Archinect
anchor

How to practice architecture

White_Snowman

If you want to get good at an instrument, you practice scales, chords, songs, etc. What are the scales, chords, etc of architecture?

I don’t know if there’s an easy answer for this, just wanted to see if anyone had any insight into how to get better. 

 
Jan 22, 20 5:01 am
threeohdoor

Eh, by your analogy, either the drafting table or AutoCAD/Revit would be the instrument of architecture, much the same way a piano is an instrument for music.

If you want to practice CAD/Revit, there are plenty of avenues to do so. Most involve just continuously drawing up projects/details that either come from work, or just random stuff in your life.

Other skills that "improve" ones ability to do architecture things include sketching (both big things and small), walk-by building analyses (How do you think they built that? How did they build that? What are the differences?). Next time you walk into a new space, ask yourself why you are there and if the room helps you do whatever it is you're doing, in a pleasing way.

On a stretch note (ha!), I'll say that cooking parallels a bit. Planning a dinner and nailing the timing, quantity, quality, and cost is difficult. Appeasing your guests (clients) while not losing your shirt is fun hurdle. Ask yourself what ingredients are most important relative to others, what's your budget, when do you need to start the grill/oven/range, when to cut/prep, how long per task, how do they plates look, are there special situations to account for, etc etc. Many "architects", especially young ones, severely lack the ability to anticipate and control for various externalities. Training your brain to think more clearly about how multiple components/tasks/projects come together (even for small ones like cooking!) is crucial. Do anything you can to exercise that muscle. 

We put a hold on a project due to "client liquidity problems" - apologies for the long response.

Jan 22, 20 10:18 am
RickB-Astoria

Cooking in some ways is a practical art and there are many parallels. Architecture in practice is a practical art (and science). The music parallels the aspects of "instruments of services" but a cook/Chef has that too. The cooking tools and equipment. It really doesn't matter what tool you use but it is important to be able to be effective with the tools to deliver the services. Whether you use CAD (example: Autocad) or a BIM tool (Revit as an example), or paper and pen/pencil (and other drafting instruments) is about designing a solution and delivering a set of drawings, specifications, and other supporting documents to communicate the intent of the design and the specifications of the design to the building department for compliance with regulatory standards for the safety of the built environment and to the builder to sufficient level of detail so the builder can within reasonable construction tolerances, construct the building according the design. This doesn't need the level of detail about how a cabinet is to be constructed and joinery detail but the builder can (if competent) and should be able to determine the specific means and methods to faithfully execute the construction of the building without deviating from the design of the architect/designer (if the architect/designer is competent).

tduds

As an architect who cooks, I strongly agree with the cooking analogy.

RickB-Astoria

I agree with the parallels.

joseffischer

I'm thinking about how practicing songs relates to buildings and would love to see some song titles tied to building images.  Like, what song is the Parthenon?  What song is the local 5+1 stumpy apartment donut?

Jan 22, 20 11:45 am

Go build something.

Then apply what you learned and do it again.

It’s not rocket science.

Jan 22, 20 11:54 am
Chad Miller

That advice is rather fatuous.

Not as much as your comment.

Chad Miller

I don't think so. Someone could learn something from my comment.

daer

@ Chad, go easy on Miles. He's not even licensed.

threeohdoor

This is akin to "bootstrapping" mumbo jumbo. OP was, seemingly, asking about smaller scale pursuits that could improve his/her skills. I know you've got a lot to offer the forum and architects/designers early in their careers, but you could add a little more to the conversation than tautology.

Chad Miller

I'm just messing with Miles. Seriously though, threedoors comments hold true.

Building your design is the most direct way to experience the transformation of the abstract into reality and all of the properties of that: scale translation, material properties, functional performance, etc.

Chad Miller

True, but it you know NOTHING about design and construction it would be a rather unproductive and slow way to learn.

whistler

I'm with Miles all the way on this one. No better way to learn than to design and then build it... don't care if its a bookshelf or a house. The process is basically the same and gets more complicated by the regulations, # of people, consultants etc. involved. It's why we as a profession typically don't hit our stride til later in life. Trial and error is a big factor.

Right, because actual experience is worthless.

Chad Miller

Actual experience with the appropriate process is great. Now go learn genetics by creating a test tube baby.

It's not rocket science and it's not biogenetics. Raising a child would be a better metaphor. But it doesn't make any difference because you’re arguing out of ego rather than intellect.

whistler

If you are talking about "creating" a baby I have been working on that with my wife for years and keep telling her I need more practice but she keeps ignoring my needs???? Raising kids is more like a real time adaptive process because most of us don't get to see it all the way through to the end before we get to start again. So it's really have to make changes on the fly with child A/B/C in various stages of their development hoping that they become the best he/she or they that they can become!

Kind of like design/build.

whistler

Without detailed plans! or schooling!

RickB-Astoria

Lets not forget what the meaning and roots of architect as a word and what it means. For the most part for most in this profession, registered/licensed Architects, today, are not architects. They are only part of that profession. They divorced themselves from fundamental role of "tect" in architect which comes from the Greek word (romanized) arkhitekton which means arch-builder like archbishop.... means the chief or principal builder. Today, architects are no longer builders (except by some who carries on a general contractor license).

White_Snowman

Y’all go hard in this forum haha. I see what Miles is saying, you have to learn songs to play music. Unfortunately for me I just sat down to the instrument so I’ll get the basics down first and build from that.

RickB-Astoria

You can't become a real architect or building designer without learning first. If you don't know how to use a pencil or pen, how can you draw a masterpiece? If you don't know the basics of music, how can you create a masterpiece? You can't make art without learning the principles and developing the skills like learning how to use the tools you use to create. You can't build a house without learning first how to use a saw and hammer and measuring tools. Otherwise, you are liable to cutting off your hand or fingers or your forearm or something. You must learn the theories and principles and begin practicing what you learn under guidance of those experienced especially with architecture/building design which is quite advance and involves a lot of knowledge and skills to be competent and much more to be great. It isn't as simple as learning how to flip a burger and Miles knows that, too! He is right that it isn't rocket science, either. True. Nor is rocket science architecture. Nor is rocket science cellular engineering? They are different fields with different scope of body of knowledge and skills. They are different. It should be understood that it isn't merely something you can learn over a single weekend. Learning to build will help in the insight and understanding the theories and fundamentals of physics, engineering, and why the assembly of building components and systems are done the way they are. Why are beams supported by posts or columns? Why are they spaced in some interval pattern? Is it purely for look and pattern or is there a structural engineering reason? Why are the beams the size they are and why are the columns or posts the size they are? How are they determined? These are all part of what you need to know the answer to and how to do it in practice. This isn't something you will get nailed down for every possible application you may come across in a single weekend or even a single week.

Chad Miller

Sit visits. See how things are built then compare them to the drawings. You can learn a lot in the field.

threeohdoor

Again, I'll point back to my comment about the smaller scale activities that one can do to practice. To continue the analogy, a pianist doesn't just play Moonlight Sonata on blast until perfection. There are many steps, practices, scales, techniques, etc to practice, some of which occur prior to practicing the piece, others occur during. I suppose it's not rocket science, you could just brute force your way through, and sure, you'd learn something, but let's not be silly and think that's an efficient way of improving the sets of skills that make a pianist "good".

RickB-Astoria

I don't disagree there threeohdoor. In a way, we are practicing and improving the set of skills across life.

mightyaa

Observe and evaluate:  Design is a mental exercise and understanding of the built environment.  Flex your brain.  So, start paying attention to spaces and how people interact and why this space is better than that space for whatever the function is.  Basically, a mental trick I use when I’m out and about is just evaluating the space.  What is it that makes that space feel right (or wrong)?  Lighting, volume, acoustics, details, and so forth.  The more you do this, the more you’ll start to understand and build your ‘good architecture’ vs ‘bad architecture’ ideas.  It can also grow into how things function; elevator cores, bathroom locations, and progression through spaces; parking, entry, reception/lobby, wayfinding (directories), passages/hallways, office entries, etc.  Eventually, you just do it all the time and don’t really turn it off.  I’ve yet to meet an architect who hasn’t mentally critiqued the building they are currently in and formed an opinion about what was right or wrong and how to improve the space. 

Next step would be learning to sketch.  Start taking some art classes.  These help define proportions, figure ground, positive and negative space, arrangement, shading, emphasis, etc.  It’s not so much dialing in technique as it is to get your brain to start to understand compositions and visual impact.    

Jan 22, 20 12:19 pm
thatsthat

Use sketching to try to understand not only how to represent a building, but how it can work functionally. Walk through spaces and sketch a bubble diagram of how different programs are related.  What observations can you make? Where are the circulation spaces and how do they connect to different rooms or areas? Sketch out a rough floor plan of your living space, including door swings and window opening using standard architectural drawing conventions. Try to get the proportions of the spaces right without measuring.  Sketch out small details you see (window/door jambs, etc.) and figure out how things are constructed. Again, try to use architectural language and drawing standards. Its not only about what you see, but how you are able to record and communicate to others.

Jan 22, 20 12:53 pm
White_Snowman

I have been sketching a lot and I find it very helpful. Part of the learning process for me of figuring out why a building is shaped the way it is and I think like you said a lot of it is just learning the architectural language

RickB-Astoria

Part of it is understanding relationship between spatial needs and arrangement with function. Take for example the "kitchen triangle" in a kitchen. It is a theory about the relationship of the spatial arrangement with function areas within the kitchen area. The kitchen (albeit sounds like a single function area) has function areas within it. These areas are associated with cooking equipment, prep area(s), utensils, food storage, sink and dish cleaning, storage area for plates, cups, etc. The kitchen triangle or kitchen work triangle is a concept used for establishing an efficient kitchen layout that is functional (and some will even also consider aesthetics in the layout). You got to think about the cook top / oven to the sink and refrigerator and often within the midst of the triangle would be a prep area that is an "island" but efficiently design to not impede access to the refrigerator, the sink and the cooktop/oven. The island and the cooktop/oven maybe integrated in some designs so as to not impede efficient movement. This is when you, as the architect/building designer, would need to understand how cooks/chef or your client works and how this can be done efficiently because even if your client isn't a professional cook/chef can become more efficient with efficient layout in addition to actually learning to cook but that's not your job or responsibility. Now if they don't cook aside from maybe cooking ramen noodles or mac & cheese and microwave dinner then.... maybe it doesn't need to be a commercial kitchen like you might design for Chef Ramsey but you can at least layout the kitchen efficiently and consider how you can efficiently cook Mac & Cheese in a kitchen. You probably done it a number of times so how can you layout a kitchen to be efficient? How much distance should you have between the cooktop (probably don't need to be an actual regular residential oven but could be) to your prep area, the prep area to the refrigerator and food storage cabinets. Then you would want to consider the prep area and the sink and then consider your egress from the prep and setup area to the eating area in an adjacent room/space. You then will have to consider the relationship between these spaces to other spaces? Why is it common in single family residential homes that the garage is located in such a way where access from the garage connects or egress to or near the kitchen? This is a question that requires understanding how people live and there is some obvious practical reasons. In this age of automobiles, how do people transport food from the grocery store where they buy food to their home? Usually via an automobile, right?!? Where is the automobile parked? In the garage? That's the ideal in the modern home. When you transport the grocery from the automobile to the kitchen, wouldn't you want to minimize distance. As time went on, we started shifting from multi-story homes designs where you would have to climb a flight of stairs to the kitchen to single story or multistory designs where the living and kitchen area is on the same level or only a step or two above the garage floor level with bedrooms upstairs. In such designs, the means of access from the garage to the kitchen to take the grocery from the car to the kitchen is made easier and more straight forward. This is how we, as architects/building designers, can make the design of homes easier and more efficient to the person who is going to live in the space. Practical functionality and efficiency is part of design consideration. The same principle applies with other design applications. I'm just giving an example with a home. We must consider efficiency in the functionality of the arrangement of function areas and this begins by learning and understanding how the client uses their spaces and the nature of how things are done. In other words, you need to learn about your client and how your client does things and the nature and consult with them about how their spaces can be improved by understanding how they do things, ideas they have about improvement and why and as you learn the nature of their design challenges, you can then improve upon it and possibly devise a solution or multiple solutions which maybe better than the ideas they have. The better you understand their needs, the better you can devise solutions and you will also be challenged to determine solutions that are realistic and within reason of the budget if the budget is reasonable. If your client only has $100,000 to renovate, you can't be presenting solutions that are going to cost $1,000,000. Be realistic. The client might be able to address a project that might cost $125,000 by figuring out an additional source of capital but they can't realistically come up with $900K more. Of course, this would be realistic for a small renovation project of a kitchen and some adjacent areas but if your client only has $100,000 and they want to design and build a semiconductor manufacturing facility, they are in no way in the world can realistically do high volume semiconductor manufacturing at that price. They might be able to afford a very small R&D semiconductor lab that can with equipment produce a research level production and possibly put such a facility within a strip mall storefront space. They could conceivably do this for under $250K. Some cases, within the $100K-$125K. However, they aren't going to be producing 10 Million microprocessors out of a facility that cost only

White_Snowman

You know out of context this looks like the ramblings of a mad man. Either way it was very helpful, thanks!

RickB-Astoria

Out of context, almost everything written looks like the ramblings of a mad man.

JBeaumont

Those are the ramblings of someone who once designed a house with no bathrooms, in which the living room looked out onto a view of the entirely blank broadside of the garage, and the main entrance entered directly into a bedroom hallway. That, and a $250k semiconductor lab in a strip mall, are lessons on what happens when one spends 20 years avoiding getting any real job in an architecture firm or in any professional setting even vaguely related, but plays architect anyway.

The architectural equivalent to practicing a musical instrument is working in a setting with one or more experienced architects, on increasingly advanced tasks on real-life projects. There is absolutely no substitute for that, no matter how many pdfs you read and forums you haunt.

RickB-Astoria

First off, you are referring to a sketch done in a 30 minute time frame including the time it takes to scan the sketch and post it on a forum. It wasn't in any way or form a final design or one that may be used as it is for construction or permits. Considering this was done while at university under a full time class load with all those other matters of class assignments. I said a research level R&D semiconductor lab could conceivably be done in a "strip mall" when your modular semiconductor cleanroom lab is installed inside the store front if the store front has say.... 15-ft or so ceiling height and the modular clean room being having a ceiling height of about 9-ft. Most of the store front space doesn't need to be in the ISO 1 through 5 level. Much of it doesn't even need to be cleanroom. The cleanrooms would be the modular unit(s) installed. The rest of the space need only be suitable for electronics. Maybe no carpet just linoleum on concrete slab to minimize static buildup. Some spaces for computers and maybe you have a transition space to get into the cleanroom attire. Not all parts of the spaces within a research lab needs to be classified as a cleanroom. Take a wafer and cutting it with proper equipment may come at its costs but it is conceivable to be done at a budget especially if you have the equipment to cut the wafer disc into wafers and the certain epoxies for covering the semiconductor wafer that mounted directly to the PCB. Can it be done.... if the right circumstances if they already have the computers and software and it is just installing the cleanroom and critical equipment for semiconductor fabrication. I'm not even remotely talking about semiconductor manufacturing capabilities like that you would find at Intel's semiconductor foundry like the one in Hillsboro. These are volume scale semiconductor fabrication plants. What you also fail to ask or considered in your response to me is what semiconductor process size (component dimensions size such as transistor size). Are we talking about a 14nm process or are we talking about something like 25 microns to 0.5 microns. The larger the component size the less strict the cleanroom standards needs to be and some of the processes needed to be. Consider this for example: ( https://twitter.com/szeloof/status/988589833974140929 ) and ( http://sam.zeloof.xyz/first-ic/ ) If you notices, the component size was of such size that you don't even need a clean room any more than what is needed for PCB etching. At 175 microns "gate size", we are talking a little thicker than that of a human hair. In an ideal setup, you would only need to wear an anti-contamination suit and cheaper end of the modular clean room setup that meets ISO 8 level. ISO 9 would basically be a office / hospital operating room when sterilized, cleaned and HEPA filters are used in the air and the room has some filtered air exchange. Even a modest priced $50,000 to $75,000 modular clean room and some process to mitigate air infiltration from non-filtered space and the clean room would be ideal for fabrication of ICs with component sizes down to 1970s level at the very least without the extreme expense of more sophisticated equipment for manufacturing the semiconductor. Such equipment could exceed a $250K budget but then you are looking at maybe moving towards a $1M to $10 Million budget for R&D but something on million+ units of IC production scale would likely jump up to the north of a billion dollar level especially with the 14nm and smaller size processes. Older processes like the 1980s level could be achieved at modest cost (potentially) with surplus foundry equipment sold at below original cost levels to clear way in foundries for newer equipment. It is possible but you also run into other problems if you are doing production scale. If you are doing R&D level stuff, you will run into less EPA/DEQ issues if you properly dispose of certain chemicals used. Sometimes, you can use 'greener' processes that are more environmentally friendly.

JBeaumont

The architectural equivalent to practicing a musical instrument is working in a setting with one or more experienced architects, on increasingly advanced tasks on real-life projects. There is absolutely no substitute for that, no matter how many pdfs you read and forums you haunt, or wikipedia entries you plagiarize, or tweets you propagate.

RickB-Astoria

Ever heard of solo musicians?

JBeaumont

I've never heard of one who got any good without instruction by and/or real-life interaction with other good musicians.

RickB-Astoria

You do know the instruction part can be done via VHS/DVD and audio cassette/CDs as well as online videos. If any real-life interaction it is usually from brief conversations not under a working environment.

JBeaumont

While I'm sure that's how you would approach learning a musical instrument, I can assure you that you would not advance any farther than hobbyist-level mastery without an in-person, human instructor, and without in-person exposure to and interaction with other musicians.

In learning music it is important to be present to hear others play, as well as to have others hear one and provide continuing feedback on one's own progress.  It's the same with architecture - one can only go so far in a vacuum, and as far as one does go without present guides may be in misguided directions.

RickB-Astoria

Hear other people play.... um... DVDs, CDs, audio cassette galore, videos, etc. 

 FYI: NO ONE ever learns anything in a complete vacuum (not to mention they won't live without a space suit and endless supply of air). Do you think that I learned about architecture entirely in a vacuum? That's not how self-directed or autodidactic learning works. Directed doesn't mean their isn't input. Didactic learning is where you have a teacher that tells directs you and basically its marching orders. Autodidactic learning comes from direct self-initiative and does involve feedback. I don't count time with mentors discussing architecture and feedback to IDP/AXP hours. If they counted, I would have a bit more of those hours officially clocked in. They only count hours under employment under direct supervision and control. You might count it for experience.... perhaps. Fine. I don't for things like resumes and IDP/AXP. I am not saying it isn't valuable. I even talked to this point higher up on the thread. Surely, one can learn by observing feedback of the audience. It is how it all began. What we know our found to be pleasant or good (subjective) all begins with finding what is good or pleasant to the audience overall. In the beginning, it was more a populous perspective. Critical analysis came after enough body of works have developed and the assessment of what is good evolved. We have bodies of work. 

What is good music? What is good? We are now being philosophical. Scientifically, there is no good or bad. Good and bad can not be quantified. Scientifically, it must be measurable. This is where art and science departs from measurable evaluation to non-measurable evaluation. What is good and bad is institutionalized by the interests holding power to invoke and impose their subjective viewpoints. I can scientifically measure if the music is too loud and hurts. There is science to that. However, we can't exactly measure what is good and bad. We can only measure statistically the pervasiveness of a "school of thought" and "values". What is DEEMED good and bad comes from the institution of values.

tduds

"We are now being philosophical." No, you are. Everyone else is still just talking about architecture.

eeayeeayo

Rick is electively and selectively autistic. When it suits him, he fails to understand common phrases and analogies, because it allows him to dodge the meaning of what's being said to him and go spinning off into space (literally, in his most recent post above.)

That describes the recent tangent on planet vs dwarf planet too. 

*gasp* 

is Rick studying to become an astronomer?

RickB-Astoria

tduds, "good and bad" in ANYTHING.... architecture and everything else in existence *IS* philosophical and subjective (hence not scientific). Subjectivity is antithetical to science for it draws opinion on non-measurable attributes. There is no science to "it's pretty". What is pretty? Why do you think your wife is attractive? Is it measurable scientifically? Is that value absolute and shared by everyone? Sure it is shared by some but not by all. I am not judging your wife's attractiveness. I have no personal opinion of my own on that. Why do people find a person attractive? While there maybe some science behind some aspects of it but a large part of it comes from cultural values instituted by the institutions of our social culture. I am not talking about government agencies. I am talking about broader societal "institutions". Yes, I am talking about the philosophical aspect but ARCHITECTURE values of good and bad is a philosophical matter. Sure, we can talk scientific about energy efficiency and heat/loss efficiency but we don't use terms "good" and "bad" for that. It is not proper in a scientific way to use qualitative words but quantitative words. Scientific approach requires quantitative words because it requires measurement. Science is measured. Architecture is a bit of both, true. Aesthetic quality is rooted in art and art is rooted in philosophies of composition and cultural values.

tduds

Rick your process of carrying on reminds me of the old parlor game, exquisite corpse.

RickB-Astoria

Cadavre Exquis..... yeah... I can see that. My mind can be somewhat fragmented from several thought lines and sometimes I will get the points together coherently. Sometimes or a lot of times, not so clear. 


RickB-Astoria

Oh.... the parlour game itself was called "Consequences" if I recall and it is similar but I wouldn't be surprised that Exquisite Corpse was used in parlors over the years.

tduds

QED

JawkneeMusic

recognize it is & isn't about arch, instead also what u know

Jan 22, 20 4:08 pm
White_Snowman

What?

JawkneeMusic

it is ur integrated self

White_Snowman

of course

Non Sequitur

words

JawkneeMusic

by words you meant something sequitor

Non Sequitur

I did. Unlike you.

sameolddoctor's comment has been hidden
sameolddoctor

jerking off regularly helps...

Image result for lebowski i still jerk off manually


Jan 22, 20 5:54 pm
tintt

Trial and error. Paying attention.

Jan 23, 20 3:40 pm

.

Jan 23, 20 3:55 pm
5839

It's a reliable rule on any forum that the longest posts come from those with the least to contribute.

Non Sequitur

Comment of the week. Both of these.

Chad Miller

Holy fucking huge blocks of text Batman. 

Jan 23, 20 4:22 pm
Non Sequitur

My commute home is too short to read it, but I like the angle of literally comparing the saying “learning in a vacuum” and actually trying to learn something while being in the vacuum of space.

tduds

I want to see the "30 minute house" plan. I think that happened before I started wasting time on here.

RickB-Astoria

I'll try to look for it. It isn't anything special. If you want something better, I probably could come up with something better. It was something I slapped together after a long day of other stuff that had nothing to do with designing or let much time to spend contemplating the design. Yeah, the bathroom was something omitted. I kind of skipped any sort of parti process to compress in such short time which if I did would have sorted out and processed the design iterations without forgetting about the bathroom. In regular design process, the overall pace would have been slower and more design iteration would have been done. You aren't really missing anything with that sketch.

Non Sequitur

30min house designs sounds like a great bar game. Sit around with several pints and a large pile of markers and pens and every one races to design a house by the time their second pint is done, then critique and start over.

It got linked a while ago over in TC but the link is broken. Discussion is still good though; https://archinect.com/forum/thread/33434/a-html/59350

Non Sequitur

EI, there are some names on that page that have not graced the forum for some time. Where did Josh and David go?

tduds

Non: In grad school I did a one day workshop where we took over a bar table and practiced napkin sketching. It was one of the most useful days of my education.

I don't follow them, but they occasionally come up in my Twitter feed when one of their tweets is liked or retweeted by others I do follow. Not sure why they haven't graced us here lately. 

I can count on one hand the number of known archinect regulars I've met IRL, and while I haven't met David, I think we did cross paths a while back. I recognized him from his photo, but thought it would be weird if some random guy came up to him and started chatting about archinect. I do recall he was taller than I was expecting.

Non Sequitur

Tduds, we did the bar round-table sketching thing once a week for over a year while in M.Arch. It was great to roll out the yellow trace between the guinness pints.

EI, I've not met anyone, likely due to the very small networking scene here and the whole "not living in the us" thing but I have many standing "will share pints" offers with some.  8-)

tduds

Literally on napkins though. We got a huge pile from the bartender and went to town.

tduds

Going off on a tangent now, but if you want to see the artistic potential of a simple ballpoint pen and a napkin, follow https://www.instagram.com/tripp_arch/

The old man used to throw me a sketch on a napkin (literally, and occasionally a restaurant placemat) for me to turn into a building. In hindsight many were likely done in a bar.

RickB-Astoria

tduds, the artistic potential of a plain ol' bic pen can be suprising and thanks for sharing that link.

liberty bell

I thoroughly enjoyed that trip back to TC history, Everyday. Thanks for that.

kjdt

Found it in the Wayback Machine:  Villa Balkins: 

https://pasteboard.co/IREYuOu.jpg 

https://pasteboard.co/IRF0eUm.jpg

RickB-Astoria

Thanks kjdt. Anyway, it was a crappy sketch which if I was spending more time than the couple of sketches and then going to computer lab with a scanner and scan it then upload it.

The criticism is fair for not including a bathroom and if I spent a minute longer, I probably would have thought it out a little better with bathroom. I was rushing the design to be done, scanned, and uploaded in the time frame because I was overcompensating for the time that it may take to get access to a computer with a scanner since the school had too few computers with scanners with the student population and I didn't have one with me as I didn't bring one to UO.

Thanks for finding them again kjdt

tduds

lol "Not For Construction"

atelier nobody

Have a little fun with it...

Jan 24, 20 2:18 pm
tduds

Got this as a Christmas present a bunch of years ago. It's a blast.

atelier nobody

I've worked in offices that actually used Lego and other toys for quick study models. Not bad as long as you like all right angles...

JawkneeMusic

alright, sketch unlimited time limit or yo mama is mía

Jan 25, 20 6:03 pm
JawkneeMusic


i think this is the worst

Jan 25, 20 6:20 pm
RickB-Astoria

Is that yours?

JawkneeMusic

ya i did it right then

RickB-Astoria

okay.....

Non Sequitur

It's hot garbage

tduds

I, too, think that is the worst.

White_Snowman

So in summation:


Practice CAD/Revit


Sketch, Sketch, Sketch


Actively think about a building while you’re in it


Go build something, it’s not rocket science


You can’t learn in a vacuum


Sketch more


Whatever Jawknee is on


Go to a bar and draw on napkins with other Architects

Jan 25, 20 8:59 pm

You forgot, "Ignore Rick Balkins"

Chad Miller

More.  

Jan 30, 20 1:57 pm
joseffischer

This is the type of sketch that makes me die inside, a design so bland and copy paste that I know my next month is going to be all about discussing 1 3/4" vs 2" profiles and moving that hard canopy up 3", then down 6", then up 4", and then "back to where we drew it in Option 2B, but with Option 3C's storefront" and finally VE'd out of the project for awnings installed NIC.

joseffischer

Not to say it's a bad drawing, thanks for the image Chad, it's just the Owners typically attached to the drawing that makes me get the chills

tduds

Nothing wrong with a good fabric building. Nice sketch, Chad.

Chad Miller

To be fair is was a 15 minute concept sketch showing a 'typical brick building' look that the client wanted. With more development I would have done more masonry detailing, better proportioning, and had more interesting metal panels. The site is very small and surrounded by 1930 - 40's style masonry buildings.

Chad Miller

Oh and you're right joseffischer - the client was one of 'those' types. The project didn't go much farther than this - thank god.

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: