very very close (aesthetically), but no. firm was originally based in memphis and also (or maybe they've moved their whole operation, not sure) have an office in new orleans. also responsible for:
I don't know it, but i like it. hope they really have the drainage for that garage entrance figured out... is this in your general region holz or am i way off
I wonder if there's a correlation between "worst photo" and "weakest link" -- that is, the reality of a building is no better than the weakest view reveals ?
Naturally, if only because photography can't really represent the reality of a building, photographers (and editors) strive to present the "best views" of a structure -- but shouldn't we judge a building more stringently than that ?
A reader of "Architecture Review" wrote the editors, a few years ago, to criticize certain US competitor publications for their "sanitized" photography of new projects. The implication was that AR held itself to a more realistic standard, not fearing to include a few warts and blemishes -- wrinkled carpets, irregular flashing, etc -- if they were present when the building was photographed. . .
interesting topic - i have been asked in the past to photoshop out certain unsightly details - eg fire escape signs, power sockets etc. in photos that were to be used for publication.
i must admit that feels just a wee bit dishonest.
yeah i've been there p2... but unfortunately not for publication purposes but real-estate listings, broker websites, etc... (very corporate firm). It got to the point where i was getting rid of certain cars, adjacent shops, and even people in site pictures who didn't "fit the image" the firm or broker thought the building was representing, and for me that's crossing the line of dishonesty to being unethical, needless to say I didn't work there too long.
...but back to the building... any hints? I wish I could see what was going on under the deck/patio a little better.
Name that Architect and Building!!!
No -- I had understood or assumed it to be new work. In retrospect, silly me. . . Thanks for the clarification.
welp if it hasn't been said yet, SDR's entry was pulltab design's east village penthouse.
just to keep the ball rolling....
arizona or something?
(that means texas)
I cannot confirm but it looks like the work of Lake | Flato architects
very very close (aesthetically), but no. firm was originally based in memphis and also (or maybe they've moved their whole operation, not sure) have an office in new orleans. also responsible for:
buildingstudio, Texas Twister - Ellis County, TX
I'll try and post something soon but if I can't feel free to repost phuyaka.
yup! you can go ahead and post one.. i've got about 4 more hours of light and air calculations before i can go home... woooo
No takers?
any hints? location? i'm intrigued by the blue line swirling through it
i'm guessing swiss-ish.
reminds me of volta schulhaus by miller maranta
It's nawt a toooma.
california wussy! so.... socal....
Austria
i was being facetious!
Graz, Austria.
Wohnbebauung Graz-Strassgang, Arch. F. Riegler, R. Riewe
hunchin, so can't upload to flickr...
no cheating
correct!
I don't know it, but i like it. hope they really have the drainage for that garage entrance figured out... is this in your general region holz or am i way off
island off mass.
Darren Petrucci
VH-R-10 ghouse
(Record 04.08)
Glad this thread is still going strong. It's the reason I make it into work each day.
and another (don't cheat):
Lebbeus Woods meets Serra?
that one from 11:58 is wicked cool.
chilean?
Italian Architect
1988
Another project by the same architect:
Massimiliano Fuksas, entrance to neolithic caves at Niaux, France.
göteborg town hall - Gunnar Asplund, very nice
yeah, much better than the rubbish pictures show.
nice staircase.
- Residence F (stealth house)
I posted his Wohlfahrt-Laymann house a few pages back. he's got an interesting approach for sure.
oh bugger, didnt see that
í'll dig up something else...
Yow. Lautner lives. . .?
pity its a really crap foto, didnt have time to scan one from my magazine.
I wonder if there's a correlation between "worst photo" and "weakest link" -- that is, the reality of a building is no better than the weakest view reveals ?
Naturally, if only because photography can't really represent the reality of a building, photographers (and editors) strive to present the "best views" of a structure -- but shouldn't we judge a building more stringently than that ?
A reader of "Architecture Review" wrote the editors, a few years ago, to criticize certain US competitor publications for their "sanitized" photography of new projects. The implication was that AR held itself to a more realistic standard, not fearing to include a few warts and blemishes -- wrinkled carpets, irregular flashing, etc -- if they were present when the building was photographed. . .
that first fuksas (corten steel) reminds me of the work of Smiljan Radic
adolf loos claimed to be very proud that his spaces were unphotographable.
interesting topic - i have been asked in the past to photoshop out certain unsightly details - eg fire escape signs, power sockets etc. in photos that were to be used for publication.
i must admit that feels just a wee bit dishonest.
yeah i've been there p2... but unfortunately not for publication purposes but real-estate listings, broker websites, etc... (very corporate firm). It got to the point where i was getting rid of certain cars, adjacent shops, and even people in site pictures who didn't "fit the image" the firm or broker thought the building was representing, and for me that's crossing the line of dishonesty to being unethical, needless to say I didn't work there too long.
...but back to the building... any hints? I wish I could see what was going on under the deck/patio a little better.
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.