example is when I prove a lot of modern architecture the standard brickworks, with a fake emty high-texh hat.
Or when I force anyone to se, that when you look for new, you must not jest find the tradisional methods rewritten into an application, as then the computer is the only new thing, ----- still just doing things as how 100 years ago.
Then I punk my oppinion, that the primitive graphics used to form architecture, only grown better during these 20 years og the tech stoneage, where the trendiest gadget is to "pull out" walls with standard pre-rendered graphicsmaking an ilution on screen and in some printed order sheets ,and I question the role of the creative process within "Lego thinking" , bringing anything else than the wonders of as simple a "material" or method as 3D-H.
Again and again I become unpopular, like last time where I pointed out that what new in the architecture this contry, was already done 80 years ago in Soviet ; each and any Icon and even the "classic" several hundred years old buildings in this contry, is found four times the size in Rome or Paris.
Im'e also angry that I been stupid contribuating architect contests with designs and describtion of a true Digital building method, proving the difficult task to make a direct link from projecting to production, and then se in the jury's comment, that within all the suggestions in this contest, not one single proposal was even starting to deal with the difficult task, of providing a direct link from projecting to production in Digital.
Now I know I shuld be more humble knowing "my place" better . but that's just the problem ; I know how well architecture will provide compared the huge beams holding lightweight panels in emty zero thickness surface technology ; 3D-H just provide everything _else_ than just a thin surface with nothing inside . Yoy at the same time se framework for floors and walls , even cut from one type of material only and not the 20 different types of steel profiles as in tradisional buildings.
Then please allow me the oppotunity to state that art allway's was the same battle, done by the same type of people ; artists vasting their life for a dull fream about beauty. People who gone thru the boring task of being autodidact computer specialists just to fulfill their dream about a better world , ------- No pyramide brought a better world and you Romans think that the ability of a material don't mirror in the result, then sorry I don't trust academics but as they are blind, can't read and will not se, why even compeed .
Please open your mind. Why reinvent another architectural style, when there are unlimited options with a new technology doing everything in a _compleatly_ different way.
When true news are here, then innovation wasn't the thing either just like the most increadible catedrals or a the first true new form language since they invented concrete.
Types & Styles
Library Places Building Photos Free 3D Models Archiplanet