i will be giving a presentation to my studio, 820 in the next week or so (location tbd) ... those interested may attend. Chris Ludwig's section of 420 will also be there. Most things I will be showing/discussing are well tread ground in the Microcosm studio - but if you need to kill some time... (it is mostly my current definition of architecture, process, and products...)
This grasshopper definition uses a base line as an input. From that 2-3 layers are created with differing curves to produce a Moire effect. Control over curvature, angle, shift height and depth allow for real-time study of the moire effect. Surfaces should be lofted over each 'fin', however much more tweaking is needed for this.
How are leading architects coping with the global financial storm?
7 January, 2009 By David Littlefield
As architecture is battered by the chill winds of recession, how do leading firms plan to cope with the lean years ahead? David Littlefield asked some of the world’s largest architecture practices about their strategies
"Now, having shrunk, firms may decide to stay smaller. Rather than opening new offices in distant cities or hiring experts in special building types, they may rely increasingly on alliances with other firms. And rather than adding full-time staff when work comes in, they may continue to hire temporary employees."
here is my newest project: with Chris Ludwig, we plan to make screen wall using coffee sleeves... so as a way to learn mor about grasshopper, i'm also trying to construct the geometries/ movement relationships in grasshopper/rhino. above is the sleeve alone... below they are arrayed along "cables" or pulls, like a mini-blind. the idea is they pulls can control the entire array of sleeves (this section is a work in progress)
pull chords about the same length
pull chords drastically different. note how the coffee sleeve responds.
"Although I more or less agree with that definition my personal view of Generative Design is slightly different. For lack of a better example I'm going to go with DNA. In its raw state, DNA contains all of the instructions by which life can be created. It will dictate the growth of cells as well as the type/characteristics of cells. Theoretically you could clone someone from their DNA and get an exact "copy" of that person (remember Dolly?). However, the end result of that clone would not be an exact copy. Why? The growth of cells is not dictated solely by DNA, but also by its interactions with its surroundings. Since the clone invariably develops in conditions that were different from the "source being" there will always be a difference between the two.
To me, this is the characteristic of generative design. Its not just a product of the parameters that generate it, but of the conditions that surround and interact with it. Even within that definition, there's a very thin line that separates parametric design from generative design, since both rely on defining their operations through external values. That thin line, to me, is parametric design being generated by a singular reference to an outside piece of data and generative design being generated by a multitude of references an some interpretation of those references in an interconnected manner.
I've moved towards defining GH as a Logical Modeler rather than parametric or generative. The main reason is that most parametric modelers rarely focus on the link between parameters as an artifact of their process. Because of this, their process, though parametrically based, is still embedded within model itself, which is certainly fine. GH does not operate in this manner. The creation of a GH definition is more of a representation of the logical steps used to create a given output, where as with parametric modelers, the representation of the inheritance of all parameters is not nearly as evident. Considering the control, amount of information that is immediately available by looking at a definition, and the interaction with those logical steps I would certainly argue that THAT is an extremely valuable aspect of the GH process. I could possibly argue that the GH definition itself is more valuable than the output it creates.
As to the Generative capabilities of parametric modelers and GH, it all depends on how you structure the interactions with external data. A 1 to 1 relationship between a value and an output is more parametric in my book, where the interaction between a multitude of values is more of a generative approach. Just my 2 cents " Best, Damien
"It is important here to recognize the question of temporality. Symbolic significance may shift, often dramatically, over a period of time. What was once shockingly alien may eventually appear reassuringly familiar. The way in which we engage with architecture must therefore be seen not as a static condition, but as a dynamic process." Katodrytis
Architecture is about defining space, orchestrating movement, and embracing an awareness of the human condition.
Designing architecture requires a process-based mentality where one evolves an idea through learning, making, collaboration, and intuition.Architects must foster the ability to gather, abstract and control information to establish innovative and novel buildings- also, theories, diagrams, collaborations, contracts, logics, scripts, artworks, spaces, machines, technologies, installations…
1)Curiosity is critical to making architecture. It is the trait that seeks and gathers information for learning, as well as, promotes tenacity – the desire to keep making decisions and refining them without fear of the wrong answer.
2)Creativity is critical to making architecture. It requires one to be curious, ask questions and challenge pre-conceived notions. It is the ability to produce solutions to problems that arise in the design process & design making. It is not limited to making pretty pictures; it requires one to see larger themes and connections.
3)Convictions are critical to making architecture. They require designers to know themselves. Strong convictions induce passion into the design process and ultimately into the architecture.