Archinect
anchor

Hi all you fancy graphics lovers

1479
PerCorell

"you abused the good will of the managers of the site by overwhelming it with huge graphic files (in case you forgot). "

Well not me and not you know hte future, but we know what it mean if someone specialised in website making are to decide the rights of someone with a vision in architecture.

We also know the result if amaturs are to judge from their perception about architecture , what will happen. It will not be the bold and visionary , those with fresh new idears in architecture, those who dare chalance that is allowed a voice --- it will be so, that if even a master architect step the toe being the rules of usenet, being the netcops dictate, or by making a joke acturly using the options in HTML. overide "rules" made by specialist web page creators then --- his name are taken and his voice are silened as this guy who call himself a designer , without being a web designer.

Now I am not a web designer but someone who spended his life in architecture and finaly delivered, and in a tread where dirt and mud throwing are the rule I "stepped the toe" --- Now if someone by mistake or by pure artistic joy, try out the fact options ; as I did being a designer of real things, played around and placed an animation where NO One said I could not place it, --- after contribuating as I did , I ask again ;
Is it Fair to invite to a serious debate expecting the real fun mails from the real artists, and then when an artist show his true face being an experimenting artist , then install a "ponishment" being stripping the most important issue, the artist's name ?

I just say that it would have been nice to know beforehand, and I also say that it is overacting and inferiour , -- so say all -- to punish an architect-designer from the rules of usenet ,after profiting the joy and entertainment , --- may I respond, that there are not death penalty for borrowing a bike, and robbing the name of an artist are a much more serious "crime" than "stepping the toe" , the unwritten rules.

Jan 23, 07 10:41 am  · 
 · 

start your own site.

Jan 23, 07 10:53 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

But please let me add, that "the punish" for "overwhelming" --- an overwhelming that soon was out of the top ten, and would have been over in a day or two, in a very lazy week, where hardly no one cared "contribuating" are not the only "Punishment" against one of today's bold and challancing characters no no --- remember that there are a specific joy making sure that the counter work unjust for a specific contribuator ; the counter here and in Design Community seem to work quite different and , I guess it must be a rare joy to know that nomatter how good a mail, nomatter how serious an issue, then by first stripping the artist name and ontop, make the counter work against this persons options keeping an issue at top of the list, must be a sevire plesant joy.

So please do not forget, that beside the ponishment being a bad spelling not american , the fact that I newer will have an honest counter made it almost impossible to promote a building system that could save the world.

Realy it wouldn't have made much of a difference if web page designers had removed me from the list, --- remember that the counter also make sure that my voice are soon silent , and any snik-snak mail have a greater oppotunity of staying at top compared the relevant discussions about new methods I contribute , --- it wouldn't have made much difference anyway .

Jan 23, 07 11:08 am  · 
 · 
postal

amen

Jan 23, 07 11:17 am  · 
 · 
postal

that's an amen to the reverand ward, btw

Jan 23, 07 11:18 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

"start your own site."


If I was ,I would be doing web design proberly not very good web design , but web design still I am not a web designer so making my own site make very little sense,


I am not engaged starting sites , I am promoting new methods and realy it would be quite alian to me, to spend my time starting or keeping a site , --- the prove I am not good at it, can be seen in all the Yahoo sites I used for storing graphics, and why do somehing you are not good at, when in fact fora's like this breed from designers who want to share their visions , see that is what I want to do.

Jan 23, 07 11:44 am  · 
 · 
nambypambics

this is NOT still going on. Oh man!!!

Jan 23, 07 12:33 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Please let me also in this tread state, that I am only in this becaurse I am a designer but I don't want to form and shape cheap modern houses, just renew the intire production ,by a new digital perspective. There are nothing wrong with the attitude of wanting nice healty houses, still new technikes must work with the core digital knowleage and knowing that, the expertations about what digital provide allready, with just another focus rendering actural work drawings ; 2D-H all ready did that for 14 years, when you all that time been looking the fact opposite direction progress start, and Helsinki must realise that my right as artist, are just as persistand as any other. Gee I am a designer, this is my Must.

Jan 23, 07 12:45 pm  · 
 · 
brian buchalski

i concur...eliminating your name as an artist is bullshit and definitely not a very nice things for us americans to do...and not very american either

i mean...what else could archinect be for if not for the promotion of a builidng system that could save the world?

Jan 23, 07 1:03 pm  · 
 · 
cpnorris

has this thread really been going on with the same argument for over 2 years?

Jan 23, 07 3:04 pm  · 
 · 
a-f

It's fun to read it again, a bit nostalgic.

Jan 23, 07 4:19 pm  · 
 · 
Living in Gin

Reading this thread makes me want to shoot myself in the face.

Jan 23, 07 4:43 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Please let me bring you update.

I would have liked to redirect you to the "Galleri Silver Screen " tread here , but I think the same tread, such as the parallel tread "Hi all yo fancy graphics lovers ,at Design community ,with it's high count of 101995 hits compared the 18208 better describe how I spended my joy and free time ;

http://arch.designcommunity.com/topic-10104.html

You can say the theme are the same , but as with all treads ,it is the pictures that count and tell their messeage. The Galleri deal with graphics and experiments with the 9 various old opaque and slide projectors , but read the first few posts and strive your way thru the many pictures , and , these experiments are progressing so don't just pass thru the first page do, click for each one untill you reach the end.

http://arch.designcommunity.com/topic-10104.html

At the moment I have great pleasure from this old beauty , it carry two lenses and both are like fine music instruments, --- how you realise well you just check simular paper drawings or drawn pictures with different projectors like this;

http://i12.ebayimg.com/07/i/000/7f/71/94f0_1.JPG

So do not say that Per Corell have his head so embedded in the future that he can't sense the past , quite opposite.

Jan 23, 07 5:08 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell
Jan 23, 07 5:09 pm  · 
 · 
cpnorris

"So do not say that Per Corell have his head so embedded in the future that he can't sense the past , quite opposite."


So you have your head so embedded in past that you can't sense the future?

Jan 23, 07 5:14 pm  · 
 · 
Living in Gin

I think he has his head embedded somewhere else.

Jan 23, 07 5:18 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

"Reading this thread makes me want to shoot myself in the face."

That is not the agenda ; what you shuld do, is realise and loudly agrea

Kill The Brick

Kill The Brick

Kill The Brick

Kill The Brick

Kill The Tower

Jan 23, 07 5:19 pm  · 
 · 
spaghetti

i have one of those, and i think those things suck. the two lenses are both like dusty maggot skins stuck on the top of an old pantry shelf in my house. the house being built in the 70s with bad wallpaper and styrofoam wooden beams in the low ceilinged living room/den. yup, it has carpet.

Jan 23, 07 5:25 pm  · 
 · 
spaghetti

and your 3D-h is pretty stoopid.

Jan 23, 07 5:25 pm  · 
 · 
Carl Douglas (agfa8x)

Per, you are truly one of a kind. An obsessive, stubborn kind, but it's good you're here.

Jan 23, 07 5:27 pm  · 
 · 
cpnorris

You would think after 2 years of discussion and not a single person agreeing with anything you say that your opinion or vision may have changed. but it hasn't at all. you get an A for determination i guess. i still have no idea what you are talking about but i hate the gif image you posted. this is an interesting thread though. more in a humorous way than anything else.

Jan 23, 07 5:35 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Well maybe it is time to listen to what this guy acturly say --- just emagine that when he is right, your house will be build at a third the cost, that this new building technike is just what architecture need and what a lot of people mlooking for a new house need ; a fresh new vision and an actural way to get there. --- A new way to put things together and use a computer for it and ontop use the same 3D drawings to realy cut the different building parts. This is much better than a thoughtless robot build house, and it requier just the same 3D programs you allready know.

Jan 23, 07 5:50 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

"You would think after 2 years of discussion and not a single person agreeing with anything you say that your opinion or vision may have changed. but it hasn't at all."

What realy is wrong is when people stick to the same picture even they can read the first post in this ;

http://arch.designcommunity.com/topic-2216.html

"cpnorris" please follow the link above then think about it, oposed what you claim, a drowd of folks think this thing is great, the only problem that this thing is allmost to great --- now you can go and read this and then read your own comment ;

"You would think after 2 years of discussion and not a single person agreeing with anything you say that your opinion or vision may have changed. but it hasn't at all."

Do you think this reflect in even the first answers in that tread, -- well I read it different, I read that there are a call for just such new methods and exiting architecture.

Jan 23, 07 5:56 pm  · 
 · 
momentum

Kahn asked the brick what it wanted to be, and I don't think it said "Kill Me."

Where did your vendetta against bricks come from? Did a brick hit you during your formulative years or something?

Jan 23, 07 6:00 pm  · 
 · 
cpnorris

well the problem is that you can't just say "hey i will build your house cheaper and it will be better" without showing any proof of it. Architecture is not as easy as making a huge laser cutter and cutting out shapes. What you are describing speaks nothing about good design or even about architecture. You are talking about a construction method that you somehow have convinced yourself into believing is cheaper than conventional building and can produce better architecture. its been 2 years of discussion and you still don't seem to get how ridiculous this is.

Jan 23, 07 6:02 pm  · 
 · 
cpnorris

what about this stuff really gets you off? its not good architecture at all. it looks like crap. its fantasy graphics that put architecture on the back burner. so what is it about this "vision" that makes you want to pursue it so badly? even if the word flipped upside down and you were right, and this way of building was cheaper, why would anyone pursue it? what does it do for people that buildings now don't do or can't achieve?

Jan 23, 07 6:09 pm  · 
 · 
a-f

careful, cpnorris, careful...

Jan 23, 07 6:10 pm  · 
 · 
cpnorris

haha! yeah i better watch my step

Jan 23, 07 6:18 pm  · 
 · 
Living in Gin

It's like wrestling with a pig... Both of you get covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it.

Jan 23, 07 6:20 pm  · 
 · 
momentum

well said Living in Gin, well said

Jan 23, 07 6:30 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Thanks jasoncross , about the first link I would think that a bit more digital projecting and following a system such as real 3D-H would have made the actural work the halve --- for me it is obvious that here there have to be put a lot of craftsman skills into it aswell , but by trusting the exact sections in a 3D-H and made that little investment to get full-scale drawings of just the main frames , that would help.

cpnorris, since you started responding I havn't seen an answer that reflect real interest in the issue, I find some of your arguments childish and obvious you write more to provoke than to contribuate , --- btw it is not just two years the tread "Hi all you fancy graphics lovers been around -- at usenet you will find the first tread with this name round 2001, if you read the tread you will find some link to that. --- then if you read your own reply you will not wonder what you say you wonder, as a tread like this attract usenet trolls and people with a compleatly other agenda than a positive and good debate about architecture, in fact any bicycle repair man with an oppinion about the new architecture is bound to find this tread.

Living in Gin you make some good jokes , a tread like this shuld be full of them and remember it have been this that made the tread grow so far,

Jan 24, 07 3:05 am  · 
 · 
geimanj

LiG- I am sitting here crying my eyes out laughing over the pig comment. Way too awesome. Every village needs its vindpust.

Jan 24, 07 3:26 am  · 
 · 
Darren Hodgson

Vindper

I have dipped in and out of this thread ever since I joined the great big community that is Archinect, and seen countless arguements and insults and large pictures posted as a title (never... ever... do that again). But the one main thing I have noticed is that you seem extremely convinced that this system you propose works, and have countless times tried to force it onto the many people that visit this site and discussion boards. Yet, I have never seen that you've never actually proved it works by going out there and building it, either at full scale or in a physical model.

One of the main things that architects and designers and inventors the world around do if they come up with something new and it has never been proven before, is to prototype it. They go out there and try to manufacture it, to build it. You can produce all the 3D visualisations in the world, but it's not until you actually attempt to physically recreate your principles that you can see the potential flaws.

So my advice to you is to stop flooding this thread and the rest of archinect with your waffle and 3D visualisations, go out and build it, realise its potenial and flaws. Resolve those flaws and make your principles work. Then and only then come back and show us, and then our collective ears might actually prick up and listen.

D

Jan 24, 07 6:06 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Thanks Darren Hodgson --- I must ask you to be a bit patient not just about my spelling but also about what a good idea is and "how" a good idear must be presented. So please hear me out I will do it as simple as possible first about if this thing work or not ;

Allready there been a few real prove that the system work , several fame architects allready won several prices and if you look at the pictures in the tread , you see a few of these attemts --- my complain in that matter is that in all other arts and creativity you can not just copy another man's manuscript and without mentioning the sourse just publish it as your creation --- Now none of these fame architects who allready produced better or mainly vorse lookalike ever vorried about the extrodanary side effect and the fact that this bright idea is in fact a revolution in structural thinking , --- now you put up youir claims and demand a prototype , but think about it, these are allrady been "borrowed" and fame architects that seen my promotion have been able to mimic some of the idea, but more important I see my "idear" as just as genuine an invention , as just as honest a contribution as any build work and why ; well first of all becaurse I am a computer specialist and the fact 3D drawings that othervise are used for moon landings and advanced robotics simply are reality written into computer code --- so is my CAD programs. So the thousands of structures of various 3D-H things in themself prove better than a prototype, that this thing work but, when these great copyists architects screen-grapped a few of the structures I published for more than 12 years , then what did they forget and how do what they forgot prove the lack of a creative process ; well if you knew this method as well as the technikes you allready know, you will instantly realise it and realise that just the way these architects ,who is willing to borrow but unwilling to leave the credit , -- just where they went wrong and how this prove just by the fact , that most of these structures are only a few years old while I can document that I published and been in architect contests for more than these 12 years --- see you can't just take another man's work and publish as your own and you can not use 3D-H without realising that this is a revolution in structural thinking and an enginous way to mass produce building compoments, --- then the strange thing the most strange thing is, that beside leaving no line of credit these architects forgot to explain about the most important thing, the very method itself , I leave it to you to guess why , but a good lead is the fact about "borrowing" a manuscript a piece of intelectural property ; why did none of these brave newthinking architects just mention the method, and how come that all of them was occupied with totaly different academic structures and theoretic smalltalk with fancy picturs , that was if you say this have to prove itself, even at a weaker theoretic plane how did all of these architects suddenly come up with a great structural method . Glad you red this to the end, thing is that you have to allow arts to expand further than your expertations ; a great new method do not grow out of tradisional conventions and just becaurse I did not make a real prototype think about it --- I would obviously have to make a prototype for each individual house, boat, aeroplane , just any item that will profit from a new way to put things together And, -- you would newer get a paragime shift if you have to follow conventions , so it is my right as artist to be given these credits and please note all the fancy exchouses not to honestly allowing just that, all the lame exchouses all to cover the lack of honesty towerds a fellow designer , all to cover the criminal mind allowed in architecture, untill rem recive it self , see --- my complains are not vain complains I spended halve my life develobing this, develobing it for a real porpus not to gain fame or win prices with a lazy criminal attitude,

Jan 24, 07 6:39 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Just want to add that I stand for honesty , that I myself allway's mention the credits ,and I find it very sad that when a thing like this happen, then a fame hounting architectural worls , skip the honesty and see how far they can go .
Maybe it is difficult for you to realise the way today's real artists have to work --- be genuine computer specialists, be real proud craftsmen m as I have several profesional projects within arts and crafts and ontop as I also have done, have spended years at the architect school, beside being a poet, a profesionall in writing , in engineering, in just everything.

Then when a bright idear surface what does it spark , try read this tread and belive me from my years of profesional boatsbuilding, my years with crafts like carpentry and welding, my years at the acadamy and my succesfull projects at "fine" workshops ---- this thing work and the pictures prove it ; everyone not looking for a fierce usenet battle will say so, everyone with basic 3D and computer skill will tell you it work --- but within architecture what work are social contacts, within architecture oposed other arts the artists are not able to draw the fine line between "borrowing" and robbing .

I am her to remind you about that, but realy rather than this, I would better recive just that line of credit so I can acturly do what you ask, build a prototype --- but with all these thives around , how shuld I be able to do just that, I allready spended so much acturly halve a life just to develob it, realise the whole vision and bring the happy messeage ; how do you expect a poor artist to find the money ?

Jan 24, 07 6:55 am  · 
 · 
Darren Hodgson

Vindper,

From what I can understand, you are saying that this method of construction has been used before and you claim that 3D-H is simply an improvement of a theme. That is fair comment. However, you do need to back up this claim.

However you also seem to be saying that you do not need to produce a prototype as the computer programming itself is sufficient proof that it works. This is simple not the case. You can draw things in CAD every day from sunrise to sunset, and it can look good and potentially work. Yet without physically making something you cannot possibly know if something will work or look good. I have drawn many and seen many details that look good in principle on paper (or screen) yet do not work on the building site. Computers should never be taken as gospel.

You also say that you cannot possible protoype this system as each individual project would differ. Surely this is your systems downfall, from what I can see you are proposing a modular system, a kit of parts that interconnect together to form a structure. I system that demands a standardised set of connections, which in order to refine requires protoyping. There is no other answer. You are telling me that your system would be different design for each project. Therefore no standardisation, therefore not modular, therefore non cost-effective. Therefore, impractical.

Once again, your only way of proving that this works is to pull yourself away from your computer and stop producing your 'fancy graphics' and start to get your hands dirty. If I remeber rightly you are a boat-builder, so go build, prove us all wrong and that you are worthy of being listend to.

D

Jan 24, 07 7:04 am  · 
 · 

most architects learn at a fairly early point that the construction of their projects often doesn't cost as much as the mechanical, plumbing, electrical, fire protection, information/data, phone, and security systems that have to be installed at various points during the construction process.

the views you've shown don't appear to offer any way to deal with these challenges and, in fact, since their manufacture should be expected to be an all-at-once sort of thing, the incremental coordination and build-out of these various systems would work against the supposed clarity and ease of 3dh.

i remember how upset you were about siza's serpentine as a 'copy' of your system. case in point: as a pavilion, it really didn't require as much in the way of systems as a more conventional program.

and separate from all that: have we yet seen a rendering from you in which these honeycomb labyrinths had a roof that would keep the weather out? i suspect that it would be hard to do as part of the system and would require something OUTSIDE the system to complete the job. this is where most cost-saving solutions fail.

Jan 24, 07 7:14 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

"rom what I can understand, you are saying that this method of construction has been used before and you claim that 3D-H is simply an improvement of a theme. That is fair comment. However, you do need to back up this claim."

No I say I happily went out and told the good news, that after years of troubling real time problems, here was a great new idea newer tried before --- when you look at things that have a slight lookalike, you soon realise that it is not the same. So what I say is that I can document to have published this long before any of those who understood just a corner , started to win prices with it. --- sorry to keep it so dull, but when you see how floors grow out of the air being build in way's no floor ever been build, when walls are sudenly just there by building system , when you realise the fantastic options , all the fantastic options you will understand and realise how unique this was from the start and still is.

"I have drawn many and seen many details that look good in principle on paper (or screen) yet do not work on the building site. Computers should never be taken as gospel."

With 2D things yes, but not with sections thru 3D solids, they are as real and even more accurate than any 2D drawing, --- remember this is so different, remember that underway I develobed software to unfold panels from 3D boat hulls, I build and controlled the measures of real boats where not one single pen touched any of the tradisional construction drawings, -- and please remember that sections are the most important issue in ships and boats projecting no one know sections better than a boats builder beside --- when sections work perfect in tradisional work drawings on a computer, why shuld they suddenly not work here --- if this is true we shuld scrap CAD.

"Once again, your only way of proving that this works is to pull yourself away from your computer and stop producing your 'fancy graphics' and start to get your hands dirty. If I remeber rightly you are a boat-builder, so go build, prove us all wrong and that you are worthy of being listend to."

True I am, but I am also a free spirit a creative human being and good skills do not allway's make good friends. I am maybe one of the fiercest treads towerds today's vain architects, I know my stuff and my demands towerds myself and my crafts are greater than any of that crowd ever displayed --- I develobet this listening to the very same architects, their expertations and my own expertations, to do that I became registrated application develober on the AutoCAD platform, --- but remember that following the leads you draw out I wouldn't either have a chance nomatter how good this method work ; I would not know the right people and belive me a cooked potato are more apriciated in social circles than a brave new idear.

This thing work the copyists allready in a limited sense allready proven that, price after price have been given , lookalike projects where the structural issues been transformed into dull talk , projects that act for the spetacular price rather than for the happy messeage , these are there plenty of --- what I call for, is the right to be the artist I am, or would you expect a brilliant new idear to come from no one else than a colorfull person, wouldn't you think that exactly art and artists must be allowed to work outside conventions to even be able to Deliver --- and you see I delivered I did not copy.

Jan 24, 07 7:24 am  · 
 · 
Darren Hodgson

Vindper

I have to hand it to you. You certainly believe in yourself and your product even if it is flawed.

My advice to you is this, if you are serious about this product then perservere, but along the way listen to the people who make comment. Among some of the detrius here, there are some little golden nuggets of helpful suggestion. Go sift for them.

I suggest that you take a break from this and go back to your first love, being a boatbuilder and a craftsman, and leave the computers alone. My father is a joiner and has produced some beautiful work, he has never once felt the need to use a computer to help him. He also is a craftsman, craftsmen from the birth of christ onwards never needed a computer. They just embraced the tools and the materials.

Return yourself to those skills again and you may find the answers.

D

Jan 24, 07 7:41 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Steven Ward I would like to give you a serious answer so please allow me to explain ;

"most architects learn at a fairly early point that the construction of their projects often doesn't cost as much as the mechanical, plumbing, electrical, fire protection, information/data, phone, and security systems that have to be installed at various points during the construction process."

Yes but first of all , I am not an architect, and I think architecture will profit most from just the angle I present, trying to think outside the box but belive me I have a thruout understanding of both materials and most tradisional structures -- that sorry for that, but some of these tradisional structures are like card houses.
But remember that this method do all the auxilery much easier ; the plumbing are prepared in the projecting easier than with today's projecting , all the means and nesserities are just as easy and often easier added with this method, realy this make order not chaos.


"the views you've shown don't appear to offer any way to deal with these challenges and, in fact, since their manufacture should be expected to be an all-at-once sort of thing, the incremental coordination and build-out of these various systems would work against the supposed clarity and ease of 3dh."

But they do --- when you modeled the raw building form there are plenty of building mass to subtract a cylinder for the plumbing, and the place where that subtracted cylinder pass the sections will leave a hole in all sections afected by the cylinder subtract ,and when the flat sheet are cut, the hole you prepared for the plumbing the wires that could be added leadway's for in the same way --- or they could simply follow the sections , acturly whole new way's to smart solve these trivial issues are so easily realised with this unique structure.

"i remember how upset you were about siza's serpentine as a 'copy' of your system. case in point: as a pavilion, it really didn't require as much in the way of systems as a more conventional program."

No -- I was not upset about the attemt to copy as much as I was upset about how bad it was done --- how this sad pavilion was making 3D-H into a joke, how these guy's misunderstood just everything and made 3D-H a bad reputation by building something I would be ashamed about. See that Serpentine pavilion could have profited heavily by these people understanding the concept, instead they seem to have been in a hurry and projected it as an insult , --- please be honest , I added my own interpatation of a structure with something of the same form , but I made the all important planes the right way , and produced a much more exiting and also practical possible structure, and I did that just to show where they went wrong, acturly they did all the wrongs possible and still there was a pavilion, now isn't that sad and how do you expect me to feel about it, from my point of view they allowed a fame old proud architect to spoil his tallent on a technike he was in the wrong generation to realise , and that too made me sad.

"and separate from all that: have we yet seen a rendering from you in which these honeycomb labyrinths had a roof that would keep the weather out? i suspect that it would be hard to do as part of the system and would require something OUTSIDE the system to complete the job. this is where most cost-saving solutions fail."

Exactly you say it yourself --- then what would be better than unfolded panels , panels unfolded from the same model that deliver the intire structure with floors , walls and all leadway's for nesserities, --- Please just before I realised this new structural method, I develobed just that software, software to deliver exact N.C. codes for the panels, still --- tell me about any other architect that was able to deliver exactly these panels, one that don't make the paneling into small pieces , Gee if you understand that the boats was to develob just that software you would also understand how that forced a solution for something to be underneath these panels --- when I say I spended halve a life to get there , then this is also documented and there was a reson for a new computer generated structure it all came natural.

But please understand my anger seeing so lame an attemt as that pavilion, my frustration about old garde architects fiddeling where the new generation demand exact precision as a prove of profesionalism, --- these copyists even set me up against some of my old hero's ; do you think that was fun ? But on the other hand these old guy's shuld have acted more hnest and not taken the bread from the young ones mouth, leaving the real hard work unpayed even by credits.

Bside --- All the time I newer promised a structure where the rain would not enter, I delivered a super strong building foundation ready to cover, the basic new aproach for others to make better .
But also with more recent creditless borrowings, also you must realist that a solution to the rain was found I allready placed pictures, BUT now hear my complain , as also those have not realised that 3D-H is not a surface feature, that 3D-H reach thru the intire building structure , and deliver foundations in a new unique way, unique and newer seen before, even these recent atemts prove that the same architects don't even stop and try understand the concept, understand that the most important thing is not "how it undulate wavy forms and spetacular whatever NO --- it diliver a brand new perception of the build works, sorry if I am still among the few to understand the structure in detail, but I did develob the method so maybe it is not so strange, that I can still add serious critic.

Sorry --- back hurt and neck frozen, the life of an artist .

Jan 24, 07 8:13 am  · 
 · 
cpnorris

Sorry if I came across as childish, that certainly wasn't my intention. I am trying to understand what about all of this makes you want to argue it so badly and how can you believe in something so much that you claim it IS the answer. I asked you about 4 questions and you answered none of them. the link that jason posted is the only thing on this thread, that I have seen, that has anything to do with architecture. Vindpust, your posts all say the same thing, which is basically nothing as you just continuously defend something that I am pretty sure you don't understand fully yourself. Maybe its the obvious language barrier that makes you come across this way, i don't know. I guess you are correct in that I am trying to provoke you, but I am trying to provoke you so that you contribute. I agree with what most people are saying, do more and talk less.

Jan 24, 07 11:08 am  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Cpnorris I hope you understand that the tone and language in these fora's are often harsh seen from outside ,but please don't think I am not able to exchouse case you find my words insulting ; this was not my intension and I am not going to use the language to exchouse that.

That I did not answer can have several resons, I do understand what I do but I am not going to exchouse trying to renew architecture with tools not seen or hardly percived before . The whole issue is to important for conflict training , to many people need more than what yestoday's architecture could deliver, we need new jobs and computers shuld not be used to mechanise the old written account. Fora's like this are here to offer you an opotunity to make an insult if you think the other guy are simply to arogant , if he can't measure then he shuldn't participate still, that make no exchouse for saveage insults or stepping the line in particular but, as you proberlyguessed I apricipate any good argument, bad arguments on the other side or arguments used to down another participant with social games or followers of the class bulli, are not respected --- so in this discussion you are welcome to insult me aslong your point is reasoable connected to subject.

Jan 24, 07 11:52 am  · 
 · 
cpnorris

I don't think your words are insulting, but it is hard to understand what you are talking about with words like "exchouse" and "saveage". These aren't english words so I can only try to guess what you mean. You are still dodging questions, giving vague descriptions, and throwing out speculations stated as fact. So, I am gonna look more into what you are talking about to see if I can get an explanation of what it is. It honestly does seem interesting but anytime someone claims that they have found "the way" its gonna draw a lot skeptisim, as it should. I just hope that by focusing way too much into this that you aren't missing the point or the bigger picture.

Jan 24, 07 1:09 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

You are most welcome and as I seem I forgot to explain ; this do what you want ,not what the computer allow or can't even suggest, like a Cabin at a third the cost.

The idea is that You are in control, by knowing just a subset of commandt, even this method could fail case, either the software is not good enough or you shuld rather make good food.

Anyway there are nothing to it, than just sharing what I must share, Gee and sorry if it caurse any problems but, --- I know I am an artist maybe you don't ,but that case it is my foult. This tool by chance solve so many of the vorry in the architect world ; can architecture fullfil it's target ,can the building compoment fabrication be made more efficient, things like that, but I must provide a tool that people have to think they themself invented, that is the best way to ensure a quick restoration of the fine old crafts , like architecture allway's was , but not more than this though.

But CAD and CAM allway's prone to be the future tool, Digital are the only remaining oppotunity, and when you want a nice house you can be glad if you know 3D-H , atleast it learn you to ask the right questions, even not how.

Jan 24, 07 1:45 pm  · 
 · 
driftwood

For the love of God and all that is and isn't holy... WHY WON'T THIS THREAD JUST DIE AND STOP CLOGGING MY EMAIL!!??!!

Jan 24, 07 6:54 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

Hi driftwood long time no sea, where have you been stranded.

Just remind me, is it good or is it bad for me when you complain ?

Good I guess.

Jan 24, 07 7:26 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

BTW --- you can allway's ask not to recive more mails , it acturly say how in the mails you complain.

Jan 24, 07 7:26 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell


Mar 10, 07 3:32 pm  · 
 · 
PerCorell

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GC106mvmffA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GC106mvmffA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Mar 14, 07 7:49 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


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

  • ×Search in: