Sunday, 16 May 2010

experiment 2 feedback

Hi All,

below is the feedback for experiment 2. There are some general comments that you should take notice of for experiment 3


The assessment criteria is carefully stipulated. However in order to fully judge the architecture we must enter your environment and walk around.

It is possible to design everything from the editor but you should be going into the game to understand 'real time'.

The major difference between sketchup and crysis is that in crysis you can experience the environment in the first person, ie as a participant and not just as an observer.

A lot of the environments I went into were unnavigable, some I would fall off the platform into the sea below and not be able to climb back up the hill. Place the position in the editor that you want me to enter the environment. Draw a diagram showing how one moves through the environment. Draw a diagram or mark up images of the environment explaining where each of the labs are. Make it easy for me to understand.

Files : do not upload separate files with separate links to filefront. Package it all together so that I only have to download 1 folder. In that folder have 2 separate folders called objects and levels.
Only place the current level and objects / textures that you need to make it work.
Check that your download works so that you are sure that I can enter your environment.

The last experiment is handed in after the last tute. So if it doesn't work I won't be able to tell you.

strength : the framed view from the darwin lab, the landscape is enticing
weakness : textures seem random, placement in the landscape, why there?

strength : the spatial complexity of the 'ice house'
weakness : too many objects, try placing the 'ice house' on the top of the hill

strength : the use of a subtractive volume to create spaces - meeting place
weakness : use the drama of the landscape to create memorable setting / environment

strength : dramatic positioning of object in the landscape, heroic modernist image
weakness : the object needs to grow out of the mountain

strength : two worlds created on either side of the object allows for distinctive spaces
weakness : the lighted labs only work at night, such a gimmick makes it hard to navigate,
think about lighting the landscape if you what a night scene

strength : positioned beautifully in the landscape and a stunning landscape at that
weakness : perhaps the path to find the object could be more obscured and therefore

strength : use of texture, the cave looking out to the horizon
weakness : unfinished work, no link to files

strength : the logic of the 3 rooms, extremely well planned, excellent use of diagrams to
explain your ideas
weakness : the landscape is not as well crafted as some others, should have textures

strength : thoughtful placement and design of the labs
weakness : the texture of the landscape should have more life, difficult to navigate

strength : landscape is dramatic
weakness : the platforms cut out the foreground meaning that it is difficult to see the landscape
below, which was the point.

strength : axonometrics are nicely drawn
weakness : the building is 'plonked' on the landscape

strength : formation of the landscape, which has fantastic potential
weakness : didn't use the landscape to enhance the design, technical issues with crysis

strength : thought process, ideas, landscape
weakness : the thinness of the object and the large openings ie just platforms not really rooms

strength : the forms of the object mimic the background landscape well, which makes the
object seem inspired by the landscape and therefore belongs
weakness : the form needs to be adjusted so that it grows out of the landscape

strength : axonometrics and textures are beautifully drawn
weakness : is the position of the object indelibly linked to the landscape? Technical issues

strength : excellent extra effort, animation and directing how one should use the environment.
The use of texture.
weakness : the animation is repetitive, needs editing

strength : strong brutalist architecture yet simple. The towers mimic the landscape well
weakness : the horizontal platform needs to do something more than what it does. Eg.
cantilever it off the cliff to add to the drama of walking along it.

strength : very beautiful axonometrics
weakness : the position of the object in the landscape is not making the most out of the fact that
you got to design the landscape as well

strength : axonometrics
weakness : object is 'plonked' on the landscape.

strength : textures and landscape are well crafted
weakness : the object is 'plonked' on the landscape, could be anywhere, looks out of place

strength : spatial complexity of the object
weakness : the object needs to be anchored to the landscape, think more about how it sits in
the landscape

Wednesday, 12 May 2010

feedback experiment 1

Hi all,

below is the feedback for experiment 1


On the whole a great effort. However there are some general comments that need to be addressed.

- the language of your blog should be english, marks have been deducted for not changing the language settings

- scan your drawings, do not take photos of them, adjust the scanned images in photoshop so they are straight, marks have been deducted for not doing this

- if you have lots of wild forms and shapes, giving them each a different texture, colour and or material renders the form making to just a collage. Collages are 2d, you are working in 3d.


strength ?
weakness lack of understanding that the ground is solid

strength spatial changes of the upper level studio
weakness need to spend more time developing the underground studio, think about
manipulating the ground plane

strength tension of revealing the obscured object
weakness the stair should allow you to experience the whole object especially from

strength dynamic roof
weakness the upper level studio looks like misplaced furniture

Cathy Xu
strength great spiral staircase and form making
weakness underground studio has a pancake ceiling low flat and boring

strength the upper level studio tubular spaces are great but need to exaggerate
them more
weakness still largely an extrusion and under developed

strength some of the sections
weakness no way of seeing the design as a whole. It is not described.

strength fantastic combination of building and landscape
weakness a little to many rooms

strength experimentation with form making is inventive especially the stairs
weakness too many objects that do not need to be there distract the overall harmony

strength complexity
weakness complexity

strength compositionally striking
weakness colour combination. Is this a beautiful colour combination

strength the spatial variety in the upper level studio
weakness animation needs to illustrate spatial experience

strength persistence with pursuing one idea
weakness the execution of this idea

strength the cavelike nature of the underground studio
weakness both the gallery and the upper level studio are very undeveloped

strength spatial composition
weakness some of the materials contradict the forms, some of the forms contradict
the desired use of natural light

strength the simplicity has an elegance to it
weakness understanding that the earth is solid, lack of materiality of the upper level studio

strength dynamic form of the upper level studio
weakness the lower level studio is an inferior version of your section. why?

strength clear forms
weakness animations are not acceptable

strength the stairs and the inventiveness of the forms
weakness too many materials and textures

strength overall complexity of the forms
weakness spatially not much better than an office building

strength dynamic roof
weakness studio is a left over platform, no interaction with the ground, underground studio a
shoebox with a skylight