My approach to this first sketch problem was one that I have grown fairly comfortable with over the past few years. First, read, re-read, and re-re-read the problem. Try to become familiar with what the instructor is asking for, before I get married to any course of action. I have found that, as a creative person, I have the tendency to start solving the problem before I even really know what it is. In this case, my earliest attempts turned out to be throw away solutions because it took some digging and fumbling before I could grasp what the purpose of this exercise was; simple spaces and transitions. In my initial solutions I was convinced that I needed to shake things up by adding some new geometry to the plan. I was playing with curves and introducing new angles. In the end, all of this was taking me further away from the solution. Rather than fight with the existing geometry, I decided to embrace it and let it drive my layout (on a side note, this is one reason that I love sculpting with found objects. Sometimes its helpful to have parameters already set up for you, as long as you can adapt to them). So, I let the existing geometry drive the exterior footprint. The only thing I really needed to do was make it large enough to accommodate my program which consisted of a large space(with two distinct subspaces), and small space, a transitional space, and the 3 required transition types. I felt it was only logical to have my Object Trouve located in the small space. I felt it deserved its own space, but didn’t need something as substantial as the large space. Also, I felt it needed to be located away from the entry to promote circulation and build suspense. I wanted to make people work to get a view of it. What fun is it if I pull them in off the street and show them the goods right off the bat?? This way, there is some anticipation. There are glimpses of it offered throughout the interior and from portions of the exterior, but a user has to be in the small space to get the full money shot… One of the other minor freedoms I took was to double and triple many of the walls and columns that divide up the spaces. I believe that the substance of these walls will be felt in the plan and really reinforce the division of the spaces. I also think that the transition from a triple wall to a group of columns to no obstructions at all makes for a special transition element in its own right. At one point as I travel down the rear corridor/transition space, I am separated from the OT by a massive slab of wall. As the wall ends, I catch a glimpse of the OT thru a group of columns which become more scarce as I travel into the space and am finally able to fully view the OT. Oh, the drama……. In the end, I feel that this plan successfully satisfies the problem that was presented.
a design journal
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Peter, thanks for the narrative. I was hoping it could be part of the process sheets, so it can be printed as a whole package. You use up a fair amount of trees for the presentation. Learn from Kyle; he is succesfully combining main info (large) with supporting smaller images. Your views are however very telling. I had asked you earlier if you really needed the double and tripple walls. Your views say it all. I can't see how from the pedestrian vantage point they are making any difference. Also the GT not being quite defined enough is very appearent.
Thanks for the input... I will add my narrative to a product sheet and condense things.....
Post a Comment