I think the key thing here is to realise that whatever happens with technology - programming/scripts/parametricism/fluid-computing/large scale 3D printing - it will become ubiquitous and accessible.
In the same way that WordPress has transformed the way people can create webpages by cloaking html in an easy interface, this technology will open up the potential for anyone to get involved.
It will not be skills that will protect architecture/architects from this change. But there is a difference between a lamp and a building in terms of these new manufacturing processes - liability. As long as architects have the mechanism to take liability and offset risk of failure through licensing and insurance, there will always be a portion of the built world - hospitals, prisons, schools - that will remain relatively protected.
dia,
your comment reminds of a recent meeting we had, where the client did a lot of design work for their future home on some easy-to use program. They pretty much frustrated themselves, so we had the job.
What will become of the architect in an age of ubiquitous intelligence? I think we'll still be around…in what will basically be a new renaissance.
That's an issue - I have left quality out of the discussion cause that is a cost of ubiquitous programming. In the same way you get kids using shitty cellphone cameras to upload fights in the playground to YouTube, you will get a client producing shitty designs using HomeMaker v3 or whatever and getting it built... Trouble is, in both cases, it does the job.
Just going to point out that this is an economy-wide, not architecture specific issue. All professional services except maybe law can be done via consumer grade software like anything else. Watson will replace doctors, 3D printing will replace fabricators, software will replace architects and engineers - whose left? The point is that as long as you have a unique and creative angle on something a consumer can do themselves, there will be a place for you in the economy. I can paint okay, but I'd rather have a Picasso, or even any "professional" painting, on my wall. Same thing.
Are you guys talking about making cool renderings and fly-throughs when you talk about programming? Those things are usually supplemental services to the actual work an architect does. So while it's there, it is hardly most important nor what architects should strive for to gain some more work. I've worked on many jobs were the modeling ate up so much of the fee that we didn't even have for it that we got in a lot of trouble with trying to finish the other work. Maybe I don't understand. Is every architect supposed to reinvent CADD now too in the hopes that our salaries will match that of programmers? That can only happen if someone is paying for the programming. As it is, it is a supplementary service, so how can you get big bucks for it?
so what do you actually do? corridor warrior? sit in a dark corner cube drawing watercolor concepts? manage and coordinate other people doing the work? Let's assume this is a nice question just to understand how different offices work. I've always worked in small offices (with the exception of a short internship long ago) so I don't fully understand all of the roles an architect could play in an office environment. I also wouldn't mind learning about how to change my role when I'm doing gets old or once I've built a glass ceiling for myself.
From what I've seen all roles require you to use a computer, and you have to use it alot. Even if you're not drafting, you're doing something on excel or quickbooks or project management software or whatever. Understanding how your tools work and how to use them to your best advantage seems like it would be personally beneficial no matter what position you're in. Seriously I've seen architects who don't really understand the difference between Microsoft Word and Photoshop. It's probably just a theory, but it seems there is a fair chance the economy will wipe those people out since they've been passed up too far by more competitive people who have worked towards keeping their skills up to date.
""curves, blobs, lazy analysis of technology" - these terms and characteristics are good examples of expiring architects struggling for relevancy."
this isn't only an invalid argument, it is also a reference back to the age discrimination thread.
And just to re-state, this has turned into a debate between the zealous supporters of programming/scripting and those who accept that it will play a significant role, but in depth knowledge will not be a requirement for the majority of architects, and as I stated, will still most likely develop a visual interface for user friendliness, decreasing the need for the majority of designers and architects to have to learn a scripting language that will be replaced in 5 years.
The idea that scripting will be directly involved and a necessity in every design project is a rather naive view, ignorant of economics, culture, and other human factors.
curt and others, knowing computer programs is quite different than knowing how to write them. I have a little bit of programming knowledge, and yes it helps, but I don't aspire to be a programmer, or to think like one. When I worked in architecture I was one of the ones that "programmed" the software for the firm and I hated it and didn't consider it my job. Since you asked, I don't work in architecture in the traditional sense anymore, I am on the fringe of architecture where I use my knowledge, but not my CAD/production skills but I don't really derive much income from it so architecture is actually a hobby for me now. Ironically, I have been working in another field where learning to program actually holds huge promises, is far more simplistic than what is done in architecture and it would be smart of me to learn it, but I'm not even interested! I will leave it to the experts.
computer scripting and programming in architecture? Why not?? Straight lines and white boxes? Why not?? we dont have to kill one thing to make the other thing possible. Changes are inevitable, just look back through history..
imho, architecture is not about right or wrong, its more about appropriateness. It is selfish to expect perfection from an architecture piece, be forgiving good people, cherish the changes..
programming and architecture
cute.
nice non-response.
gfy
if you can't see it, you're either blind or just plain stupid.
hey yelp, find me a place to eat.
Yeah, whatever.
thank you come again
@i r giv up
shh.
oh look morals.
this thread has almost as many posts now as the thread that started this one...
-says new guy with short-sighted morals
The only thing this thread proved is that people on the internet are assholes...
^agreed
I think the key thing here is to realise that whatever happens with technology - programming/scripts/parametricism/fluid-computing/large scale 3D printing - it will become ubiquitous and accessible.
In the same way that WordPress has transformed the way people can create webpages by cloaking html in an easy interface, this technology will open up the potential for anyone to get involved.
It will not be skills that will protect architecture/architects from this change. But there is a difference between a lamp and a building in terms of these new manufacturing processes - liability. As long as architects have the mechanism to take liability and offset risk of failure through licensing and insurance, there will always be a portion of the built world - hospitals, prisons, schools - that will remain relatively protected.
^--now that's thinking.
i'm all for being a nice guy until we start hearing the same BS from 40 years ago.
"curves, blobs, lazy analysis of technology" - these terms and characteristics are good examples of expiring architects struggling for relevancy.
i wanna set up rand and jl-arch on a blind date.
dia,
your comment reminds of a recent meeting we had, where the client did a lot of design work for their future home on some easy-to use program. They pretty much frustrated themselves, so we had the job.
What will become of the architect in an age of ubiquitous intelligence? I think we'll still be around…in what will basically be a new renaissance.
Why spent the time programming a low margin building when you could probably write a half dozen iPhone apps and strike it rich in the meantime?
Quote of the thread - handsumcash FTW!
Metal,
That's an issue - I have left quality out of the discussion cause that is a cost of ubiquitous programming. In the same way you get kids using shitty cellphone cameras to upload fights in the playground to YouTube, you will get a client producing shitty designs using HomeMaker v3 or whatever and getting it built... Trouble is, in both cases, it does the job.
Just going to point out that this is an economy-wide, not architecture specific issue. All professional services except maybe law can be done via consumer grade software like anything else. Watson will replace doctors, 3D printing will replace fabricators, software will replace architects and engineers - whose left? The point is that as long as you have a unique and creative angle on something a consumer can do themselves, there will be a place for you in the economy. I can paint okay, but I'd rather have a Picasso, or even any "professional" painting, on my wall. Same thing.
Are you guys talking about making cool renderings and fly-throughs when you talk about programming? Those things are usually supplemental services to the actual work an architect does. So while it's there, it is hardly most important nor what architects should strive for to gain some more work. I've worked on many jobs were the modeling ate up so much of the fee that we didn't even have for it that we got in a lot of trouble with trying to finish the other work. Maybe I don't understand. Is every architect supposed to reinvent CADD now too in the hopes that our salaries will match that of programmers? That can only happen if someone is paying for the programming. As it is, it is a supplementary service, so how can you get big bucks for it?
Are you guys talking about making cool renderings and fly-throughs when you talk about programming?
are you fucking kidding me?
i really give up now.
You should have given up a long time ago. I'm not a cad monkey, so I don't see things like you do.
I'm not a cad monkey
so what do you actually do? corridor warrior? sit in a dark corner cube drawing watercolor concepts? manage and coordinate other people doing the work? Let's assume this is a nice question just to understand how different offices work. I've always worked in small offices (with the exception of a short internship long ago) so I don't fully understand all of the roles an architect could play in an office environment. I also wouldn't mind learning about how to change my role when I'm doing gets old or once I've built a glass ceiling for myself.
From what I've seen all roles require you to use a computer, and you have to use it alot. Even if you're not drafting, you're doing something on excel or quickbooks or project management software or whatever. Understanding how your tools work and how to use them to your best advantage seems like it would be personally beneficial no matter what position you're in. Seriously I've seen architects who don't really understand the difference between Microsoft Word and Photoshop. It's probably just a theory, but it seems there is a fair chance the economy will wipe those people out since they've been passed up too far by more competitive people who have worked towards keeping their skills up to date.
""curves, blobs, lazy analysis of technology" - these terms and characteristics are good examples of expiring architects struggling for relevancy."
this isn't only an invalid argument, it is also a reference back to the age discrimination thread.
And just to re-state, this has turned into a debate between the zealous supporters of programming/scripting and those who accept that it will play a significant role, but in depth knowledge will not be a requirement for the majority of architects, and as I stated, will still most likely develop a visual interface for user friendliness, decreasing the need for the majority of designers and architects to have to learn a scripting language that will be replaced in 5 years.
The idea that scripting will be directly involved and a necessity in every design project is a rather naive view, ignorant of economics, culture, and other human factors.
curt and others, knowing computer programs is quite different than knowing how to write them. I have a little bit of programming knowledge, and yes it helps, but I don't aspire to be a programmer, or to think like one. When I worked in architecture I was one of the ones that "programmed" the software for the firm and I hated it and didn't consider it my job. Since you asked, I don't work in architecture in the traditional sense anymore, I am on the fringe of architecture where I use my knowledge, but not my CAD/production skills but I don't really derive much income from it so architecture is actually a hobby for me now. Ironically, I have been working in another field where learning to program actually holds huge promises, is far more simplistic than what is done in architecture and it would be smart of me to learn it, but I'm not even interested! I will leave it to the experts.
holy crap!
I'll pay attention to scripting when i find a job posting looking for that skill
preservation agents
computer scripting and programming in architecture? Why not?? Straight lines and white boxes? Why not?? we dont have to kill one thing to make the other thing possible. Changes are inevitable, just look back through history..
imho, architecture is not about right or wrong, its more about appropriateness. It is selfish to expect perfection from an architecture piece, be forgiving good people, cherish the changes..
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.