Neither of them look like very much of a new idea to me. They both look practiced and expected. But neither of them look effortless, which could be the highest achievement for a repetitive move.
that Zaha thing looks familiar and unfortunately forced, although obviously 3 dimensional it seems spatially flat. Berkel's looks like it could be an opportunity for something but the scale and the imagery is misleading
This prove in real time that architects lost their way. Here is nothing, no more than nothing, not even anything inside, no function, no pointer no new gadged, and none of them has a clue even about how to make it, make it for what, make it why.
No substance, no reson, no must do.
Looks like spoiled childrens playground, lack of need to, missing visions, -- these are people who forgot what it is about if they ever even thought about it, even tried to calculate it as how the compute do it just to know what they are doing, -- doing for who, there are no critic.
knowing that all hadids office ONLY has AA students its not unexpected that the ideas are comming from the last image they had....
AA Pavilion Summer 2008
If that is true I understand it much better, -- latest image made me think this was what I would suggest to prove 3dh , -- when I many years ago published simular structures right here in the fora, all the response I had, was arogant claims ;" a total vaste of materialsm way to many ribs unnessery, how will you keep out the rain" sort of replies. But true these are exactly what you would test, with a new genious method to put things together.
I mean, -- such and in particular, even more florished form language is obvious, When it is so easy, to manufactor the compoments for near any fom then these new way's to build, are offcaurse experimented if it must work some porpus at least :I just fail to ealise why so much form are vasted looking for nothing. Sure Blob are trivial, but the vorse critic seem to be ponted to something by means done to look bad!
That is how I see that lattrice structure being the foundations, ever build such vaste, when a tenyh the volume in frames placed by design atleast. like with 3dh, -- you can build whatever, a third the cost much more solid, and by using a method have xoftware manufactoring and design on site, with 3dh tge frames are cut, framework assembled, and surface paneling done. -- Unless a million are spended "calculating" concrete formwork as for a bunker,
Now I worked for promoting a simple design idea, everyone with some tallent will perform, only with brand different way to use a computer, and I was told that idears like 3dh ,need near 20 years to be realised, we are so bound in what we can see and maneage. First ; 3dh is not a insult to you ; I merely interduced the idea with intergrating increadible new tools into architecture, but when you realise how everything changing, cheap new manufactoring realy are for the Bold.
You maybe thought a majestic every sense a modern piece of architecture, but emagine how much there would be, in develobing housing for the many and poor. As where 3dh would be truly promising.
17 Comments
I like Van Berkel's better.
why? because its shiny?
they're both just sculpture/objects. boring.
Van Berkel's looks spatial to me..
when will this blob crap end?
i kinda like 'em. they're nifty and fun in the same way as kapoor's bean - and they offer (more of) an opportunity to go in/under. why not?
I like Berkels because the fold is a support/column.
See also Chicago Tribune Skyline Blog
I'm interested in seeing how BvB's performs in the rain, looks like it could be interesting.
<sigh>
Neither of them look like very much of a new idea to me. They both look practiced and expected. But neither of them look effortless, which could be the highest achievement for a repetitive move.
that Zaha thing looks familiar and unfortunately forced, although obviously 3 dimensional it seems spatially flat. Berkel's looks like it could be an opportunity for something but the scale and the imagery is misleading
This prove in real time that architects lost their way. Here is nothing, no more than nothing, not even anything inside, no function, no pointer no new gadged, and none of them has a clue even about how to make it, make it for what, make it why.
No substance, no reson, no must do.
Looks like spoiled childrens playground, lack of need to, missing visions, -- these are people who forgot what it is about if they ever even thought about it, even tried to calculate it as how the compute do it just to know what they are doing, -- doing for who, there are no critic.
or
knowing that all hadids office ONLY has AA students its not unexpected that the ideas are comming from the last image they had....
AA Pavilion Summer 2008
If that is true I understand it much better, -- latest image made me think this was what I would suggest to prove 3dh , -- when I many years ago published simular structures right here in the fora, all the response I had, was arogant claims ;" a total vaste of materialsm way to many ribs unnessery, how will you keep out the rain" sort of replies. But true these are exactly what you would test, with a new genious method to put things together.
I mean, -- such and in particular, even more florished form language is obvious, When it is so easy, to manufactor the compoments for near any fom then these new way's to build, are offcaurse experimented if it must work some porpus at least :I just fail to ealise why so much form are vasted looking for nothing. Sure Blob are trivial, but the vorse critic seem to be ponted to something by means done to look bad!
That is how I see that lattrice structure being the foundations, ever build such vaste, when a tenyh the volume in frames placed by design atleast. like with 3dh, -- you can build whatever, a third the cost much more solid, and by using a method have xoftware manufactoring and design on site, with 3dh tge frames are cut, framework assembled, and surface paneling done. -- Unless a million are spended "calculating" concrete formwork as for a bunker,
Now I worked for promoting a simple design idea, everyone with some tallent will perform, only with brand different way to use a computer, and I was told that idears like 3dh ,need near 20 years to be realised, we are so bound in what we can see and maneage. First ; 3dh is not a insult to you ; I merely interduced the idea with intergrating increadible new tools into architecture, but when you realise how everything changing, cheap new manufactoring realy are for the Bold.
You maybe thought a majestic every sense a modern piece of architecture, but emagine how much there would be, in develobing housing for the many and poor. As where 3dh would be truly promising.
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.