I did a design for a G+1 house facing north road. How much do you rste this design in general interms of aesthetics
Non Sequitur
Mar 13, 24 11:06 pm
1.7 out of 10
sleek renderings do not always equal good design and you need to put some effort in more than just the shape of the exterior.
archanonymous
Mar 14, 24 6:44 am
tree fiddy
natematt
Mar 14, 24 2:51 pm
Came here to say this....
kenchiku
Mar 14, 24 7:28 am
2/10
Looks like a few copy/pastes of token trendy design elements smashed together.
natematt
Mar 14, 24 2:53 pm
Same. It's a mashup of too many different ideas and elements. It's like a modernist version of a McMansion Hell critique. Edit yourself!
Chad Miller
Mar 14, 24 10:30 am
What is a G+1 house? Is north road some famous place I don't know about?
t a z
Mar 14, 24 3:32 pm
I'm not hip to the liggidy, but "G+1" may mean "ground floor + 1 story" house?
So a 2-story house...
Chad Miller
Mar 14, 24 3:39 pm
liggidy giggidy
JLC-1
Mar 14, 24 1:03 pm
$2
JLC-1
Mar 14, 24 5:09 pm
get rid of the oversized number and the salad above the door, it will look horrible when you water it and spills over the front wall.
Chad Miller
Mar 14, 24 5:37 pm
I like salad though.
Non Sequitur
Mar 15, 24 6:12 am
A wise man once said: “you don’t make friends with salad”.
Almosthip
Mar 15, 24 1:55 pm
We had a supplier bring vegetable lasagna to a lunch and learn. And now we don't specify any of his products. Where's the meat?
Chad Miller
Mar 15, 24 2:57 pm
My salads have cheese, meat, various vegetables that are all smothered in a nice dressing. The entire thing is surrounded by bread. OK, so it's a sandwich but still . . .
Orhan Ayyüce
Mar 14, 24 4:53 pm
I like the rectangular massing proportions but it is hard to say without seeing the other drawings. Rendering is nice.
Josh Mings
Mar 15, 24 10:11 am
Agree - can't make a judgement on a single rendering.
Chad Miller
Mar 15, 24 10:30 am
I would like to see a site plan and floor plans.
Richard Balkins
Mar 15, 24 3:26 pm
I agree. I can't make a complete judgment of the whole design from this one view but I can already get a sense of what to expect and not entirely excited over. I am getting a sense of incongruence between the lower floor and upper floor. I would like to see a site plan and floor plans, renderings from the other views (elevation view renderings) -- ortho or perspective, and possibly more angled view where you see more of 2 perpendicular elevations at the same time. However, even without it, I sense some problematic incongruence between the two floors in terms of form.
Richard Balkins
Mar 15, 24 4:15 am
Design isn't just about aesthetics. First thing you need to do is DESIGN FOR FUNCTION and Purpose. Hell the whole damn idea of modernism in large part is the concept of form follows function. Aesthetics without addressing function and use is idiotic.
Lets start with this critique about the flower bed. It would remind people of a gutter with plants growing in it. You know that's a bad. Here's your problem. When you have planters like this big one, you need to drain the water that goes into it. Otherwise, with enough rain, everything in the planter will eventually float out the top and overspill. If you drain it, you solve that but it still has to be drained. With most planters, water does drain out the bottom eventually and when it does, has soil particulates in the water. Guess what that means when it drains out the bottom, you'll see the dirt stain down the wall from the drain points.
What you need to do with such a planter is basically some kind of double-walled planter system with a gap that screens the water that trickles through the soil and then drain out a concealed draining system that needs to be properly sealed. This is a matter of careful details. You need appropriate filtration that keeps the soil where it is and not trickle out with the water. The water through the filtering layer needs to be clean of soil debris which can lead to problems of clogging up.
You seem like an architecture student not a professional. On the aesthetics front, you have elements that are typical of modernism features but you have a composition problem. Part of your problem arises out of not designing and planning for function and established appropriate plan typology. Your elevations are kind of meaningless without a good sound floor plan layout. Can we see the plan layout?
When looking into this type of modernism style, I would suggest you bone up on De Stijl and its influences on the works of: Gerrit Rietveld (example work: Schroder House), Mies van der Rohe, aspects of the Bauhaus style, Richard Neutra, Rudolph Schindler, and others. These architect's work can help you pick up on some of this.
However, don't forget to begin designing with its function in mind, the kinds of spaces and volumes you want to present. Highs and lows, large and smalls. The use of juxtaposition. Intelligent and nice compositional breakings up the masses. De Stijl can help you think about that. Of course, you don't have to use the primitive color palette. You can use natural materials and their colors and textures in a similar manner. They don't have to be all-white or feel "plastic". You can still use ideas and appropriate contrasts. We have interesting ways to do that now with new materials including CLTs for example.
Richard Balkins
Mar 15, 24 4:20 am
What it seems is there is some composition issue with the layout.
Richard Balkins
Mar 15, 24 4:27 am
For me, the thing that is jarring the most is the upper floor design and lower level isn't harmonized. It almost looks like a house of one design is stuck on top of a house of another design. Incongruent.
JonathanLivingston
Mar 21, 24 12:37 am
Classic Rick with a shake weight reply. And then the shuddering replies to his own comment. Never change Archinect . Never change. This is what I come here for.
Richard Balkins
Mar 21, 24 3:13 pm
There are several issues with the OP's design potentially including the planter gutter trough. You can see how that can be a problem. There is overall some incongruence of the form between the upper floor and the lower floor that just fucks with the eyes. It isn't the worst shit I have seen, though. I've seen some gawd awful crap before.
Jay1122
Mar 15, 24 1:23 pm
if you are asking for a critic from architects. At least provide a full set of presentable material. Plans, sections, other 3D views.
And honestly, it looks like the work of students. Complexity for the sake of coolness. All those turns, off set, uselessly extended walls cost extra money. It can be done of course, just need to spend extra money on material, labor and flashing work. Probably more prone to failure too.
citizen
Mar 19, 24 2:59 am
Fifty bucks says there are no plans or sections (as of this post).
Richard Balkins
Mar 19, 24 4:02 am
I agree but not betting $50 against something most likely that I agree to be the case.
bennyc
Mar 19, 24 5:31 am
On a scale of 1 to crappy, I would rate it crappy. Nice visuals, but this is not architecture. Oversized parapet walls? how does one access that planter in front? A tree growing at side of house? Cages to hold the owners in?
Good design aims to enhance space, enhance life, enhance environment. This 3D should never leave your screen...
citizen
Mar 19, 24 5:13 pm
Wouldn't that scale run from Crappy up to 10? =O]
JonathanLivingston
Mar 21, 24 12:43 am
It has a naive simplicity. But seems like effort and thought. I'd give it a 4/10. Think through how it would be built and lived in. Context and construction. Keep improving, architecture isn't easy. Balance your eye for composition with reality of construction.
pj_heavy
Mar 23, 24 11:19 pm
Can someone rate my bored child colouring too ?
Richard Balkins
Mar 25, 24 1:22 am
lol... better than the OP? In the OP's case, it is the computer generated output. You bored child at least demonstrates a hands on approach to actually deciding the colors and what not. The human touch!
Josh Mings
Mar 26, 24 12:22 pm
Not enough color for a Sauerbruch Hutton
citizen
Mar 26, 24 4:40 pm
How do you redline a drawing that's already red? Gaaaah! :O]
chris-chitect
Mar 26, 24 4:48 pm
I like it. Just imagine if that green was that glossy green Japanese tile, and the red was Corten steel. The contrast between reflective and matte materials would probably be stunning.
pj_heavy
Mar 26, 24 11:09 pm
I like what you sau
pj_heavy
Mar 26, 24 11:09 pm
said. Chris_
Volunteer
Mar 24, 24 12:26 pm
What is the point of having tall, blank walls, without any landscaping or gates,intersect the sides of the house?
Chad Miller
Mar 27, 24 10:17 am
To keep you out.
chris-chitect
Mar 26, 24 11:59 pm
My main suggestion is to provide some context for this house. Unless this is located in Saskatchewan I just don't believe this house is surrounded by wide open sky.
I did a design for a G+1 house facing north road. How much do you rste this design in general interms of aesthetics
1.7 out of 10
sleek renderings do not always equal good design and you need to put some effort in more than just the shape of the exterior.
tree fiddy
Came here to say this....
2/10
Looks like a few copy/pastes of token trendy design elements smashed together.
Same. It's a mashup of too many different ideas and elements. It's like a modernist version of a McMansion Hell critique. Edit yourself!
What is a G+1 house? Is north road some famous place I don't know about?
I'm not hip to the liggidy, but "G+1" may mean "ground floor + 1 story" house?
So a 2-story house...
liggidy giggidy
$2
get rid of the oversized number and the salad above the door, it will look horrible when you water it and spills over the front wall.
I like salad though.
A wise man once said: “you don’t make friends with salad”.
We had a supplier bring vegetable lasagna to a lunch and learn. And now we don't specify any of his products. Where's the meat?
My salads have cheese, meat, various vegetables that are all smothered in a nice dressing. The entire thing is surrounded by bread. OK, so it's a sandwich but still . . .
I like the rectangular massing proportions but it is hard to say without seeing the other drawings. Rendering is nice.
Agree - can't make a judgement on a single rendering.
I would like to see a site plan and floor plans.
I agree. I can't make a complete judgment of the whole design from this one view but I can already get a sense of what to expect and not entirely excited over. I am getting a sense of incongruence between the lower floor and upper floor. I would like to see a site plan and floor plans, renderings from the other views (elevation view renderings) -- ortho or perspective, and possibly more angled view where you see more of 2 perpendicular elevations at the same time. However, even without it, I sense some problematic incongruence between the two floors in terms of form.
Design isn't just about aesthetics. First thing you need to do is DESIGN FOR FUNCTION and Purpose. Hell the whole damn idea of modernism in large part is the concept of form follows function. Aesthetics without addressing function and use is idiotic.
Lets start with this critique about the flower bed. It would remind people of a gutter with plants growing in it. You know that's a bad. Here's your problem. When you have planters like this big one, you need to drain the water that goes into it. Otherwise, with enough rain, everything in the planter will eventually float out the top and overspill. If you drain it, you solve that but it still has to be drained. With most planters, water does drain out the bottom eventually and when it does, has soil particulates in the water. Guess what that means when it drains out the bottom, you'll see the dirt stain down the wall from the drain points.
What you need to do with such a planter is basically some kind of double-walled planter system with a gap that screens the water that trickles through the soil and then drain out a concealed draining system that needs to be properly sealed. This is a matter of careful details. You need appropriate filtration that keeps the soil where it is and not trickle out with the water. The water through the filtering layer needs to be clean of soil debris which can lead to problems of clogging up.
You seem like an architecture student not a professional. On the aesthetics front, you have elements that are typical of modernism features but you have a composition problem. Part of your problem arises out of not designing and planning for function and established appropriate plan typology. Your elevations are kind of meaningless without a good sound floor plan layout. Can we see the plan layout?
When looking into this type of modernism style, I would suggest you bone up on De Stijl and its influences on the works of: Gerrit Rietveld (example work: Schroder House), Mies van der Rohe, aspects of the Bauhaus style, Richard Neutra, Rudolph Schindler, and others. These architect's work can help you pick up on some of this.
However, don't forget to begin designing with its function in mind, the kinds of spaces and volumes you want to present. Highs and lows, large and smalls. The use of juxtaposition. Intelligent and nice compositional breakings up the masses. De Stijl can help you think about that. Of course, you don't have to use the primitive color palette. You can use natural materials and their colors and textures in a similar manner. They don't have to be all-white or feel "plastic". You can still use ideas and appropriate contrasts. We have interesting ways to do that now with new materials including CLTs for example.
What it seems is there is some composition issue with the layout.
For me, the thing that is jarring the most is the upper floor design and lower level isn't harmonized. It almost looks like a house of one design is stuck on top of a house of another design. Incongruent.
Classic Rick with a shake weight reply. And then the shuddering replies to his own comment. Never change Archinect . Never change. This is what I come here for.
There are several issues with the OP's design potentially including the planter gutter trough. You can see how that can be a problem. There is overall some incongruence of the form between the upper floor and the lower floor that just fucks with the eyes. It isn't the worst shit I have seen, though. I've seen some gawd awful crap before.
if you are asking for a critic from architects. At least provide a full set of presentable material. Plans, sections, other 3D views.
And honestly, it looks like the work of students. Complexity for the sake of coolness. All those turns, off set, uselessly extended walls cost extra money. It can be done of course, just need to spend extra money on material, labor and flashing work. Probably more prone to failure too.
Fifty bucks says there are no plans or sections (as of this post).
I agree but not betting $50 against something most likely that I agree to be the case.
On a scale of 1 to crappy, I would rate it crappy. Nice visuals, but this is not architecture. Oversized parapet walls? how does one access that planter in front? A tree growing at side of house? Cages to hold the owners in?
Good design aims to enhance space, enhance life, enhance environment. This 3D should never leave your screen...
Wouldn't that scale run from Crappy up to 10? =O]
It has a naive simplicity. But seems like effort and thought. I'd give it a 4/10. Think through how it would be built and lived in. Context and construction. Keep improving, architecture isn't easy. Balance your eye for composition with reality of construction.
Can someone rate my bored child colouring too ?
lol... better than the OP? In the OP's case, it is the computer generated output. You bored child at least demonstrates a hands on approach to actually deciding the colors and what not. The human touch!
Not enough color for a Sauerbruch Hutton
How do you redline a drawing that's already red? Gaaaah! :O]
I like it. Just imagine if that green was that glossy green Japanese tile, and the red was Corten steel. The contrast between reflective and matte materials would probably be stunning.
I like what you sau
said. Chris_
What is the point of having tall, blank walls, without any landscaping or gates,intersect the sides of the house?
To keep you out.
My main suggestion is to provide some context for this house. Unless this is located in Saskatchewan I just don't believe this house is surrounded by wide open sky.