“Practicing” architecture is moving from a profession that focuses on building buildings as its highest calling, to a lifestyle that appreciates the beauty of architectural design, real or fantastic. This shift has two underlying realities. Just like the musician who lives his art, or the athlete who loves her sport, there are people that love architectural design, deeply, but fewer architects are needed to create buildings in this generation. — Common Edge
"The lack of need is based on less construction activity (a normal cycle, but now longer than any living architect has experienced) and the fact that technology has pre-empted the body count necessary per building design."
For more on the current status of the profession, check out these articles:
101 Comments
Hello Duo Dickinson,
Haven't chatted with you in a long while. Aside from the topic (please reply via PM is better), how goes it?
Quondam,
$10,000 to $20,000 for professional custom web design services can in fact cost that much when you are paying professional web designers that can do HTML5 or Flash, CSS, scripting and also have professional web graphic artists taking 20 Megapixel photos and 2400 dpi scans of renderings and making it web-safe and viewable with anti-aliasing raster processing and all that 'groovy' stuff. Lets not forget font artists as well. Paying them at billed hourly rates at $100/hr. can certainly cost a lot.
To give you a real world idea what custom software development can cost. Think like $1 Million or more. A complete custom website can cost in labor alone $10,000. 100 hours 'man-hours' at $100/hr. is not that much. Considering about 40 man hours of web coding and scripting work, meetings and 60 man hours of graphic artist work.
It would more likely cost two to three times that amount for some of these professional websites because it takes more than that on web site work. After all, you seem to forget the continuous web site costs you spend in human labor costs every time something is added to the website.
In larger corporate website work that is highly custom can actually cost over a million dollars when you create the server code work. If I were to custom build a modern Interactive graphically oriented electronic multi-user web-based bulletin board system (not web forums.... but bulletin board systems) from the grounds up for customer/client, it would cost them over a million dollars considering all the hours and labor involved in creating such a system. If I did it for myself, it would only cost me time that I could be doing something else. I am one of a small percentage of people with the knowledge & skills to actually do it.
You think those $99 custom website work is entirely custom written from scratch?
Aside from that I am not taking any position on Duo Dickinson's website or justification of choices he made. I'll leave it at that.
I would argue that when the web design consultant contract entails more than just setting up a website code and template but also involves a bit of graphic design work and plugging in content to the website, testing and all, the cost of website can go up quite a bit. Then you add an additional amounts for ongoing maintenance, updating, adding content, etc.
Would Duo Dickinson need a complete custom website? Does it need to be elaborate? No. Can it be improved upon? Yes.
Some things that would improve things is a simple use of cascade style sheets a little javascript and so forth. Duo, you know that your clients are probably using something newer than a Windows 95 box.
One thing that I would strive for is some design consistency between pages of your website.
The technology I am talking about in website work has been around in 1997. Among the things that I would have done is the actual images would be clickable link just as the text underneath it. It isn't like people are still using Windows 3.1 any more. If they can afford you or a home to be built or remodeled, they can afford a modern computer.
Just a little point there.
quondam,
You're right. It was curtkram who it should have been directed at. Too bad, I can't go back and edit the post.
duo, that's not an insult, it's a fact. your response was "dumb". you clearly have a firm capable of having a good website right?
put it this way, if your website was designed, the people you are railing against in your piece would maybe listen to you, but one look at your website you look like a contractor hippie who built a few projects.
so when I said dumb, given all your other achievements, your response was DUMB.
Duo, your ideas on that position page are stupid, arrogant, unconstitutional, and and reflect a complete disconnect with reality. I read over your "call to action". It's really really dumb. Looking for ways to force architects down people's throats is not a way to gain respect or relevance.
The tone here is perfect :"dumb" is not an insult, just fact, "stupid, arrogant, unconstitutional" ideas created by hundreds of architects over a 6 month crowd-sourcing exercise that had positive response by many more hundreds at the 2009 AIA convention are "really dumb" -the anonymity of the internet creates extreme certitude, but offers no solutions except that I do not spend $20,000 on pro bono work for those who need it most to create a new website for one that now yields 30 jobs a year, for 20 years, because I look like a "contractor hippie" on its pages...
No, there are no insults here, just the sage thoughtful criticisms of the anonymous...
Then hundreds of architects are completely out of touch with reality. You can't simply create a mandate that requires an architect for things that others are currently making a living from. It's called restraint of trade and would violate ones due process and be considered an illegal seizure of property. Also, do math. Where would we find enough architects for all of these projects? 100 k architects. Millions of projects per year...DUMB
When you restrict architecture practice then you are restricting an art expression. Art expression is protected under the Constitution and when you exclusively restrict trade of all architecture to only those that meets whatever whimsical requirement that those already licensed forces on those trying to become license is trying to restrict the number of artists that can practice the art of architecture by creating artificial barriers to entry. The 14th Amendment flat out says states (including their subpolitical entities) may not adopt or enforce any law that abridges the privileges (rights are a special type of privilege of our country's citizenship) outlined in the Constitution.
This means you would be impeding the Bill of Rights. So in turn it is all about making so certain people can express the art of architecture. The art of architecture is an art and therefore is protected by the first amendment and recognized by Supreme Court ruling. The science of architecture is merely part of the communication. So yes, we can regulate HSW by ensure the standards of design and resulting construction does not cause public harm.
Restriction of people from practicing the art of architecture is down right unconstitutional.
Practice of architecture is practicing the art and communication and applying the science which is still an art of logic and analysis.
The licensing laws as they are are arguably unconstitutional and also violates previously established Federal law such as the Sherman Act and most of the antitrust laws had been adopted before Illinois enacted the Architect act in 1897.
Where is any restriction called for of any kind? Please cite the actual words - not fears of implications:
A call to action paragraph 1.
Duo (assuming you are the real Duo Dickinson)
I'll be less anonymous. The big point you are missing here. Your essay, which was interesting and many points I agree with essentially attacked a world of architecture you do not reside in, whether you want to believe it or not - Design/Academia (pop version, current, trending)
So the immediate reaction of all those you rail against in your essay (almost rant) is that you are equally clueless based upon your website.
Does that make sense?
It's like getting an email from some Nigerian Prince asking me to transfer funds, sounds all good, but when I google it I'm completely let down.
Hire a young kid out of school to use Square Space or something, take some professional photos or at least high quality, and update your website. A small thing to achieve considering all your other achievements.
- Chris
Duo, for the record and addressing my point to a degree - my website shows a very small, very small portion of what I do. Average about 60 projects a year ranging from mid-rise new buildings to renderings to legal (your site inspired me to add that soon) to restoration.
point is, someone will google you and you want to show them what you are not only good at but can also and want to do. (for instance 100's of projects that I'll never post on my website, I too make a living)
Do you do pro bono work as a major part of the bargain? That intern and another do the work for the homeless, habitat, religious groups that serve the needy rather than the website and the site they maintain shows who I am: no marketing, just communication: no one has ever said they hired me despite the website - but it may surprise you that many have said they Love my website - its completely transparent and full, and yes, artless: but it works - the buildings are the art: I have visited scores of architects websites that are gorgeous, and extremely frustrating as they often do not work...I am Duo, BTW
Duo my parents were Christian Missionaries and one time with my Amex Gold Card as a 27 year old interb architect (boss didnt expect me to get there) i paid for $90 in drinks for a realtor at Time Warner building. he asked if i was proud my parents lived off other peoples money? short of taking my chimay glass and repeating the bar scene in trainspotting, i continued - life is hard when you dont know where the money is coming from.....duo you are still posting anonymously on archinect, post a photo and use a real name the way i am. all your words ring hollow after we see your website. i mention my parents and being true to the cause while some guy like baker shat on america via tv and taking money...gave the good people a bad name.....so why dont the good guys have good websites?
I am soooo out of the interWebNet loop that the pic is beyond any desire I might have for cred: when I interviewed Deborah Berke she and I mused at the extreme freak show of meeting a payroll every 2 weeks: something every professor and AIA administrator have to do! Just know the website is a conscious choice, like owning a modest building in New Haven County rather than renting a slick space in Fairfield County Ct: if people really care that much about the missing gloss of my website then they would hate my office, and, in the end, me: at 60 I am wut I am: we have work, I pay all the bills, and help those who cannot afford design fees: win-win-win
Duo,
First, it's called internet. The Web part is a shorthand term for World Wide Web. It's not exactly a loop or ring. It's more of a multi-star topology as well as individual computers. It's a complex inter-networking (where the term Internet is derived from) of networks and individual computers.
Do you do pro bono work as a major part of the bargain?
Actually, I do. I've done it plenty of times. Sometimes not to any benefit for me. Duo, do you do other work that isn't pro bono? After all, don't you pay employees?
I could help you out in getting the website improved some without using Flash or much in the realm of HTML5.
The biggest issue is inconsistency between use of a white background and black background oriented theme. In fact, Archinect itself and the way it feels can be translated to your website and give it some design theme consistency. This can be adequately handled using borderless frames and/or possible use of iframes. Since your theme preferences obviously would be black & white. It would translate some. There is some good opportunities to optimize the feel of your website while keeping some consistency of feel and keep it clean.
Get rid of useless crap like page counters as no one really gives a shit. That was an internet fad that got overused and then people stop using it because it was non-essential crap and in this day and age is very amateur feel that no self-respecting professional business would use them.
One of the biggest area that needs work in my opinion is the areas regarding projects. While it may technically work, any page where images load and text shows up technically works but it needs a bit of organizing and projects that are show cased SHOULD be projects with textual information. I'm not suggesting anything like a house plan stores. But projects pages could really say something if you have not just photos of completion but possible 3d models and rendering. I'm not talking construction documents but something that tells a story about each project. Some of your projects actually have a preliminary/schematic concept floor plan with simple graphic scale and labels for room space. That's fine. You wouldn't want the CDs online as that makes the work easier for 'pirates' that don't respect copyrights. Don't make it easier for them if you don't have to.
Sincerely,
Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer
(also software developer / IT professional)
P.S. If you need page counting, there is various server side PHP scripts that can be used to add to a page log and store that information away. No need to visually show it on a webpage. It can even be databased using SQL. Most web hosting platforms already have analytic tools for tracking how traffic on a website works.
the short version - with a little effort people would take you more seriously.
"InterWebNets" - mocks my own illiteracy: its a joke at my own expense - coined by SNL about 15 years ago...
When there are architects out there who are proud to be technologically or culturally illiterate, is it any surprise that the profession of Architecture seems to be losing the public's respect and losing ground to related professions (interior design, interior architecture, urban design, preservation, placemaking, interface design etc). Clients hire professionals because they should provide expert knowledge of the best current practices.
True: and dishonesty and pretense and affect to fake capacity and expertise are so often the rule that builders find architects more posers than professionals: I have an office full of the technologically literate: that allows me to be honest about my own personal inadequacies, have staff to compensate for them, work 60 hours a week doing what I do best, and offer my office's expertise as a whole: and it has worked: the vast majority of our work is either personal referrals or continuations of a relationship over 10, 20, 30 years of honest interaction - an 80% build rate, of things in the world: for people, communities, and businesses - not for the approval of other architects: not the unbuilt "misunderstood" designs that so often are unbuildable at any budget, but often become unbuilt because preconceptions precluded an honest interaction between client and architect and architect and builder
davvid,
One doesn't have to know everything about the newest fangled software. Since the shelf-life for that knowledge is about 12-18 months. Current practices when it comes to architecture or building design (which is more or less the kind of work Duo works on.... my kind of projects), it is not about the newest features and functions of Revit or Archicad or any of the other programs. It is about being up to date on current practices as it pertains to the health, safety and welfare of the buildings one is designing.
I can design a building that meets the current building code requirements for any size or type of building and do it in paper & pencil/pen. (ie. hand drafted)
It can be done if you know what you are doing. Houses for the most part in the U.S., don't need a licensed architect to design them. A client may need a competent design professional (licensed architect, building designer [certified or not], design-builder, etc.) to prepare the design, plans, & specifications. You don't need to submit digitally. If you really had to, you can buy a large format scanner or set up a rig to photograph a large format sheet with a high resolution camera, then with a little bit of just getting it to work without losing, altering or distorting the image or scale of the drawings.
Software isn't architecture anymore than a pencil is. It's just a tool to convey your thoughts into a medium.
jla-x "1) That architects be recognized as critical to the building regulatory approval process based on a national determination of clear legal status for all building professions including but not limited to the practices of architecture, landscape architecture, structural engineering, interior design, and residential design."
"restriction of trade" - ? so it restricts the trade of a dermatologist if you say she/he cannot do brain surgery?
dishonesty and pretense and affect to fake capacity and expertise are so often the rule that builders find architects more posers than professionals
But Duo this is the same bullshit stereotype that your article on Common Edge was incorrectly promoting which is why everyone here is so angry about it in the first place.
Look: You have a practice that works for you. Starchitects have a practice that works for them. Hospital designers have a practice, sports stadiums designers, school designers, theme restaurant designers, etc. etc etc. all have milieus in which they are successful, and any of them who are simply "posers" will NOT be successful for long!
There are SO many ways to practice in this profession that when one cohort tears down another it doesn't do any of us any good. Embrace the different approaches, all of us.
Rick, here we are again with the difference between what you "can" do and what you ever do do.
And are you seriously suggesting that a successful, profitable architect revamp his website because you think it lacks consistency? Have your own websites ever brought in a single client or project? Is Dickinson's site really likely to be helped by your expertise?
RickB-OR,
Tools have limitations. If you're restricted to an older/incomplete toolset, you capabilities are limited.
5839,
Regarding the first part of your statement, are you asking me to violate the licensing law to post some hand drafted design for a non-exempt building? I already have done hand drafted construction documents before.
As for a website in his business, his reputation as an architect began before internet so I can understand his clientele are going to be more older people and also they are not likely to care. Then again, he wouldn't need a website for his business, would he?
It would just need to be a glorified digital business card. A little bit of consistency in layout and otherwise cleaning up the website a little bit, getting rid of some page counter as it really serve no purpose in his business. It doesn't matter these days about how many people visit a page or site. Little things like that aren't going to get anyone to select him as an architect. People probably select him because he is a local architect in his area that people recognize his name as he is involved in his community.
It can have a little bit of presentational improvement. I'm not even suggesting that much of a change in style or feel that much. A little web coding clean up and all. It would help make the website flow and feel like a little thought in presentation is made. He has the content to make a decent website and one the works and design flow works without being web design wise.... messy.
Guess what, I'm not the one that brought up his website being messy or what not. I concur in that there is some areas that can be improved upon and otherwise cleaned up.
He's an architect. It is expected that architects have a consideration of visual design. Guess what, website design is a visual art. It employs principles of visual composition. Don't they teach visual composition in architecture school?
Now, web design is about visual composition of content on a computer screen that you navigate through from page to page. Aside from the 2d visual plane, there is the passage of time (flow between web pages in this case). I simply suggested some modest improvements, while others were far more critical.
davvid,
Tools have limitations. If you're restricted to an older/incomplete toolset, you capabilities are limited.
Your mind is the tool. The pencil or whatever is merely a means to conveyance to a medium. Where has it yet became required that you need to use CAD or BIM to design houses. (BIM is just another breed of CAD which stands for COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN which is the principle of using computers to aid design)
If you are talking about rendering, first rule is never give clients photorealistic rendering. There is a reason for that. You don't want to give clients a false impression that a house will absolutely look like that. The less photorealistic like a painting would be, the more degrees of freedom or latitude for variation to happen. In residential design, you don't give something that looks too realistic because what if the paint actually selected or the real lighting conditions of the site isn't exactly like how that vibrant photorealistic raytraced rendering presented? Enough on that. I hope you get the essential point.
Your mind is the tool.
so if you want to hammer a nail?
use your head!
you're a tool.
- only the posers are "bullshit": anybody who can walk the talk, in any style, attitude or affect is AOK by me: but the ratio of building architects to those who don't really care about building is factually changing dramatically - every architect I know over 40 has seen this generation's shift: shifting is often a great thing: its can be called progress when it makes things better; but the disconnect between huge debt for training that cannot be used has left those trained and indebted with few points of purpose Except For Affect: schools minting money for irrelevant education are not limited to Architecture: but its what I have dedicated my life to and given about 80 people livelihoods over the last 30+ years: so I, too, call out "Bullshit" when its there...
curtkram,
You missed the point. Yes, you would use a hammer but the mind controls the body which is an extension of the mind in physical form and the hammer is an augmentation to body. Without the mind, you are just a inanimate blob of skin, flesh and bones. What gives animation to the body is the mind. It is what tells the appendage called your arm and the hands and the fingers to grab hammer and use the hammer.
That is what I was getting at.
rick, my point was that you're a tool, which you seem to have missed. instead you're talking about waving around your appendages. this is a public forum for chrissakes
to help translate duo to those under 40, 'get off my lawn you kids. back in my day we didn't google to find a phone number or address, we searched the yellow pages. and dagnabbit, we liked it that way.'
by the way, this is what the yellow pages looked like
gosh darn kids and their expectations. why i need good inter web? i big duo dickenson i have been on TV..............lets talk pretentious - so back in the day Richer Meier refused to update his geocity website, but when he finally caved into his marketing directors request they made a real nice site. pretentious because he had books published about his built works - no need for interweb if you published! Fake. So you are telling me no one over at Morphisos or Gehry's office knows how to put buildings together? people that know how to put buildings together make buildings that look like yours? and even worse, make bad websites. dont call yourself a designer, that would be Fake.
curtkram,
I know what you said. I wasn't going to respond to that insult. I chose to ignore that last sentence as you wrote it. I'm not dropping to using adolescent insulting and snipe remarks like you were. Yes, it is an online forum. It still doesn't justify being adolescent with petulant criticism all the while hiding behind anonymity.
its pretentious to think you do not need to list your phone number in the yellow pages.
...but the ratio of building architects to those who don't really care about building is factually changing dramatically - every architect I know over 40 has seen this generation's shift
Do you have some statistics on this? Because yes it may appear that architecture graduates today don't know the same things we did when we graduated (I've been in practice for almost 30 years, I'm 49) but! they know a whole hell of a lot more about all kinds of things than we did when we graduated. The kind of knowledge needed to get a building built has shifted in the last three decades. It's not that younger grads don't care about building: they're getting stuff built all over the globe, and that kind of practice requires a different kind of knowledge than the kind at which you (and I, too) personally excel.
Not better or worse, different.
I don't buy that bullshit for a minute. What's changed is the nature of the education of a future professional, by the professional; they do a lot less, and expect a whole lot more.
DUMPSTER FIRE ! ! ! !
"Even though matriculation and graduation from architecture schools are slightly down, if you average the 6,000 degrees awarded now and the 3,000 degrees awarded 50 years ago, there are well over 200,000 people with professional architectural degrees, in a market containing far fewer jobs. Even with this professional brown-out, there are nine new schools of architecture trying to get accredited."
it takes perhaps half the number of humans to draw any given building as it did when we graduated half the number of students, there is less work now per worker, and a record number are opting not to get licensed: there are 6,000 architects teaching, a 1-4 ratio to students: great for the teachers: but what will their students do upon graduation: teach?
These are facts: with more graduates, fewer buildings, less humans needed to draw buildings, there are many more architects who will build less, if anything: this means education is not responding to the purpose of the education: IF you think architects are educated to build: without building, architects are simulations of architects: the pose as architects: it is not their fault they want to do something with less opportunity: just like bank tellers or buggy whip makers: but its changing the essential purpose of architectural education: and it erodes our value.
Duo Dickinson,
Lets remember that 60 or so years ago, we were building houses for the parents of the baby boomers and were building for the growing housing demand of the baby boomers. Fueling the financing was the GI Bill. This added a drastic growth after a period of population stagnation. During the period of the Great Depression and the war, there was a period of some stagnation due to people holding off or being careful to not raising a family in a time where there was lack of jobs and money. There was some lower than average population growth rate at the time.
Then we have the baby boomers. From then on, housing supply had been growing at a rate far exceeding the population growth rate. Now, that stock probably exceeds our needs for decades especially as the baby boomer generation fades to dust.
That phase of the U.S. is gone. The GI Bill is gone. Therefore, anything happening in new construction housing is only going to serve to inhibit a future boom in housing. The new norm that I foresee is this. I argue that the kind of boom and change of that period is unlikely for a long time. We are also an established country not a growing one but one that reached its critical mass. We are just about peaked out for what the economic capacity and needs are given our population and the shift from manufacturing production to a service oriented country. There is not much in the world of a new frontier in the U.S.
Given the rust belt and yet to be established new industries/market economies to take up the old production work force. We have that set back. Until we move on to have new positions, new industries, new occupations to make up for lost positions, lost industries, lost occupations... its going to be awhile.
Lets see if we can possibly have some intelligent dialogue or thoughts on the following questions: (in the context of the United States)
Why do we need architects? Why do we need new buildings?
Those two questions are rhetorical but feel free to answer as you see. I don't know if or what is the right answer to them at this time.
rick you may challenge duo, thats acceptable but do not pretend to be an architect like duo pretends to know everything about architecture EXCEPT design.
The Ninja Has Spoken
Duo - my consulting work for the most part is "figuring out how to build" often very creative and interesting stuff. I reviewed much of the work on your website and find nothing posted as a challenge to detail nor beyond something you could not find in Architectural Graphic Standards or Ching books............As you note most kids do not know how to detail or are not taught even the basics, this is true for the most part............ When I graduated I was very nervous about this fact (2002). First Architect I managed to keep employment at beyond 6 months did residential projects and technically considerably more advanced than what you show on your WEBSITE and I considered him a simple man with regard to spatial thinking............ I took on consulting for artists, specifically, public art projects - you spend hours worrying about a material assemblies duration under public traffic......... Worked for firms who strictly believed in design intent only, which is worse than academia's short comings on not teaching to build, this philosophy actually promotes not caring how buildings are built. maybe its the professions fault no one in academia cares how a building is put together!........i have worked for specialists and even as Executive local architect on Starchitect projects. Some stars know the consultants will take care of it, others worry about the grain in the wood meeting the steel meeting the stone under various temperature changes. some care so much about how buildings go together even the contractor is ready to learn...............so i stress - you can not be taken seriously as your website says you are little more than average when it comes to building technology and for the most part do not care about design, which you have established as a personal preference - fine. but do not expect the people you are critiquing to care. here to help, consider this a constructive studio crit.......its like you posted the best drawings in studio but showed up hung over in a smelly flannel and sandles and spilled your cofee on a juror before you even started your presentation. its all uphill from there.
Agree with everything you just posted, Chris (but admit the smelly flannel image put me off - yuck).
Duo you're very successful, with work and books and a public persona; none of that can be challenged. It's not like you're some nobody here posting about something about which you have no practical knowledge (<cough> Rick).
But you've trotted out your bona fides, so here are some of mine: I was at the AIA Emerging Professionals Summit, and last year gave a talk at AIA National about the same topic: the changing nature of practice, how our graduates and emerging professionals are coming into a working world that is completely different from the world of graduates 30 years ago, that the practical skills they need are different, and how a bunch of old, change-resistant practitioners (like myself) are driving them out of the profession because we refuse to face the fact that the future of practice is their future, not ours.
I work with graduates of architecture who are doing all kinds of incredible work on the built environment, they're winning awards, getting meetings with mayors, impacting neighborhoods, rewriting zoning codes...but they are doing very little work in the realm of "buildings". They're designing and building things, but it's far from traditional practice. They're not getting licensed because the licensing process is archaic and frustrating and they don't need the license to do what they want to do.
Sure, it takes half as many people to draw a building. But drawing a building isn't architecture, it's one tool in the skillset of doing architecture.
God I could talk about this forever, but it boils down to: your article was based on a view of architecture that's outdated. To borrow from a band from our generation: The Kids Are Alright. Really, trust me, they are. We old people just need to stay out of their way.
" But drawing a building isn't architecture, it's one tool in the skillset of doing architecture."
bingo
this is the 99th pointless post in a series of posts unrelated to the original news article. i bet RB wants to be 100. he has to have the last word after all.
Nice post Donna!!!
Let's also not forget that environmental awareness wasn't as widespread 30 years ago. I know several M-arch grads (including myself) who have found niches in various areas of sustainability relating to the built environment...from xeriscape design to energy modeling...some really useful stuff...its not all fluffy pictures...a lot of highly technical and tedious work being done...Not everyone wants to be a starchitect.
A little housing start data....
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tpWY6_dn4vA/U6A2lv8VcnI/AAAAAAAAfZk/PrQKNahrtlo/s1600/StartsMay2014.jpg
Exactly, jla-x. I know lots of people in the energy sector. The problems to be solved in today's architectural world are more complex than just building a building and plunking it down.
smelly flannels, after 3 days of all nighters.. Donna if you cant get past the smelly flannels you will never see the wonderful work posted on the wall (like a bad website)..... so duo what then is the full skillset? as Donna and jla-x point out its considerably more expanded than what the ARE's encompass and whats in the books. is having a website that speaks volumes about your success useful? could it have prevented most the skepticism here on Archinect?
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.