Hi all you fancy graphics lovers

Sep 28 '04 1455 Last Comment
Oct 9, 04 4:07 pm

this is so flipping hilarious...
it kind of reminds of the old days of archinect - open for use and absuse by all (no registration)...

Per Corell:
i think you should take some time to read the constructive comments (there are some here) that members of this site have wrote for you... some of them do make very valid points.
i think you should spend some time exploring what people have already done and achieved in the areas of CAD/CAM...
good luck.

Per Corell
Oct 9, 04 4:29 pm


Now It wasn't me that started speaking about CAD/CAM Im't talking about architecture and design , realy I do knoe G codes I acturly had to write my own drivers when I borrowed a small 3D router a decade ago. Anyway isn't this a little like saying "we know what we want it have to be somthing we already know ,don't you think you can do anything new we know it already ", now can that be art I don't think so.

Per Corell
Oct 9, 04 4:43 pm


spiderdad when did eternity start for polyester or reinforced petrochemics . Now being a boatbuilder I se no difference routering out a silli foam boat, just to use as a plug to make a form, just to support an outdated technike.
If you think 3D routers is the future, well they been so the past 20 years, did this bring a different technology or did it just support the technology already there, ---- what is realy the difference just replacing the plug .
Sheet material will alway's be there and then you can build from eco materials or sheet steel ,you can even produce a flying cooling element with sheet material and micro welding, then why use plastics.

Realy the future is not decided by "what we already done" but from the visions we create.

David Zeibin
Oct 9, 04 10:12 pm

OK. Well, Per, I want to try it, just to see for myself whether it works. Where can I buy/download the software? Do I need to purchase a license to use the technique? Is this technique patented? You should make a patent application for this technique so no one steals your ideas and tries to make money from them.

Per Corell
Oct 10, 04 4:18 am


Zebin things slowly or maby suddenly start to turn, My wish is just to change the world point to some new jobs ,and start a new lead , to do that things can't be easy as how I experienced the past 12 years develobing what I hope can inspire better gifted designers than I.

Realy this is how it work for today's artists, you decide that there are no easy way and make sure you make that trouble yourself as you can se in this tread. But shaking up the lazy crrowd somtimes is the backside of the medal realy it is not just easy to show that to build round all you need is sheet material ------- maby this will not make the full exchouse to those offended, but maby realising that there are still artists ,skilled or not, that don't give up and still keep the vision intact ,maby can ease the lead.
Guess you reconise there are positive response and that make the whole trouble worth the vorry.

Per Corell
Oct 10, 04 4:19 am

Hi Sorry I didn't ansver your question, but I am open to any suggestion untill the thing is just rutine.

David Zeibin
Oct 10, 04 5:01 am

Huh? I just want to start using this novel technique. Where can I download the software?

Per Corell
Oct 10, 04 5:09 pm


No not yet , it's true that it seem strange using so many years to pogress such new way's , and true I use a handfull of applications to do the projecting switching from program to progeam exporting and importing but anyone that know Lisp and know AutoCAD and 3Ds. can maneage , but please do not think this is just an unintiligent rigid boxwork --- if you realy go into detail with some of the examples ,you will se frames form the most wonderfull places, suddenly you realise that this method carry hidden abilities in terms of placing the frames just right , difficult to explain but if you check some of the examples you will proberly note, that it didn't "went wrong" so many places you would think, if you think about the structure as just some dumm automated framework ; it seem not to work that way, the "foults" is not as many as you would think. Ofcaurse this rely partly of chosing right scale offset distance and some grid system, but not as much as you would think, this framework realy do a remarkable job providing frames just the right places, ------ check how X profiled walls or pillows stand symetric even made from two dumm sheets meeting, Sorry Im'e not good to this english but you se these details all over the renderings.

David Zeibin
Oct 10, 04 7:01 pm

So what exactly do you want from this discussion? If you're not selling anything, it's not money. Is it just respect? You've precluded any sort of respect anyone might have given you simply based on the attitude and approach. Just a suggestion, but if you want people to sign up, maybe explain this is a work in progress and that you are looking for constructive criticism.

In short, there are LOTS of very smart people in the world. Many have come before us and many, many will come after us. Ideas are ideas - everyone has them, and some are better than others. It takes the right combination of an amazing idea, the right approach, the right friends, and the right amount of humility for genius to really be recognized. Just some thoughts for you...

Oct 11, 04 3:14 am

Zeibin: "Huh? I just want to start using this novel technique. Where can I download the software?"

It's just the contour tool in FormZ - change arbitrary plane to 45' apply to any crap model and THEN make sure to preach your newfound technique in ANY forum on the web....

Oct 11, 04 6:37 am

Don't you worry for Per Patrick... He is ready to fight for his rights. And I'm sure he had a lot of fun too. Check his other posts, especially on the "derrida is dead" thread. He's always ready to promote his ideas, and we're all enthousiastically debating it with him, that's all...

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 7:42 am


Zelbin, it take atleast 12 years, to realise how and why plans is made as how they was first develobed to build boats in the 17\ century.
Acturly the top/front/side plan views we use today, was develobed back then and the concept have not changed as these 3 planes support the math. that make you describe any point on a plane in 3D, from it\s projection onto the other two planes .

It seem so easy but thousands of engineers and builders been producing countless exact drawings from the tradisional drawings --- but don't forget why we even use top-side-front views we do so, to be sure that what we build will follow the measures ; now do you think Bilbao do that ?

No it is not as simple as that, and I guess this is realy the best argument for somthing new, that it is so simple that you would say "why havn't anyone thought about this before".

And right I made a lot of writing to manifest this, to document it if you want to put it that way.

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 7:58 am


Please me add about the Derrida tread, that I alway's had trouble with the deconstruct, but when architect deal with the other things he did, I take this as a prove he realy was a pioneer. You must have a drive and I am sure that this drive prove your worth.
Now I will not add further as when I tell that my bible is "pioniere der sowjetischen Architectur", then you will know why I focus on structure.
Also I think that when derrida say he only read four books then I think he ment that down to the words, --- you havn't read a book if you only look it thru, I am sure derrida had many more books, but isn't this what a real visionary will say , --- end about that.

Oct 11, 04 8:51 am

Zelbin, it take atleast 12 years, to realise how and why plans is made as how they was first develobed to build boats in the 17\ century.

Wow, and I *always* thought Albrecht Dürer invented orthographic projection in the 15th century, later mastered to solve problems with stonecutting by Philibert de L'Orme in the 16th century. But then again, who am I to believe such absurd facts?

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 10:06 am


Well you don\t think about these calculations now they are the basics of all CAD programs , but don\t this just show how tight we are in what we can measure , anyway we soon will get into a discussion about why we stayed so tight with 3 planes that alway\s follow the xy xz and yz plane ,then soon it shuld be easy to se why and why there shuld be computers before you could even think about making the calculations that describe an object turning according to these planes , my argument is that it simply was to difficult to do this , just as how it is impossible to matsh a 3D/H framework onto the tradisional projecting planes. Well try emagine any of these framework put into a tradisional section drawing, in this it would make no sense and you could not use the 3 tradisional planes to make the object, to do that, you must free yourself from only viewing everything from the tradisional 3 planes , is there an academic word for doing that .
But Ok it took from the 14' century ;))

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 11:09 am


Just to make my point clear I better use boat design as the example realy boat design is vey simular to floor planes just so that the start view is not from top down in boat plans but from front in, ---- Still the calculations are the same ,except you architects don't need all those calculations when changing a curve on one plane, to make it mirror onto the two other planes, in that sense boatbuilders must know more about drafting than architects.

Up untill past century it was quite common that boatsbuilders didn\t rely on plans but tradision ,learned rules measures on a piece of wood and experience. acturly in 17\ 18\ century shipsbuilders didn\t knew how to use plans and even some of the great shipsbuilders was totaly unskilled in math. ------ But they did produce wonderfull ships.

Why is it you think that somone that can build without plans, can't do an even better job acturly using plans, maby this work so in arcitecture, but it don't work so in boat design, and realy boat design is about 3D, not just boxes and cones but actural organic forms.

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 11:16 am


Also while at this subject, ------- boatsbuilding is about providing the right strength to make the craft survive se the thing as a whole, produce the all important framework to make the hull be able to twist without breaking, carry a heavy load in water not quiet space, make the thing last 100 years and smooth in with nature combine this with technology , now why shuldn't boatbuilders be able to find a better structure or find a more flexible way to make computers acturly work.

Oct 11, 04 11:29 am

Ah "malerhjerne", Just det! Nu forstar jag.
Forr eller senare maste ni ta itu med sant! Det har jag lagt marke till.

Oct 11, 04 11:58 am

Eh, but the 3D-H structure is built up by planar surfaces that are perpendicular against each other... why not choose (x,y,z) as being a local coordinate system that is perfectly aligned to the structural elements, and you're done? (alternatively, rotate the building). Everything in threedimensional space can be projected onto a Euclidean coordinatede system, it's just a matter of if it's handy or not to do it. A perspective of a complex joint may be better fit to describe the surface geometry, but I wouldn't want to use a perspective to study the organizational diagram of a building, although a perspective is "truer" to the perception of the real object. The simplified representations of orthographic projections are good just because they're simplified - fast, abstract.

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 12:42 pm

Tja ---- there are the thing about it that using 3 planes is one plane more than using 2 planes. I don't know if this make sense to you, but with tradisional 3 planes, I often think about houses as card houses, where with 2 planes 3D-H vise you can twist the two planes simultanily forming sore of WWWWW seen from top where !!!!!! look more card house like, act a bit mor unstable ,well isn't this the reson when a collapse occour ---- as you know WTC collapsed becaurse weak fittings between two planes vertical and horisontal , 3D-H simply don't carry any knees or fittings.

Oct 11, 04 2:25 pm

yep i am dumb.

Pimp Minister Pete Nice
Oct 11, 04 2:41 pm

I have to agree beta

I can't help but think what I have missing out on in the realm of digital technology. AUTO LISPS! What was I thinking to create all of these MEL Scripts? Boy, was I wrong after reading this thread it has truly changed the way I think about computers/scripting/programming -This is quite revolutionary - PATENT IMMEDAITLY!!

Pimp Minister Pete Nice
Oct 11, 04 2:43 pm

IMMEDIATLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!STOP IT

Oct 11, 04 2:54 pm

hey patrick, i am not sure what the beef is with me, because i am pretty much in agreement with most people here that what has been provided by Per to this point is either not new, or incoherent - aside from the language - no, actually including the language. this is not just this site but other sites as well. hey i am with you one hundred percent, if Per wants to bash his head, and our heads, collectively on the same wall, then shame on us for allowing it to happen. maybe perhaps you have been able to see through all this endless dialogue and can clue some us stupid people, interior painters or whatever as to the real genius behind Per's designs. if you can do that for me, i will sit down and listen, but up until now it is really difficult for me to understand someone that talks in circles, and refuses to respond to seemingly basic issues.

so, on to you. i eagerly anticipate your explanation, because i like so many of us here want to understand.

thanks for reading.

yours truly,


Oct 11, 04 5:02 pm

Hey, it's "Koolt".
I think that is a close translation, something a "dumb blonde" would do. Ooops, just blew my cover.

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 5:19 pm

To realise or not realise there are no question.

Per Corell
Oct 11, 04 6:22 pm


It is obvious what iave been going on in this and other treads isn't it.

One ansver this is impossible another that it is nothing new and already is in used and known. Then somone claim it is useless and no one will ever be so stupid to make it, then somone claime it still need to show and without one single structure in real it prove it is impossible while others claim their grandfather already invented it, but it is nothing ,somone then say as it is no invention as even it is already invented it is not different than how things is already done even that what is refered is made as a shell and this obviously is a structure there are no use for it, that's why youy already se it everywhere.. --- even no one seem to have seen it before becaurse it don't work and never will, even you can draw it in 3D.

Now with all these different arguments it seem that what you agrea is very different from what you say, acturly your arguments are so opposide that one could vorry you would ever agrea , but you do and that's what is the only funny thing about this tread, that you use so different arguments and even you talk against eachother with arguments that will never meet you agrea .

Can't you se that if I said it is not possible I would talk against those who say it is and already is done. Can't you se that if I say it is ugly I would talk against those who say it is facinating.

Oct 12, 04 7:43 am

Let's see if this works...

<img border="0" src="" width="600" height="525">

Oct 12, 04 7:43 am

Oh, again...

Per Corell
Oct 12, 04 8:18 pm


Now who need a lame wire mesh why make framework from pipes or fight double curved faces, I just miss the 90 deg between the frames but I guess in real a small weld would do the trick, Now today you can perform much greater visions than yestoday , but remember to reflect an honest aproach , you se I spended years to promote a new way and a different aproach, the models are quite easy.
It is not about showoff but breaking new ground. You se I never was offended by others skills and alway's payed respect rather than creating just to compare, ------ Why can't you se that we make different things I develob new building methods the, showoff is the least part of it Showoff is no part od decent design, If you make a nice design carryed by a new structural idear you still made a good design even you didn't develob the concept. Nomatter what this tread proberly tell a lot about what art is and what is not art.

Art is creating somthing right ?

Per Corell
Oct 12, 04 8:30 pm

Still I se you acturly ballanced the framews quite good, that you didnot put to much mass into the frames and that this will be quite an impressive set of spaces , --------- now when you worked with it another year , you would maby show much more detail ,maby you would combine several scale framework , just emagine what wonderfull places what nice interiours it also offer the easy access to have it made in real, that is different than mesh entities that alway's made a lot of trouble now the designer have hands-on toutch . Now things can happen don't make it into a bad thing.

Oct 13, 04 10:53 am


sketch and scan a typical connection between two members of your structure please. post it. or post it in the image gallery. no offense, but those renderings tell us nothing thus far. show where the maximum moment would occur on a series of horizontal members and where a max load would be distributed to. show how to not use all the "typical construction" means we use today in this sketch. by hand. por favor.

i just cannot engage in a serious conversation about this like some have without it being shown to me as to why this is an innovation.

Per Corell
Oct 16, 04 11:16 am


For decades you handed these questions to engineers ,the tradisional way's develobed with thousands of skilled people who build ontop others work ,refining what was already develobed tested and reflected in the industrie that provide the profiles bolts drills and schools.
millions of skilled people been following the same leads making it better, develobing new gadgeds changing the materials finding new way's to continue the same aproach just further refined ------- please I know what I am up against.

Now I just one person suddenly step out the crowd ,ask a few questions ontop a life long experience acturly creating nice things with just that build-up crafts, with the experience that tell why a halve notch do not mean halve strength and able to refere hundreds of applications where a halve notch been either welded , made fit and locked with the opposide piece, aso. aso.

Now Kyll I'll place just a single rendering ----- I guess you know that it create exact measures when somthing is placed in 3D and the plane drawn on is twisted 45 deg, I also guess you know that a 3D drawing in itself gurantie that what is drawn can be made, -------- but when the Car was invented quite a few had some serious questions, among those was "where to place the hey for the horse, where to place the water for the horse" , questions like this ,showing more than anything that "people" can not se much more than what they expect.

So when an architect draw out a primitive mesh and say it is a museum, everyone say WOW. now we just need to fiddle the wonder ,we just need a few skilled steel workers to "read" the drawings and even mesh entities are made from strait pipes making a 4 corner join with a troubled double curved face inbetween, then even nothing show within the mesh strings, skilled craftmen made the fancy sketches come thru. -------- You Jokers claim that you can't "se" how halve notches work, you can't se how this work , I just ask as quite a few others acturly instantly can "se" , if you think you would find a job in construction .

Now what dis I say that you did not hear ;
I said that no other system so smooth generate an assembly framework where two planes intersect to form a "material" vowen together . I said that this replace 20 different rigid profiles and in terms of Dome structures a few expensive special fittings, then another great architectural Icon crash and you still don't respond to any of these claims , you rather ask "where are the hey for the horse, where are the water for the horse".

So as this group rather prepared for the social games ,those you master better than acturly stepping out the crowd and point to another of my claims, --- inventing somthing that by a press of a button solve your lame lack of emagination , please ansver me why I shuld even ansver where the hey for the horse and the water for the horse shuld be in this new and different craft, things realy show in this tread ; your skills my skills, your expertations about future technologies and my visions and resuls. Guess you rather go to an arts exebition and find the "ansvers" for yourself crowd in with those who talk about how difficult visionaryes alway's been the pray for those making the game into knowing who to do your homework and licking the feets of the pretitors who know how to maneage a job situation.

You want that rather than realising that inventing the car engine make no use of horses anymore, that develobing computer programs started by doing the same just rewriting it into fast code, and that the real challances is making the computer do it different ------- different than sketching out a 2D thing on paper asking the engineer to complete your "work".

I don't talk about being a famous designer, I talk about cheap houses. I don't prey on those who are "different" and try make a crowd on Usenet or Web to fight anyone "who think he is somthing" , as that make no strong house, acturly those social skills was already there in the caves, bet cavemen had a strong and complicated social life, but that didn't make a new form language.

Kyll when you say ;

"those renderings tell us nothing thus far. show where the maximum moment would occur on a series of horizontal members and where a max load would be distributed to. show how to not use all the "typical construction" means we use today in this sketch. by hand. por favor. "

Then you say "us" where I acturly had very plesant responses that say othervise, also you ask me for ""typical construction" means we use today in this sketch. by hand. por favor" ------ now please this is different then how can I refere "what we use today" beside you ask a "hand sketch" ----- again what do you expect, that I shuld sharpen the stone adge and do a pen drawing make it into a pseudo digital 2 D where today's claim is atleast 3D , and then when you have such sketch on the screen in what way do you then think you can continue saying "where are the hey for the horse, where are the ink for the laser cutter. Where are the engineer to straiten out the hand made sketches to make the architect claim he made it in 3D.

Do you all think it still is just about sketching it out nomatter if it can be done, nomatter how it will be done , you draw with the tools not some fancy attitude saying "Wow how heavy colors they mooove" as then it is not the colors that move but how you "se". Realy it is not the artist that make the color move but your brain.

Oct 16, 04 3:01 pm

ohh no...looks like Per is having a menage a trois elsewhere...

Per Corell
Oct 16, 04 5:54 pm


Well make you use graphics, also Gif animations work fine , guess this shuld be possible here to but I never tried , seem words not pictures are the issue here where Designcommunity offer to place graphics .
Now don't say you are surprised as you know, my intention is to bring a way to just press a button to have a building mass, sort of a simple 3D frame puzzle, automatic to fill in just pressing a button , making the computer work different by not producing the block and attributes but the real thing.
Programs like Revit make you draw out walls, emagine you do that but replace the brickwork with a sheet steel framework , then you also go strait from CAD drawing to the manufactoring of the individual building compoment.

Oct 18, 04 5:10 am

et un silence se fit...

Per Corell
Oct 18, 04 9:17 am


<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage Express 2.0">
<title>Ikke-navngivet Tom side</title>

<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

<p align="left"><font size="4" face="CountryBlueprint">Hi</font></p>

<p align="left"><font size="4" face="CountryBlueprint">I think
that it is better to have a direct link making it easy to go from
3D drawing directly to the laser or water cutter that will cut
the individual building frames.</font></p>

<p align="left"><font size="4" face="CountryBlueprint">When doing
that you can prepare for standard building compoments as the
window frames already show in other graphics, maby you think it
is upside-down thinking to place the windows,stairs and floors,
and then generate a framework around that, but fact is that the
3D puzzle will fit down millimeter, everything you se in these
renderings can be produced, and more than ever, it\s the touch of
the designer, the experience of the designer that make the
structures act make the computers finaly work, fact is that
computers was made to make it easy, not to make it more

<p align="center"> </p>

<p align="center"><img
width="340" height="260"></p>

Per Corell
Oct 19, 04 9:01 am

Sorry I try again:

<p align="center"><img
width="340" height="260"></p>

Per Corell
Oct 19, 04 9:02 am

Sorry again, I will not try this before I know how to place graphics, maby a-f can tell me .

Oct 19, 04 9:07 am

Easy, look at the bottom of the page!

Per Corell
Oct 19, 04 10:22 am


Thanks ---- but this realy was a Gif animation ,seem like only the first graphic in the slideshow show.

Per Corell
Oct 20, 04 7:37 am


Please refere how Disney hall display itself in raw frames, most strait and a few forced into shaping curves :

Now this is as you know very different from 3D-HoneyComb this is the way tradisional steel beams and profiles are used ,this is what 3D-H replace with just one material .

Oct 20, 04 9:39 pm

per I am assuming you are the one on the right.

Oct 20, 04 11:02 pm

what, the computer?

Oct 21, 04 1:41 pm


Oct 21, 04 8:23 pm

Woo-Hoo I'm Number 200!!!!!
Can someone contact me to arrange the delivery of my T-Shirt...

Oct 21, 04 11:30 pm

holy crap

Josh Russell
Oct 22, 04 12:36 am

"holy crap" indeed.

David Zeibin
Oct 22, 04 1:58 am

Sweet Jesus!

He/it is the one on the right. The far right.

el jeffe
Oct 22, 04 8:28 am

He's lawnmower man.

  • ×Search in:

Please wait... loading
Please wait... loading