Like Archinect on Facebook.
Sign up to our mailing list.
No plans, no sections, no model... your critics will tear you apart.
No easier way to hide under designed projects than a fly-through animation (unless it's an animation of a wireframe where only three views are rendered) and most critics are aware of this now.
Now is not the time to be cynical about "what the jury can judge" if you don't want to talk about 'site-appropriateness' (and I sure didn't) it's up to you to propose a more engaging topic. But the drawings still have to be there to prevent skeptics from taking the "Yes, but.." route.
you're right that you can't just hide behind the fly-through model animation. But I didn't say 90-second building fly-through. In that particular example, I am curious how the convention of the architectural animation might have to change in order to communicate the same architectural understanding that is conveyed by plan, section, etc. Who says you can't just project plans and sections and animate them? If your thesis looks weak in plan or section, maybe it's because it demands a rethinking of architectural media in order to say something.
Nick, you need to get back to work on your thesis.
ALT + F4 works like a charm--
I think what you are hitting on should not be missed. The idea of working an idea to fruition and into a fully developed project. (plans/sections/elevations/renders) But then the step that is so sorely missed in architectural education, the focused editing. For yourself, taking from what you have produced and pulling the pointed ideas out and representing those only. So it may be only a fly-over animation, but only if after all else, that is the conclusion.
our studio this semester has a constraint that is, I believe, in the spirit of what you're describing: 2 minutes to present 20 slides (followed by 8-10 minutes of feedback/review from the critic(s), during which some slides are revisited).
as long as the jurors/critics can cross reference plans/sections/perspectives to best understand the project more power to you. I remember going through undergrad/grad and having only drawn one elevation - it can be done. Defend the argument allow it to be taken all the way through.
The key is figuring out exactly what the minimum requirements are to convey your ideas and strive to do no more. The maximum legibility with the minimum deliverables. That is not to say that you produce way more stuff then you present - but you only show the relevant pieces and don't plaster the wall with every shred of trace produced during your thesis.
well said barry! the minimum or maximum ought to be the wall you pin up on (and quality not quantity being the impetus for layout). also, too many times i've seen beautiful drawings pinned up in an illogical order with little concern for correspondence and the narrative of the project. oh and i have always appreciated presentations where models hang from the wall, but could be removed for more closer viewing ...
nick, I'm envisioning headphones integrated into your presentation somehow ...
thanks for the comments all, and @jesskleinman I whole heartedly agree that narrative is woefully overlooked.
I think, though, that headphones would be too quiet! I'm embedding one of these into my model: (video)
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZlabT5koGaw&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZlabT5koGaw&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?