Those aurolab rendengs are great - they're actually the sort of thing I had in mind when I said I was finally starting to like computer renderings. However I is just plain too po to afford it :(.
nils, my reference to the late eighties does of course exclude po mo.
I think the one graphic I am most displeased with in my boards was the aerial - yes, it does illustrate the idea, but so would a napkin sketch. I just couldn't get the perspective right for some reason.
Form1,
If you can afford a PC, sketchup + render software, a drawing software ( intellicad for example) and and indesign + photoshop you can set your self to almost the same quality renders than that of auralab ( for around 5000 USD which is not that much for an architect office is it?)... what will make the diff is experience, speed and mono oriented activity which makes them leader in their fields...
Its funny you mention the napkin sketch, because Nouvel ( people will think i work for him lol) also came up once with a few battered A3 drawing sketches at a competition jury, and he won the competition just by words and few basic drawings). it was for the "endless tower" project in Paris ( finally abandoned).
Like you I tended to avoid 3D stuff and think my architecture itself was sufficient in proving it was good, but now that i have learned the tools to produce way more "selling" images, i left my reluctancy aside... i seldom use handrawings in the renders, appart for small sketches that explains basic schemes etc..
one more month to go before we know what the jury decides... lets hope its like switzerland and they produce a book / report of some sort so we all can benefit from what they decided..
I am not counting on a book......1100 pages or at least 700. If they had planned that book they might be considering a website now to celebrate the new library and the competition ....lol.
Sketchup is great, I must say and agree with N. You don't really need anthing else than Photoshop to add to it although I am now using Maxwell as well to render my SU models. I see though by knowing many colleageus here in the profession few master Sketchup well although its really a simple application.
I am using Modo now and feel its even better with a very well integrated renderer and with a very good team behind it. Modo however is a lot more study though. The tutorials are the best I've seen so studying Modo is a lot of fun.
I also won a competition once with a A4 sketch made in less than a hour. There where only two other archtitects in the competition though. It was embarrassing to see how much time they had invested in their plans and drawings. They had no chance with our simple but much more effective plan. The Asplun competition is a bit too complicated for such simple golden concepts I am afraid, at least I have not seen anything truly simple that aswers all problems in the most effective way.
well, they did kind of ask for it - the brief specifically asked for a complex building. You can respond to that several ways, but i prefer the "sneaks up on you" sort of response.
Yes, the best would have been to take down Asplund and put a true landmark there or choose a different site more to the centre of the city. Well, they probably thought of this and came to the conclusion that the new landmark should be close to the subway, hence the choosen direction for the new entrance and then connect the whole thing to Asplund. Then we have the annexes, the commercial building being the landmark there and the hill and slowly things became so complicated that it looked like a design competition......lol. Then we 1100+ submissions arrived and no clear answers where found....or are there and did we not see them...
Maybe instead of five we should as a forum jury decide on 50 plans. Lets see if we can group 50 and predict at least 3. Should be easy.
I stole some of others here but I start with these and later I have a look again what plans I want to add. Would it not be funny if we did not guess one of the winners.
I start with:
Down the rabbithole
Trivium
2 squares
Janus
Oasis
Malmash6
isbn 0-7148-3976-0-1
Don't know revit and I am on a Mac. Never liked Autodesk solutions for design work though. A colleague of mine had the Autodesk police at his one-man office checking his autocad licens just after he bought it. There where 3 guys waiting at his desk going through his things as if he was a criminal. When I read Autodesk I see about 600 of the worst submissions passing by. Give me Sketchup any time and I beat almost anyone in speed and quality even when given only a few hours of 3D modeling.
I like Autocadd for 3d modeling and drafting in general, but I don't really render with it. From what I've seen, I've liked sketchup's rendering, but not its modeling. The last rendering program I really bothered with was 3dstudio, and that was a pain in the ass - and I didn't like to graphic feel of it either.
Revit has yet to impress me, really.
Well, modeling in Sketchup can't get any better. At least not within todays array of modeling tools for architecture. The way it handles components and drawing in perspective is great. Most of my income in the past two years was generated by using Sketchup. I can model most of my presentations in less than a day. I have never worked with anything that is that fast, used microstation, vectorworks, modo, and a lot of other less well known packages. I have seen people trying to keep up with me in Autocad or the likes and needed 4 times as much time, and they where supposed to be full time professionals in modeling. Obviously Sketchup is for straightforward building design work better than curved nurbs and Gehry stuff.
Sketchup takes a few weeks to get used to but from then on its your best friend at the office and I don't work at Google...
This CAD subject is a bit off topic....I think we lost most of the members in this thread...maybe we should all just wait and see and discuss on a new thread the winners during the course of the next month.
running out of time for this list of projects grr ;)...
[off topic more on]
agreed 100% of all Filver said about sketchup/maxwell...
Revit seems to be the future in complexier 3D's you want to go with all the way to the construction its a good software ( parametric 3D, with future IFC links ) if you are working on big projects, within big teams etc... I'm not sure its that usefull for small / one man archs doing small projects..
... sketchup way easier quicker for sketches / early 3Ds and renders... if you have the time ( paid) like I have on some projects, you can even use it to build litteraly the 3D ( i model the materials the way they are in real and built layers of materials one on each other this way) result is almost no surprise on construction site on each project i've done with this technique
[off topic more off]
Would be interesting to discuss around the various projects online when we have a few mins, i'm using msn mostly for work so if u guys wanna chat bout it u can still add me: my addy is swoardsnowboards attttt hotmail doc come ( this for spam bots ;)
how did the stocklholm comp. discussion get hijacked / devolve into such a discussion of such banality about setchup or autocad? there are endless discussions on this stuff to be found already...
yes, your right, CAD is not really Asplund. I think we lost some discussion members here long before things got off topic.
Its time for a new thread with a more inspiring subject than "Favorites". But it did help to filter the plans a bit as far as worth looking at.
Pitty we had no one here who was actually at the exhibit. Looking at my own submission and the tiny pdf that is posted on the website I doubt if looking at 1Mb pdf's does the submissions any good. We miss the actual look and feel of the work done.
I also feel most here have seen the work of others more or less as competitors and the jury will not. They will be much more interested to guide their judgement following a matrix of aspects and goals. We haven't done that here and also don't know really what the jury and organisers now feel are priorities.
I think I am out for a while and have a look at the winners later next month.
well now, don't be too pessimistic - think of the conversation in terms of the role of graphics in a competition, how much they can do for you, how much they can't, and its at least a little more on topic in the general competition sense.
I think Filver's right that we don't get the same impressions that jury gets by going to the exhibition (or could get by going to the exhibition). my experience of my own pdf posted vs my boards is much the same - the finest lineweights blurr out, etc., so there's a degree of the presentation that you don't see. I think the same would go for most.
I wonder a lot about wether the jury is using the exhibition specifically, or if they are also browsing through the files electronically. I would assume that they don't have to go throught the pain of downloading. I'd wonder if they might have suport staff ? - "go find me a scheme that has the news center on the top floor...". Sort of a low tech go-fer search engine.
Just saw a scheme I liked - 0877 asplund library maquinas. The floor plates wind up too tortured for me, and I'm unsure of the circulation pattern, but the overall massing seems interesting, even if I would change it a bit to improve connections and circulation. I particularly liked how there is a plaza at the base of the hill, rather than just the backside of the building.
Ok, I am back, can't wait till next month ....lol.
I am sure the jury will have a shortlist of most important aspects and will give points to those that have the highest score. Something like this not strictly to this order though:
-World class entrance facing Odenplan?
-Sensitive plan in its surroundings?
-Park connection?
-Underground subway/shopping connection?
-Clearity for visitors?
-Great work-place for staff?
-Attrackt new young staff?
-Attrackt new young visitors in droves?
-Flexible in terms of how to put the program in now and in the future?
-Big enough?
-Landmark?
-Within competition brief bouderies, clearing subway, Asplund etc.
-Leaves Asplund and 4th wing untouches or almost?
-Naturally extending the excisting library?
-Livingroom experience?
-Media handling well arranged?
-Budget?
-Maintanance?
-Program efficiancy?
Well, there must be more.....
Use this list by giving points from 1 to 3 and see what floats up.
0877 asplund library maquinas has no connection what so ever with Asplund so what to do with that, the design looks clear and simple but it does not solve the math.
that's true about the connection problems with 0877, but it looks like there's no reason that you couldn't make a connection. The plan begs for it. It's a fairly sly trick - make the choice obvious, and let the client make the decision (touching the holy asplund building) that you feel that they may get upset with if you made the decision yourself.
I think that the five winners could easily be outright deficient in some areas, only to make it up in the second round in further development / response to jury comments. The connection problems with 0877 would be a good example of that theory.
I don't think 0877 scores many points really. The connection is one of the competition main goals. Your not going to wait in stage two to see how that is solved if about 500 submissions solved that straight away unless the submission looks so good its like a once in a lifetime kind of aha-experience.
I just saw Jeve Jobs on the new iPhone as presented at the keynote on a quicktime movie. Steve had a really interesting way of presenting the new iPhone. He stated a set of design characteristics and showed how he solved them all and then showed the model. A very old fashioned looking phone and everybody laughed. Then he showed the real model and even though it was neither very exciting the audiance applauded the design. Very clever but mostly the new phone was a set of well designed features solving a set of design goals. I am sure the jury has plenty of choice to come up with 5 winners who solved the list best. But the first shortlist will contain plans that won't make an audiance laugh, the audiance does not have to be impressed either. After that the math will do the rest.
I also feel that almost none of the submissions really did the math very well, maybe since the more professional offices have not submitted in such an open and crowded competition. The jury will simply have to live with the fact that some winners will have to get a serious make-over to win the second stage. Thats not so easy because the winning plan in the final stage can not be developed in such a way that it begins to look like one of the no-winners. It will have to maintaine its typical character and winning features.
I also thought 0692 - the new media forum was good untill I figured out where they planned the main entrance and put the staff. And then I saw the escelator going into the rotunda.... It does score some good points though on important issues, landmark, clearity, big, modern. Very hard and cold design though. I also see many plans degrading the staff by even putting them underground. Can you imagine what a nightmare that would be after having visited Seattle....
No, I am sure the jury and organisers are not going to wait and see what happens in the final stage to figure out if their most important goals are going to be answered or not. There is plenty to choose from and I am sure if they do their work well they will find those submissions, good looking or not. They can always commit the winner to work with a well know Swedish office who will supervise the architecture and interior design making sure it will be of world class. The winner will just have to look modern enough not to make the audiance laugh in disbelieve.
all the more to the point that it isn't necessarily about the math - its about the inspiration too. They had evidently considered that they might not choose a winner who even had enough experience to pull the job off - remember the stipulation that if they felt the winner hadn't the experience to finish the job, the jury would team them with an architect who did?
Obviously the winners should be inspiring plans but there are dozens of those so still you have no winner. Count on the math to be of great importance to find the winning entrees. A shortlist of at least 20 plans are all inspiring to a certain degree and will not be laughed at.
But even to come to this shortlist they will have a rougher and less detailed matrix set up the list. On that list are probably also a few true or false points to make.
For instance all plans outside area 2, all plans that mess with Asplund, all plans that are not complete missing floorplans or sections or are simply to unfinished to judge, all plans that look so bad none of the jury members would want to be seen dead with them (500 plans at least). I think in all just the yes and no list already takes care of a 1000 plans. Maybe even a seperate team could do that work even before the jury is going to consider the rest.
I am not even sure if they are obligated to the winner to let her or him do he final design and built the plan or that they have left the option open to eventually choose an architect do make a final design after the second stage has ended.
You're right, you do have to do at least math. I'm just saying I think its possible for a scheme to be inspiring enough in one regard that it overcomes a deficiency. Some of the schemes would be obviously over budget, or technically impossible, so that is a big negative.
The competition brief states that the winner will get an additional prize if a the process does not lead to a commission for them within (If I remember right) 1 year. So no, not a solid obligation to award a contract, but certainly a financial penalty if they don't.
The winner will be an entry that looks wonderful next to Asplund's Library and responds to the surroundings through juxtaposition or a complementary contrast, or somehow???.
then, after those projects are picked, the jury will look at how the building works.
the building that has the right balance of looks and brains will be the winner.
At least 2 will have kept the annex buildings, for political reasons.
ok, I am sure but wonderful looks very different to all of us....ask Ramus, Zaha or Gehry what they think of wonderful...very different as the jury will come up with very different ideas as well.
I have been in many competitions where the winners where ok at best leaving the real wonderful stuff honorably mentioned at second and so places.
Plans that don't look all that good in the planning fase sometimes turn out surprisingly well when built like the Seattle building. Many now feel that Seattle looks good although you would not hear such praise when the drawings where shown some years back.
Just read this again as stated by the Stockholms Stadsbibliotek website considering the competition:
"A large building, with a floor space of 10-12,00 m2 (this is a mistype I suppose), in this requires an architect on par with those who are designing the world's top libraries, such as the black diamond in Copenhagen or the library in Alexandria. No doubt the commission will attract huge interest. The name Gunnar Asplund will garantee that."
I am sure they are looking for a big name as well. The problem is that your not going to experiment right beside the work of a god no matter how well intended. Really funny to see 500+plans actually digging into the Asplund library. Those submissions underestimated Asplund's monumental status in Sweden and are going to be dumped in the first few days by this fact alone.
Oh, and by the way, the jury has a good portion of members who are most interested how the building works and they are going to express their interest to the more architecturally inclined members of the jury by saying "and what about this"?? pointing at a great but not so wonderful projects.
Thats how Ramus sells his work and passes by on the discussion wether the concept looks wonderful or not. I sure hope we get some insight on how the jury came to their decision when they expose it. Also I hope they show a list a bit longer than the 5 they choose just to show which projects took their attention and which did not. I am sure they realise how much energy everybody put into this competition and so compensate that by providing us the neccesary information to understand our own submission.
Has anyone found some other threads on the competition or are they all in Swedish?
"February 14-April 21, 2007
The exhibition presents the five finalists in the international architectural competition for an extension to the Stockholm Public Library, designed by Gunnar Asplund."
we should at least try...
I have a feeling I would come to the same conclusions as the jury and that counts me out ....lol.
the 14th, thats according to plan, basicly that means they have sorted things out already, lets wait and see. Anyhow its more interesting to see how the five turn out in the second stage, there we see what the organiser was actually looking for, the first stage will just show plans that are most flexible towards those goals.
I would think that they would have to have the choices already made so as to give the five time to make travel arrangements to go to the exhibition, BUT the five are to remain anonymous through to the end, so that would preclude having a presentation. All they need to display is 10 boards, so prep needs are fairly low. If things were hotly contested among the jury, they could probably argue to the end.
Well, no way they are just going to set up 10 panels and move on. This is going to be presented as big as the whole thing has been sofar.
The second stage is also anonymous. I am sure of course the five have already been informed by the administration. You are not going to present five without any confirmation of their whereabouts although they will not be expected to show up at the presentation. Obviously to the jury the five remain anonymous. So for those still hoping by now they can get back to work or have left this forum to make sure they remain anonymous.
Obviously I am shocked not to have won but at least I have an excuse ....1100+.
I don't think the jury being a high profile group with busy agenda's and many other projects to attend to are going to debate untill now even. It would be a matter of planned and prepared meetings where decisions are being made well in time and properly order. Its all about setting up the new brief now for the second stage and about to move on from there.......as if I know .....lol.
the fact that the guy lying is typically acting with his hands like that shows the photographer had some mixed feelings at this competition. I think that he or she is obviously trying to say, my god this is madness........
I this the way to world class architecture ? The end results are not clearly saying this is the way to do it, neither for the organisers neither for all those involved. It has been great though to be part of such an experiment.
I would like to be at this exhibit 80 years from now and look at all this paperwork in a time that animations, web and digital techniques have taken over and for sure all ideas about architecture and culture. Will it all look as old fashioned as Asplund now does? Probably the new extension will be looked at the same way we percieve the 4th wing Asplund added later at a time he was done with archiac and eclectic style he had in mind when building the library at first.
I took it he was just making a joke about being tired from looking at so many projects - he does first tell people that its cool, then reminds them to bring a lunch
I checked out a swedish discussion board on a site from the city of stockholm - http://81.92.65.172/chattsthml/ I used an instant online translator on the few postings, and got back a lot of nonsense translations that more or less indicate cool show, I hope they pick something exciting, its so stodgy here, etc. The one decent translation I got was posted by the moderator on Jan 17, and said that the five projects would be announced on the 8th of Feb, which is a week before they are to be exhibited and a week after the competition states as the decision deadline (Feb 1st)
Well done submission although old fashioned and small without much of a connection and in conflict with the subway and lacks flexibility or appeal to the younger generation. This submission does not make me feel its the solution for the next 80 years or so. World class is it certainly not and no connection to the subway.
The submission does look ok for its graphics and good looking interiors, I can understand the jury will have a closer look at this one.
Wonder if these wooden models or abstract presentations are any good compared to the more down to earth in situ renderings with people, citylights and more modern urban architectural qualities or if the jury has no preference on how the concept is visualized. I mean a subconcious preference since the jury will never admit that such an aspect of the submission is of any importance.
I don't see the conflict with the subway - it doesn't have much in the way of a basement, and the footings could probably be accomplished with a grade beam of some kind. The connection to the asplund library at the upper levels could also be made better than it is - wouldn't be impossible.
What I think struck me the most was that this looks like the most successful composition I've seen that keeps any, much less two, of the existing annex buildings. There is also a rather original connection made to the original drum, with a stair in the arced interstitial space. Look at the top left corner of the right hand board). They've made a rather interesting connection to their main axis. That stair connects directly to the main entry at level 0.
Sorry, it wasn't your submission was it ?
But your right, I have taken over this thread and its getting to be a monolog. I better go to Stockholm and have a lay down there as well, take lunch too ....lol.
kwalt, for your first post here, thanks, it was time someone stood up and did something. You did indeed do me a favor.
I admire you insights and enthusiasm … I hope you go to Stockholm to see the boards up close. Remember, this would be a once in a life time thing since they will pack up the boards, and all you will know about all the entrys is from the blurry PDFs. I wish I could go, but I’m in N.Y.C. Then, you could let us know what you’ve learned.
I’m way too busy for reviewing the other entrys right now; otherwise I would be looking and learning too. This was a challenging project, and it is great to have the opportunity to review all of the projects before they choose 5.
ok, thanks omen. Still, I think kwait has a point. There is not much concrete in my remarks other speculation. I have been in a number of competitions and plan to do more. I have indeed a feeling to know what goes on in the juries mind and am excited to see if I am right. Could be totally wrong though and sure hope so regarding some of my comments.
Well, if I still go to Stockholm it will be an impuls on the last moment coming week.
I'd say your conversation is welcome filver - kwalt was just responding to your writing style. You seem to be using more of a debating style than a discussion style, which tends to shut down other thoughts (as well as irk people).
You have a lot of good things to say, I would only recommend as a conversation-mate that you just remember that you don't have to win - you just have to get ideas out there.
Ha, your boards are not lonely there and how am I ever going to find them unless they have set things up according to the numbers.
I"ll make photos if I go but theres only a 50% chance on that.
Well … I wanted to like this, and it could have been better keeping the same formal arrangement.
Notice the very literal “potential connection” to the Asplund library, as if in the future they would make a narrow bridge over to the little “living room”. The model is “out of control” – never spend that much time on a model when you could be designing -- my mentor told me this, and i agree ... But i think computer rendering can work out nicly as they are more flexable.
I fear that this was a class project, or a firm with a strict man at the helm.
“… Do this again” NO! you can not touch the Asplund Library; make a small opening for a future connection!” “We will make a tunnel to the library from the pond!” “We will connect the offices to the hill!!!” “Label ALL toilets”
This form looks terrible next to the Asplund Library, and a miserable failure regardng a relation to the historical setting. The planning does not delight, it is rather boring. Some things are worked out, but not smoothly, or with joy. This is a joyless place build by the Nazi Party.
Although I don’t believe Prince Ramus, the solipsist, when he insists that Seattle Library’s form was derived from an intense study of program and light, I must admit that the light to space relation is resolved -- and there is therefore delight. With the new Stockholm profile, the little living room has joyless darkness.
Sorry but no …
I have been looking for projects like this. Does anyone know of any projects that have saved the Annex Buildings?
Funny, I know of a competition a few years back where just before the submission had to be sent in a member of the team got a panic....."we have no time to put in the room numbers" haha.
About renderings, if you have to do them as well as the design you are already spending less time on the design than the big boys.
I am still impressed by what friends say about the Seattle library and curious to find out what the jury is going to do with their experience having been there. To my suprise there are not so many submissions that have that typical large building or livingroom feeling. I have seen the annexes saved hundred times or more but that ...no.
I am still here, should really be attending other matters, I am going to try to keep away for a few days...
There is a great anecdote about fearless Frank Furness: if you look at his competition rendering for the Pennsylvania Academy for Fine Arts closely, you’ll notice that he cut and taped a small portion of the tracing paper, which was a last minute change. I imagine this very determined character, saying “ I have to make the change -- otherwise I will never sleep!”
Stockholm Library Comp. Favorites?
Those aurolab rendengs are great - they're actually the sort of thing I had in mind when I said I was finally starting to like computer renderings. However I is just plain too po to afford it :(.
nils, my reference to the late eighties does of course exclude po mo.
I think the one graphic I am most displeased with in my boards was the aerial - yes, it does illustrate the idea, but so would a napkin sketch. I just couldn't get the perspective right for some reason.
Form1,
If you can afford a PC, sketchup + render software, a drawing software ( intellicad for example) and and indesign + photoshop you can set your self to almost the same quality renders than that of auralab ( for around 5000 USD which is not that much for an architect office is it?)... what will make the diff is experience, speed and mono oriented activity which makes them leader in their fields...
Its funny you mention the napkin sketch, because Nouvel ( people will think i work for him lol) also came up once with a few battered A3 drawing sketches at a competition jury, and he won the competition just by words and few basic drawings). it was for the "endless tower" project in Paris ( finally abandoned).
Like you I tended to avoid 3D stuff and think my architecture itself was sufficient in proving it was good, but now that i have learned the tools to produce way more "selling" images, i left my reluctancy aside... i seldom use handrawings in the renders, appart for small sketches that explains basic schemes etc..
one more month to go before we know what the jury decides... lets hope its like switzerland and they produce a book / report of some sort so we all can benefit from what they decided..
N.
I am not counting on a book......1100 pages or at least 700. If they had planned that book they might be considering a website now to celebrate the new library and the competition ....lol.
Sketchup is great, I must say and agree with N. You don't really need anthing else than Photoshop to add to it although I am now using Maxwell as well to render my SU models. I see though by knowing many colleageus here in the profession few master Sketchup well although its really a simple application.
I am using Modo now and feel its even better with a very well integrated renderer and with a very good team behind it. Modo however is a lot more study though. The tutorials are the best I've seen so studying Modo is a lot of fun.
I also won a competition once with a A4 sketch made in less than a hour. There where only two other archtitects in the competition though. It was embarrassing to see how much time they had invested in their plans and drawings. They had no chance with our simple but much more effective plan. The Asplun competition is a bit too complicated for such simple golden concepts I am afraid, at least I have not seen anything truly simple that aswers all problems in the most effective way.
well, they did kind of ask for it - the brief specifically asked for a complex building. You can respond to that several ways, but i prefer the "sneaks up on you" sort of response.
Yes, the best would have been to take down Asplund and put a true landmark there or choose a different site more to the centre of the city. Well, they probably thought of this and came to the conclusion that the new landmark should be close to the subway, hence the choosen direction for the new entrance and then connect the whole thing to Asplund. Then we have the annexes, the commercial building being the landmark there and the hill and slowly things became so complicated that it looked like a design competition......lol. Then we 1100+ submissions arrived and no clear answers where found....or are there and did we not see them...
Maybe instead of five we should as a forum jury decide on 50 plans. Lets see if we can group 50 and predict at least 3. Should be easy.
I stole some of others here but I start with these and later I have a look again what plans I want to add. Would it not be funny if we did not guess one of the winners.
I start with:
Down the rabbithole
Trivium
2 squares
Janus
Oasis
Malmash6
isbn 0-7148-3976-0-1
Any thoughts on Revit as a modeling platform ? I'm not getting bowled over with the stuff I'm hearing about it -
Don't know revit and I am on a Mac. Never liked Autodesk solutions for design work though. A colleague of mine had the Autodesk police at his one-man office checking his autocad licens just after he bought it. There where 3 guys waiting at his desk going through his things as if he was a criminal. When I read Autodesk I see about 600 of the worst submissions passing by. Give me Sketchup any time and I beat almost anyone in speed and quality even when given only a few hours of 3D modeling.
I like Autocadd for 3d modeling and drafting in general, but I don't really render with it. From what I've seen, I've liked sketchup's rendering, but not its modeling. The last rendering program I really bothered with was 3dstudio, and that was a pain in the ass - and I didn't like to graphic feel of it either.
Revit has yet to impress me, really.
Well, modeling in Sketchup can't get any better. At least not within todays array of modeling tools for architecture. The way it handles components and drawing in perspective is great. Most of my income in the past two years was generated by using Sketchup. I can model most of my presentations in less than a day. I have never worked with anything that is that fast, used microstation, vectorworks, modo, and a lot of other less well known packages. I have seen people trying to keep up with me in Autocad or the likes and needed 4 times as much time, and they where supposed to be full time professionals in modeling. Obviously Sketchup is for straightforward building design work better than curved nurbs and Gehry stuff.
Sketchup takes a few weeks to get used to but from then on its your best friend at the office and I don't work at Google...
This CAD subject is a bit off topic....I think we lost most of the members in this thread...maybe we should all just wait and see and discuss on a new thread the winners during the course of the next month.
Back to work..
running out of time for this list of projects grr ;)...
[off topic more on]
agreed 100% of all Filver said about sketchup/maxwell...
Revit seems to be the future in complexier 3D's you want to go with all the way to the construction its a good software ( parametric 3D, with future IFC links ) if you are working on big projects, within big teams etc... I'm not sure its that usefull for small / one man archs doing small projects..
... sketchup way easier quicker for sketches / early 3Ds and renders... if you have the time ( paid) like I have on some projects, you can even use it to build litteraly the 3D ( i model the materials the way they are in real and built layers of materials one on each other this way) result is almost no surprise on construction site on each project i've done with this technique
[off topic more off]
Would be interesting to discuss around the various projects online when we have a few mins, i'm using msn mostly for work so if u guys wanna chat bout it u can still add me: my addy is swoardsnowboards attttt hotmail doc come ( this for spam bots ;)
Nils
how did the stocklholm comp. discussion get hijacked / devolve into such a discussion of such banality about setchup or autocad? there are endless discussions on this stuff to be found already...
yes, your right, CAD is not really Asplund. I think we lost some discussion members here long before things got off topic.
Its time for a new thread with a more inspiring subject than "Favorites". But it did help to filter the plans a bit as far as worth looking at.
Pitty we had no one here who was actually at the exhibit. Looking at my own submission and the tiny pdf that is posted on the website I doubt if looking at 1Mb pdf's does the submissions any good. We miss the actual look and feel of the work done.
I also feel most here have seen the work of others more or less as competitors and the jury will not. They will be much more interested to guide their judgement following a matrix of aspects and goals. We haven't done that here and also don't know really what the jury and organisers now feel are priorities.
I think I am out for a while and have a look at the winners later next month.
well now, don't be too pessimistic - think of the conversation in terms of the role of graphics in a competition, how much they can do for you, how much they can't, and its at least a little more on topic in the general competition sense.
I think Filver's right that we don't get the same impressions that jury gets by going to the exhibition (or could get by going to the exhibition). my experience of my own pdf posted vs my boards is much the same - the finest lineweights blurr out, etc., so there's a degree of the presentation that you don't see. I think the same would go for most.
I wonder a lot about wether the jury is using the exhibition specifically, or if they are also browsing through the files electronically. I would assume that they don't have to go throught the pain of downloading. I'd wonder if they might have suport staff ? - "go find me a scheme that has the news center on the top floor...". Sort of a low tech go-fer search engine.
Just saw a scheme I liked - 0877 asplund library maquinas. The floor plates wind up too tortured for me, and I'm unsure of the circulation pattern, but the overall massing seems interesting, even if I would change it a bit to improve connections and circulation. I particularly liked how there is a plaza at the base of the hill, rather than just the backside of the building.
Ok, I am back, can't wait till next month ....lol.
I am sure the jury will have a shortlist of most important aspects and will give points to those that have the highest score. Something like this not strictly to this order though:
-World class entrance facing Odenplan?
-Sensitive plan in its surroundings?
-Park connection?
-Underground subway/shopping connection?
-Clearity for visitors?
-Great work-place for staff?
-Attrackt new young staff?
-Attrackt new young visitors in droves?
-Flexible in terms of how to put the program in now and in the future?
-Big enough?
-Landmark?
-Within competition brief bouderies, clearing subway, Asplund etc.
-Leaves Asplund and 4th wing untouches or almost?
-Naturally extending the excisting library?
-Livingroom experience?
-Media handling well arranged?
-Budget?
-Maintanance?
-Program efficiancy?
Well, there must be more.....
Use this list by giving points from 1 to 3 and see what floats up.
0877 asplund library maquinas has no connection what so ever with Asplund so what to do with that, the design looks clear and simple but it does not solve the math.
I think that's a good list
that's true about the connection problems with 0877, but it looks like there's no reason that you couldn't make a connection. The plan begs for it. It's a fairly sly trick - make the choice obvious, and let the client make the decision (touching the holy asplund building) that you feel that they may get upset with if you made the decision yourself.
I think that the five winners could easily be outright deficient in some areas, only to make it up in the second round in further development / response to jury comments. The connection problems with 0877 would be a good example of that theory.
I don't think 0877 scores many points really. The connection is one of the competition main goals. Your not going to wait in stage two to see how that is solved if about 500 submissions solved that straight away unless the submission looks so good its like a once in a lifetime kind of aha-experience.
I just saw Jeve Jobs on the new iPhone as presented at the keynote on a quicktime movie. Steve had a really interesting way of presenting the new iPhone. He stated a set of design characteristics and showed how he solved them all and then showed the model. A very old fashioned looking phone and everybody laughed. Then he showed the real model and even though it was neither very exciting the audiance applauded the design. Very clever but mostly the new phone was a set of well designed features solving a set of design goals. I am sure the jury has plenty of choice to come up with 5 winners who solved the list best. But the first shortlist will contain plans that won't make an audiance laugh, the audiance does not have to be impressed either. After that the math will do the rest.
I also feel that almost none of the submissions really did the math very well, maybe since the more professional offices have not submitted in such an open and crowded competition. The jury will simply have to live with the fact that some winners will have to get a serious make-over to win the second stage. Thats not so easy because the winning plan in the final stage can not be developed in such a way that it begins to look like one of the no-winners. It will have to maintaine its typical character and winning features.
I also thought 0692 - the new media forum was good untill I figured out where they planned the main entrance and put the staff. And then I saw the escelator going into the rotunda.... It does score some good points though on important issues, landmark, clearity, big, modern. Very hard and cold design though. I also see many plans degrading the staff by even putting them underground. Can you imagine what a nightmare that would be after having visited Seattle....
No, I am sure the jury and organisers are not going to wait and see what happens in the final stage to figure out if their most important goals are going to be answered or not. There is plenty to choose from and I am sure if they do their work well they will find those submissions, good looking or not. They can always commit the winner to work with a well know Swedish office who will supervise the architecture and interior design making sure it will be of world class. The winner will just have to look modern enough not to make the audiance laugh in disbelieve.
all the more to the point that it isn't necessarily about the math - its about the inspiration too. They had evidently considered that they might not choose a winner who even had enough experience to pull the job off - remember the stipulation that if they felt the winner hadn't the experience to finish the job, the jury would team them with an architect who did?
Obviously the winners should be inspiring plans but there are dozens of those so still you have no winner. Count on the math to be of great importance to find the winning entrees. A shortlist of at least 20 plans are all inspiring to a certain degree and will not be laughed at.
But even to come to this shortlist they will have a rougher and less detailed matrix set up the list. On that list are probably also a few true or false points to make.
For instance all plans outside area 2, all plans that mess with Asplund, all plans that are not complete missing floorplans or sections or are simply to unfinished to judge, all plans that look so bad none of the jury members would want to be seen dead with them (500 plans at least). I think in all just the yes and no list already takes care of a 1000 plans. Maybe even a seperate team could do that work even before the jury is going to consider the rest.
I am not even sure if they are obligated to the winner to let her or him do he final design and built the plan or that they have left the option open to eventually choose an architect do make a final design after the second stage has ended.
You're right, you do have to do at least math. I'm just saying I think its possible for a scheme to be inspiring enough in one regard that it overcomes a deficiency. Some of the schemes would be obviously over budget, or technically impossible, so that is a big negative.
The competition brief states that the winner will get an additional prize if a the process does not lead to a commission for them within (If I remember right) 1 year. So no, not a solid obligation to award a contract, but certainly a financial penalty if they don't.
The winner will be an entry that looks wonderful next to Asplund's Library and responds to the surroundings through juxtaposition or a complementary contrast, or somehow???.
then, after those projects are picked, the jury will look at how the building works.
the building that has the right balance of looks and brains will be the winner.
At least 2 will have kept the annex buildings, for political reasons.
ok, I am sure but wonderful looks very different to all of us....ask Ramus, Zaha or Gehry what they think of wonderful...very different as the jury will come up with very different ideas as well.
I have been in many competitions where the winners where ok at best leaving the real wonderful stuff honorably mentioned at second and so places.
Plans that don't look all that good in the planning fase sometimes turn out surprisingly well when built like the Seattle building. Many now feel that Seattle looks good although you would not hear such praise when the drawings where shown some years back.
Just read this again as stated by the Stockholms Stadsbibliotek website considering the competition:
"A large building, with a floor space of 10-12,00 m2 (this is a mistype I suppose), in this requires an architect on par with those who are designing the world's top libraries, such as the black diamond in Copenhagen or the library in Alexandria. No doubt the commission will attract huge interest. The name Gunnar Asplund will garantee that."
I am sure they are looking for a big name as well. The problem is that your not going to experiment right beside the work of a god no matter how well intended. Really funny to see 500+plans actually digging into the Asplund library. Those submissions underestimated Asplund's monumental status in Sweden and are going to be dumped in the first few days by this fact alone.
Oh, and by the way, the jury has a good portion of members who are most interested how the building works and they are going to express their interest to the more architecturally inclined members of the jury by saying "and what about this"?? pointing at a great but not so wonderful projects.
Thats how Ramus sells his work and passes by on the discussion wether the concept looks wonderful or not. I sure hope we get some insight on how the jury came to their decision when they expose it. Also I hope they show a list a bit longer than the 5 they choose just to show which projects took their attention and which did not. I am sure they realise how much energy everybody put into this competition and so compensate that by providing us the neccesary information to understand our own submission.
Has anyone found some other threads on the competition or are they all in Swedish?
yeah, its getting boring to speculate on how the jury will respond...
We'll see anyhow, any fairly soon to.
Good luck to you all.
"February 14-April 21, 2007
The exhibition presents the five finalists in the international architectural competition for an extension to the Stockholm Public Library, designed by Gunnar Asplund."
am sure we're gonna "LOVE" it!...
we should at least try...
I have a feeling I would come to the same conclusions as the jury and that counts me out ....lol.
the 14th, thats according to plan, basicly that means they have sorted things out already, lets wait and see. Anyhow its more interesting to see how the five turn out in the second stage, there we see what the organiser was actually looking for, the first stage will just show plans that are most flexible towards those goals.
I would think that they would have to have the choices already made so as to give the five time to make travel arrangements to go to the exhibition, BUT the five are to remain anonymous through to the end, so that would preclude having a presentation. All they need to display is 10 boards, so prep needs are fairly low. If things were hotly contested among the jury, they could probably argue to the end.
Well, no way they are just going to set up 10 panels and move on. This is going to be presented as big as the whole thing has been sofar.
The second stage is also anonymous. I am sure of course the five have already been informed by the administration. You are not going to present five without any confirmation of their whereabouts although they will not be expected to show up at the presentation. Obviously to the jury the five remain anonymous. So for those still hoping by now they can get back to work or have left this forum to make sure they remain anonymous.
Obviously I am shocked not to have won but at least I have an excuse ....1100+.
I don't think the jury being a high profile group with busy agenda's and many other projects to attend to are going to debate untill now even. It would be a matter of planned and prepared meetings where decisions are being made well in time and properly order. Its all about setting up the new brief now for the second stage and about to move on from there.......as if I know .....lol.
I found another photo of the exhibition -
http://www.hviidphotography.dk/b/uploaded_images/lyingasplund-799654.jpg
What’s that; a jury member faints?
Maybe a living room AND carves into the hill
good photo, ask the photographer, its his site...
I think some jury members had to be put down ...
the fact that the guy lying is typically acting with his hands like that shows the photographer had some mixed feelings at this competition. I think that he or she is obviously trying to say, my god this is madness........
I this the way to world class architecture ? The end results are not clearly saying this is the way to do it, neither for the organisers neither for all those involved. It has been great though to be part of such an experiment.
I would like to be at this exhibit 80 years from now and look at all this paperwork in a time that animations, web and digital techniques have taken over and for sure all ideas about architecture and culture. Will it all look as old fashioned as Asplund now does? Probably the new extension will be looked at the same way we percieve the 4th wing Asplund added later at a time he was done with archiac and eclectic style he had in mind when building the library at first.
I took it he was just making a joke about being tired from looking at so many projects - he does first tell people that its cool, then reminds them to bring a lunch
I checked out a swedish discussion board on a site from the city of stockholm - http://81.92.65.172/chattsthml/ I used an instant online translator on the few postings, and got back a lot of nonsense translations that more or less indicate cool show, I hope they pick something exciting, its so stodgy here, etc. The one decent translation I got was posted by the moderator on Jan 17, and said that the five projects would be announced on the 8th of Feb, which is a week before they are to be exhibited and a week after the competition states as the decision deadline (Feb 1st)
has anyone checked out 1074+-+a+new+stockholm+library+profile.pdf - its a pretty impressive piece of work.
Well done submission although old fashioned and small without much of a connection and in conflict with the subway and lacks flexibility or appeal to the younger generation. This submission does not make me feel its the solution for the next 80 years or so. World class is it certainly not and no connection to the subway.
The submission does look ok for its graphics and good looking interiors, I can understand the jury will have a closer look at this one.
Wonder if these wooden models or abstract presentations are any good compared to the more down to earth in situ renderings with people, citylights and more modern urban architectural qualities or if the jury has no preference on how the concept is visualized. I mean a subconcious preference since the jury will never admit that such an aspect of the submission is of any importance.
i've been tracking this thread for awhile.
all i will say is: filver, please stop. not just for me but for you. thank you.
I don't see the conflict with the subway - it doesn't have much in the way of a basement, and the footings could probably be accomplished with a grade beam of some kind. The connection to the asplund library at the upper levels could also be made better than it is - wouldn't be impossible.
What I think struck me the most was that this looks like the most successful composition I've seen that keeps any, much less two, of the existing annex buildings. There is also a rather original connection made to the original drum, with a stair in the arced interstitial space. Look at the top left corner of the right hand board). They've made a rather interesting connection to their main axis. That stair connects directly to the main entry at level 0.
Sorry, it wasn't your submission was it ?
But your right, I have taken over this thread and its getting to be a monolog. I better go to Stockholm and have a lay down there as well, take lunch too ....lol.
kwalt, for your first post here, thanks, it was time someone stood up and did something. You did indeed do me a favor.
no not my submission. just don't know how its possible for anyone to know so clearly what this jury will decide.
I don't, was just hoping some one else does...
Filver,
I admire you insights and enthusiasm … I hope you go to Stockholm to see the boards up close. Remember, this would be a once in a life time thing since they will pack up the boards, and all you will know about all the entrys is from the blurry PDFs. I wish I could go, but I’m in N.Y.C. Then, you could let us know what you’ve learned.
I’m way too busy for reviewing the other entrys right now; otherwise I would be looking and learning too. This was a challenging project, and it is great to have the opportunity to review all of the projects before they choose 5.
ok, thanks omen. Still, I think kwait has a point. There is not much concrete in my remarks other speculation. I have been in a number of competitions and plan to do more. I have indeed a feeling to know what goes on in the juries mind and am excited to see if I am right. Could be totally wrong though and sure hope so regarding some of my comments.
Well, if I still go to Stockholm it will be an impuls on the last moment coming week.
I'd say your conversation is welcome filver - kwalt was just responding to your writing style. You seem to be using more of a debating style than a discussion style, which tends to shut down other thoughts (as well as irk people).
You have a lot of good things to say, I would only recommend as a conversation-mate that you just remember that you don't have to win - you just have to get ideas out there.
- and if you go to stockholm, for gods sake get us some photos of the exhibition up on Flickr. I worry about my lonely little boards.
ok, lesson learned.
Ha, your boards are not lonely there and how am I ever going to find them unless they have set things up according to the numbers.
I"ll make photos if I go but theres only a 50% chance on that.
lol - you wound me sir ! My boards shall of couse stand out in all of their glorious brilliance ! :)
New Stockholm Library profile:
Well … I wanted to like this, and it could have been better keeping the same formal arrangement.
Notice the very literal “potential connection” to the Asplund library, as if in the future they would make a narrow bridge over to the little “living room”. The model is “out of control” – never spend that much time on a model when you could be designing -- my mentor told me this, and i agree ... But i think computer rendering can work out nicly as they are more flexable.
I fear that this was a class project, or a firm with a strict man at the helm.
“… Do this again” NO! you can not touch the Asplund Library; make a small opening for a future connection!” “We will make a tunnel to the library from the pond!” “We will connect the offices to the hill!!!” “Label ALL toilets”
This form looks terrible next to the Asplund Library, and a miserable failure regardng a relation to the historical setting. The planning does not delight, it is rather boring. Some things are worked out, but not smoothly, or with joy. This is a joyless place build by the Nazi Party.
Although I don’t believe Prince Ramus, the solipsist, when he insists that Seattle Library’s form was derived from an intense study of program and light, I must admit that the light to space relation is resolved -- and there is therefore delight. With the new Stockholm profile, the little living room has joyless darkness.
Sorry but no …
I have been looking for projects like this. Does anyone know of any projects that have saved the Annex Buildings?
Funny, I know of a competition a few years back where just before the submission had to be sent in a member of the team got a panic....."we have no time to put in the room numbers" haha.
About renderings, if you have to do them as well as the design you are already spending less time on the design than the big boys.
I am still impressed by what friends say about the Seattle library and curious to find out what the jury is going to do with their experience having been there. To my suprise there are not so many submissions that have that typical large building or livingroom feeling. I have seen the annexes saved hundred times or more but that ...no.
I am still here, should really be attending other matters, I am going to try to keep away for a few days...
There is a great anecdote about fearless Frank Furness: if you look at his competition rendering for the Pennsylvania Academy for Fine Arts closely, you’ll notice that he cut and taped a small portion of the tracing paper, which was a last minute change. I imagine this very determined character, saying “ I have to make the change -- otherwise I will never sleep!”
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.