Doesn't the use of algorithms in architecture devalue the architect? If you say that a building can be generated by a computer/math problem, aren't we sort of implying that the architect is just a technician and someday we can make a building writing program? Where is the human component? The craftsman is replaced by the robot. I personally find algorithmic designs beautiful, but rather hokey. Sort of like the rash of clear/opaque products that came post iMac. Did you read the article about the MIT students who wrote a program that wrote a technical paper that was accepted to conference on bioengineering or something? I'm starting to see architecture as a circle jerk. Basically a mastibatory event where someone wins.
yes it somewhat devalue's the architect, but its another way of designing. I think it'd be hard to find a client that wanted a nice building based on an algorithm. But the renderings fascinate me.
why do the renderings fascinate you? algorithmic architecture can be very beautiful, but the design component lies only in the algorithm itself. what appears on the screen (or reality) is not really the design of the architect, because in many cases it's a beautiful accident created, not by the architect, but by a formula designed by the architect. algorithmic design can be quite exquisite and even humane (think preston scott cohen and officeDa) but it does take some very liberal defining of agent of the architecture.
these renderings seemed very elementary, and looked more like DNA images from a biology textbook
Toyo Ito recently designed a building somewhere in Scotland with cecil balmond on structures. i think it is a selfridges.
anyway there is a JA or similar outh there somewhere devoted to ITO's work explaining how he used algorithms to place the columns (which are all at angles) and work out the facade. Mos interesting bit is a brief discussion tween toyo and cecil where ito is being mocked by cecil for wanting to work out the angles according to feel. ito had mocked up dozens of columns in his office at various angles, but in the end ceec won and it went rational. surprised that bit was published but quite revealing to see how open ito is to inout from others. his office is very cool that way.
that the algorithm was used to decide angles and so on is no more devaluing of the profession than an orthogonal grid. no need to rely on intuition all the time.
Yeah it's a portfolio.
Me personally see too algotythms and scripts like a method of research in architecture and design. There would always be the dilemma of the devalue of architect as a mental originality in process of designing, but why not help the algorithm originality (especially when idea leak) it could be the burst of an idea that the architect can continou to evolve, cause for sure an algorythm is useful/beautiful behind a stupid mind like a monkey eating with spoon and knife at a table.
Algorythms in architecture - It's just a state of mind!
A different attitude, a new architecture , that architects realise that most architec applications acturly just do things as how it was done before computers.
But what realy shuld make things moving is to realise that there are no way to develob the cheap steel fittings that now houses can't be made with vorse craftmanship ------ it is simply impossible to refine the plybox houses into more efficiency ,both crafts and materials suffered enough
,what architecture need are a new vision a new way to put things together ,or can you emagine "further develobment" of what you see in that picture ?
ALGORITHMS IN ARCHITECTURE!!
Know where can I buy this book?or anything like that?
http://www.mh-portfolio.com/Algorithms_Architecture/p1s.html
thanks
i dont think thats a book, i think its just his portfolio for columbia
you could try him....mh2019@columbia.edu
it's listed on the html version of the portfolio.
Doesn't the use of algorithms in architecture devalue the architect? If you say that a building can be generated by a computer/math problem, aren't we sort of implying that the architect is just a technician and someday we can make a building writing program? Where is the human component? The craftsman is replaced by the robot. I personally find algorithmic designs beautiful, but rather hokey. Sort of like the rash of clear/opaque products that came post iMac. Did you read the article about the MIT students who wrote a program that wrote a technical paper that was accepted to conference on bioengineering or something? I'm starting to see architecture as a circle jerk. Basically a mastibatory event where someone wins.
yes it somewhat devalue's the architect, but its another way of designing. I think it'd be hard to find a client that wanted a nice building based on an algorithm. But the renderings fascinate me.
why do the renderings fascinate you? algorithmic architecture can be very beautiful, but the design component lies only in the algorithm itself. what appears on the screen (or reality) is not really the design of the architect, because in many cases it's a beautiful accident created, not by the architect, but by a formula designed by the architect. algorithmic design can be quite exquisite and even humane (think preston scott cohen and officeDa) but it does take some very liberal defining of agent of the architecture.
these renderings seemed very elementary, and looked more like DNA images from a biology textbook
I think of an algorithim as a tool. There are many tools that aid in design, an algorithim (very simply) is one of them.
Foreign Office does some cool things.... she has nice breast too.
Toyo Ito recently designed a building somewhere in Scotland with cecil balmond on structures. i think it is a selfridges.
anyway there is a JA or similar outh there somewhere devoted to ITO's work explaining how he used algorithms to place the columns (which are all at angles) and work out the facade. Mos interesting bit is a brief discussion tween toyo and cecil where ito is being mocked by cecil for wanting to work out the angles according to feel. ito had mocked up dozens of columns in his office at various angles, but in the end ceec won and it went rational. surprised that bit was published but quite revealing to see how open ito is to inout from others. his office is very cool that way.
that the algorithm was used to decide angles and so on is no more devaluing of the profession than an orthogonal grid. no need to rely on intuition all the time.
Yeah it's a portfolio.
Me personally see too algotythms and scripts like a method of research in architecture and design. There would always be the dilemma of the devalue of architect as a mental originality in process of designing, but why not help the algorithm originality (especially when idea leak) it could be the burst of an idea that the architect can continou to evolve, cause for sure an algorythm is useful/beautiful behind a stupid mind like a monkey eating with spoon and knife at a table.
Algorythms in architecture - It's just a state of mind!
Some time ago we already discussed it http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=P19059_0_42_0_C
By the way anybody has ever used this kind of designing in algorithms or scipting? Share share share!!!
There's Karl Chu in it!!!
Interesting if you have patience!
Have any idea how Microsoft Excel can generate a Melscript! Sounds ...
Anywone's under Karl Chu this fall http://www.arch.columbia.edu/gsap/55498///?data=true!work!current_studios.php?semester=2005-09-01!55498
Hi
Now if an algoritm shuld generate the forms -- wouldn't it be smart if it also generated buildable forms ?
Yes, Per.. exactly..
but what could possibly do that? do you know?
A different attitude, a new architecture , that architects realise that most architec applications acturly just do things as how it was done before computers.
But what realy shuld make things moving is to realise that there are no way to develob the cheap steel fittings that now houses can't be made with vorse craftmanship ------ it is simply impossible to refine the plybox houses into more efficiency ,both crafts and materials suffered enough
,what architecture need are a new vision a new way to put things together ,or can you emagine "further develobment" of what you see in that picture ?
i thought per was going to be published by now. i guess that fell through? romans.
as long as I don't have to be his editor, I'm all for it. I would pay to own a copy of Per's book. Absolutely.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.