Brads Details and Comments for the Week

  • “Architecture starts when you carefully put two bricks together. There it begins.” Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
  • biarchitect@optusnet.com.au
  • WEEK ONE - Recommedations of the Week is to fully get your head around Sketch Up. Later on you dont want to waste time figuring out how to use it when you should be using your time to figure out your designs
  • Have a look at http://bradinwood.blogspot.com/ for last years students work which we will discuss in class as examples.

EXPERIMENT II FEEDBACK

Altiparmak Koray Ersan
Key strength of the scheme:
Good appreciation of client’s needs and requirements. Expressive and meaningful ramp. Good appreciation of scale.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lack of colour and textures to enhance the architectural space. Could have developed further from your original ideas. Table and chair seems out of place and detract from your design.

Binsbergen Theo
Key strength of the scheme:
Some beautiful expressions of the volume of the architectural space, especially to the internal areas.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Your textures and axonometric need further development.

Chan Veronica Sze-Marn
Key strength of the scheme:
Beautifully presented clearly shows care and understanding of the experiment. Good theoretical ideology behind the clients to give the architecture a meaningful and solid basis to work from. Lovely entry and ‘key hole’ to the face of the solid with the way the massing is broken down.

Most significant weakness of the scheme::
Nobel’s office is not as strong as Cousteau’s studio. The ramps lack an architectural expression to tie the two clients together. The variation to scale as you walk along the ramp could have been expressed stronger and more evident in the design. Don’t be afraid to push the boundaries and really emphasis ideas to your design. BE BOLD.

Ciano Julia
Key strength of the scheme: Good development of the ideas of the clients and manipulating a space to suit their characteristics. Good use of spatial characteristics and using different sensory feelings in the architecture.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Lack of colour and materiality to help express your ideas. The walling around the internal office is not articulated and could have developed further. Design lacks some excitement and interest in some of the places and further development could have helped improve the design. Some parts are rather empty.

Ei Shwe Sin Win Ashley
Lovely use of some of the shapes and how they relate to each other, especially in Cousteau’s space. Good backdrop and ‘glowing’ effect to the space. Interesting form generated for the Campbell’s lab.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The Nobel space is only visual without any ability to walk and use it. Opportunity lost to use it as a pathway or journey to the client’s offices. It has no real purpose of functional ability to be used at present.

Femia Dominic
Overall good design, with good appreciation of the clients. Lovely textures. External office has lovely spatial consideration and would be quite pleasant to be physically in the space.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Haven’t thought about the ramps sufficiently to add to your design. Design is rather rigid (concrete) and would like to see your future designs to loosen up. Don’t rely on symmetry unless it is important to your overall design philosophy. Textures were not used to help establish an idea. These could have been used to work in a particular manner to establish part of your curriculum and not just ‘slapped on every wall’.

Hespe Patrick Anthony
Key strength of the scheme:
Interesting scheme with a well developed appreciation of the clients and their personality. Nice to see a different understanding of Nobel than just dynamite. Well articulated internal spaces that show a mature understanding of being physically in the space. Good appreciation of the use of the spaces.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Some elements seem rather arbitrary to your design. Would like you to imagine yourself more in the internal space that just the creation of a beautifully sculptured element, especially as the users of the space.

Hu Wenjun
Key strength of the scheme:
Interesting colours and textures.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Your textures and axonometrics are rather rough and lack any care to detail or imagination. You have no UT2004 map for me to walk through. This was part of the submission requirements. The scheme is rather complex and difficult to understand and there is no strong thought or ideological response to your scheme. Try to think about what you are doing to establish an idea and make sure all parts of your scheme can help establish that idea. Your quality of images is also poor.

Hunter Matthew
Key strength of the scheme: Clever use of ‘ironic; location of the rooms. Interesting form for the Campbell’s lab with the repetitive nature of the blocks stacking up and connecting.
Complex yet beautiful form generated from your ideas.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Some of your textures are over the top and take too much dominance to your design philosophy. Some of the walling on the other hand is empty and not articulated sufficiently.

Hur Benjamin
Key strength of the scheme:
Good appreciation of colour and textures. Lovely axonometrics.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Your textures have no thought behind them. Scheme lacks any real architectural ideology apart from your use of colour. Your shapes seem more arbitrary placed than well thought out and meaningful to your idea.

Jiang Wei
Key strength of the scheme:
Interesting ramp that ties in with your scheme. Interesting sculptural quality to Nobel’s space. Good delicate use of colour.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:Poor hatching to your axonometrics – take more care and pride in your craftsmanship. Your textures do not relate or work with your architectural idea. Simplistic interpretation from Cousteau’s quote to the architectural form.

Kuok Wilson
Key strength of the scheme:
Interesting scheme and nicely presented with ‘duplication’ for Campbell becoming the structural expression of the work space. Well articulated ramp and nicely integrated as part of the overall design.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Nobel’s work space lacks the beauty that Campbell’s conveys.

Liang Ximing
Key strength of the scheme:
Some well taken images that encapsulates your ideas and visions. Well use of lighting and textures, especially to Nobel’s lab. Lovely appreciation of your clients and their ‘needs’

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Overly complicated in some parts which didn’t need to go that far. Would have been more fruitful if you concentrated on your main ideas and concept

Mahony-Hayes Hannah
Key strength of the scheme:
Well developed internal space for Nobel.
Nice craftsmanship to your textures

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Rather simplistic scheme that, although you understood the clients and their personality, you didn’t develop to into a well established and representative scheme. Opportunities lost to enhance the space with more architectural expression.

Moulder James Edward
Key strength of the scheme:
Lovely use of the ramps and the way it ties the different labs and rooms together.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
No reference to who each lab is for. Apart from the internal red room, the other rooms are both empty and lack any great architectural or sculptural merit. The design does not exhibit a feeling of completion and fulfilment that could have been archived through further development.

Orya Qaiss
-

Rakic Ognjen
Key strength of the scheme:
Lovely ‘journey’ through the studios and labs for Cousteau and fantastic attempt to not just showing something blowing up for dynamite but to establish architecture through two forces annihilating each other.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
File front did not work – these should be checked before you submit. Although you chose a difficult architectural objective to represent for Nobel (which is admirable), it did not completely come across as clear and expressive as I would have liked. Ramps are uninspiring.

Seeto Asher
Key strength of the scheme:
Beautiful textures and lovingly complex axonometrics.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
You have a strong idea and appreciation of the clients and established an objective to design towards but the architectural lacks the details and sculptural attributes that your original ideas had. Lovely idea for Nobel but sits awkwardly on the cliff face and could have been tied in better.

Soo Kuok Kean
-

Teng Ryan
Key strength of the scheme:
Lovely sculptural qualities to the architectural design.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Very uninspiring architectural space internally, as you have studied the external fabric of the architectural design with little or appreciation of the qualities of the internal spaces. Poor use of colours, textures and materials to your design.

Turle John
Key strength of the scheme:
Lovely scheme with a mature and well orchestrated use of colour and textures. Good to see you are really thinking and pushing your boundaries of your comfort zone to learn about your architectural expression.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Some elements of your scheme seem rather arbitrary. Your ramps are not as inspiring as some other parts of your design.

Yu Vanessa Hao-Yan
Key strength of the scheme:
Very beautiful axonometrics and textures. Lovely representation of your ideas and the development of your ideas into an architectural form.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Some of the walling is well articulated, while other parts seem empty and lack any expressive form – which could have developed further with more time.

Zheng Chloe Yifan
Key strength of the scheme:
Some beautiful element connections. The internal space is lovely to look at and you have taken some good images throughout the design that clearly highlight your scheme.

Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Ramps could have been developed further as they lack any architectural merit.

EXPERIMENT 1 FEEDBACK

The intention of publishing the feedbackbelow is so that all students can benefit by understanding the strengthsand weakness' of a range of projects. Please take the time to reviewother students work with these comments in mind. If you have anyquestions or would like any further clarification don't hesitate to askme during the studio session.

Altiparmak Koray Ersan
Key strength of the scheme: A beautiful architectural element that encapsulates the brief and objectives of the exercise. Good use of colour and materials. The images are well presented and become pieces of art in themselves. A good development from your original scheme and ideas.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: The stairs could have been further developed to enhance the artist and your conceptual idea, especially the stairs to the above ground studio. The above ground studio also has been cut for our view but I would like to have seem how this side is also treated architecturally (i.e. does this side a reflection of the other side?)

Binsbergen Theo
Key strength of the scheme: An interesting form that is both graceful and elegant and comes to together as a sculptural piece of architecture. The location of the stairs holding the ‘egg’ in space is a mature architectural response to the brief.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Stairs could have been developed further to enhance your architectural idea. The below ground studio and stairs seems to be less developed than the above ground. The brief also asked for 3x 10 second animations also. Make sure you follow the brief on all assignments in future.

Chan Veronica Sze-Marn
Key strength of the scheme: A really impressive architectural element that is quite beautiful to look at. The connection between the below ground and the above ground studios and how they relate to each other is interesting. The scheme is also well thought out and resolved. The placement of the art is also well orchestrated and cleverly considered. The use of music also enhances your presentation.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: The opening where the below ground studio connects with the ground level could have reflected more about the below ground space. The shape of the gallery on the ground could have reflected more with the 3D concept for the above ground studio. (although it does defines the gallery as a separate part of the design).

Ciano Julia
Key strength of the scheme: Mature approach that clearly shows your development from your original ideas in the architectural form. This is a mature and well regarded approach to designing. The placement of the studio and the development of the formed ground line to work with your design is admirable. The disjoined form of the below ground studio is beautiful.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: No solidity to the below ground stairs and unsure how or what they are sitting in the solid space. Further opportunity could have been taken to develop the ‘controversy’ ideology and make it read stronger as a real ‘conflict’ of ideas and opinions.

Ei Shwe Sin Win Ashley
Key strength of the scheme: Some interesting architectural forms created to the below ground studio. Well crated textures and sections. Nicely considered architectural space to the below ground studio.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Try to avoid 2d extraction to make a 3d sculptural image. Opportunity to enhance and push the conceptual idea of the stairs further than taken. Would like to have seen the above ground form more integrated into the conceptual idea with the inside space a reflection of what the outside space looks like.

Hespe Patrick Anthony
Key strength of the scheme: Lovely formulation of space and complex/clever combination of the different architectural elements to help enhance your idea of ‘birth’. Good appreciation of materials and colouring.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Some of your use of elements seems arbitrary and recommend that your always develop your elements/openings etc with strong consideration of your original theoretical idea.

Hu Wenjun
Key strength of the scheme: Good use of colour and materiality in your design. Some of your images are beautifully presented and help establish a setting for your studios. Below ground studio is well developed and the staircase locations helps break up the space into useable sections.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Try to avoid extraction of the 2d image to make a 3d form. Your use of furniture detracts from your overall design. Your final design seems to lack the richness and beauty that your original sketches were able to convey. The scale is also overly large for an individual studio.

Hunter Matthew
Key strength of the scheme: Nicely proportioned and placed elements that work together to create and interesting response to the brief. Strong evidence of development of your original idea to the final design.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Lost opportunity to help establish the below ground studio to be more reflective of the ‘uncomfortable’ ideology you were trying to convey. Further development would have helped achieved this. The suburban street scene detracts from the overall design also.

Hur Benjamin
Key strength of the scheme: Nice appreciation of the way light can be used to enhance or articulate an architectural space.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Presentation from your sketchbook is poor – use a scanner next time and crop and tidy up your workings. The quality of the images presented and the animations are poor. Due to this, it was difficult to appreciate the architectural qualities of your work. The submission requirements are uncompleted and poorly communicated.

Jiang Wei
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting formulation of space and sculptural qualities. Nice folded nature to the above ground studio. Interesting articulation of the walling in the below ground studio.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Check your spelling. Lost opportunity to utilise the stairs as an integral part of your design and as part of your evocative architecture. The entry to the below ground studio lacks any architectural merit and could have been enhanced to communicate your ideas to the below ground space. Additional wording to explain your studios would also have helped.

Kuok Wilson
Key strength of the scheme: Inserting eclectic mix of shapes and elements for both the above and below ground studios. Nice appreciation of the special qualities of the studio.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Some of the shapes and forms of the above ground studio could be more strategically placed to help emphasise your conceptual idea. Colour and materiality could have been used more strongly also to help communicate your ideology. Entry to the below ground studio lacks any real architectural merit.

Liang Ximing
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting formulation of architectural elements. Nice way of relating the below ground studio to the ground line. Nice juxtaposition of the above and below ground studio spaces.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Check your spelling. Your stairs are not as evocative as the conceptual approach to your design. And opportunity lost to realty integrate them into the submission. Some of the elements seem arbitrary and not as strongly related to your overall conceptual idea.

Mahony-Hayes Hannah
Key strength of the scheme: Beautifully developed and prepared scheme that relates strongly to your ideological approach. Your sketches and textures are very beautifully crafted. Good use of colour and appreciation of the architectural space.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Stairs still not fully integrated to the scheme although a large improvement from the first weeks. Possibility of teasing people with the small expression of the below ground studio space above the ground line.

Moulder James Edward
Key strength of the scheme: Beautifully crafted sculptural element that clearly exhibits its architectural form from your original concept. The repetitive nature of the below ground studio and the way it is able to be appreciated and express ‘repetition’ is well considered and beautifully represented.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Opportunity to establish the stairs to the above ground studio more representative of the ‘scrap’ concept.

Orya Qaiss
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting form and roof concept. Good utilisation of the artists work and your textures. Lovely spatial configuration and good appreciation of movement through the architectural space.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Try to avoid an extrusion of your 2 d drawing into a 3 d space. The floor line between the above and below ground studio is to thin. Also how does the side of the studio we are looking at finish off. Is it open? Remember that this is a sculptured architectural form and should also be able to observed in the 3 d form on all of its sides.

Rakic Ognjen
Key strength of the scheme: The above ground studio is a very mature and well established concept that then follows through with your original idea and the results in a well formulated architectural space. Stairs are lovely located and sit as an integral part of the overall design concept.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Check your spelling in your presentation. The below ground studio lacks the clarity to that of your above ground studio. Although a difficult word to convey, there is some complexity and connectivity to the above ground space which reduces it being represented as a ‘minimal space’.

Seeto Asher
Key strength of the scheme: Beautiful drawings and clarity to your images. The evocative nature of the below ground space really exhibits your idea of reformation. The stairs are well designed and sit nicely within the above and below ground studio.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Opportunity to establish ‘power’ as a more defining element to the above studio. The setting for the studio could have established a hierarchy of power with a defining base and as discussed in class the white supporting ‘bones’ could have taken reference from the use of medieval cathedral design to really asses the concept of ‘power’ – especially in terms of height and dominance to the studio.

Soo Kuok Kean
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting scheme and idea to the above and below ground. The formulation of space to the below ground really enhance and establish the ‘riddle’ architectural idea. Good use of colour and materiality.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Very literal translation of your original design and would like to have seem some more development of an ‘architectural concept’ from your original sketches. As discussed in class, the above ground stairs tend to not be cohesive with the overall concept and seem out of place relative to the ‘arms’. Lost opportunity to establish the stairs as a more integral part of your architectural philosophy.

Teng Ryan
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting architectural form and well thought out consideration of the use of the space as a studio. Beautiful consideration of materials, colour and elements that combine into the studios, both below and above ground.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Stairs lack any architectural expression and have poor design content. Your use of furniture detracts from the overall design, especially the heritage bed. Add items if required that enhance your ideological response to the brief, not detract from it.

Turle John
Key strength of the scheme: Clever use of the studio being able to move to help establish the hallucinogenic nature concept. Interesting use of colours.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Disappointing that never saw your design until the end of the submission. Would like to have seen further development of the stairs as an integral part of the design. Some arbitrary elements to the design, especially the above ground studio. Try to always think of your architectural ideology and what you are adding or subtracting to the design to help emphasis this concept. A more evocative entry to the below ground studio could have help establish as expectation to what occurs below.

Yu Vanessa Hao-Yan
Key strength of the scheme: Beautiful sculptural element and fantastic use of the artists work to bring colour and materiality to the design. The complexity of the above ground studio shape ties in nicely with your concept of ‘chaotic’.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Additional appreciation of materiality to the below ground space would have helped in the understanding of what is solid and void and what is suspended in space (hard to read in present form). The circularity of the below ground space is so strong that it tends to dominate the studio and the suspended concept of the space is partially lost.

Zheng Chloe Yifan
Key strength of the scheme: Well establish and innovative development of your original ideas to the final studio models. Interesting collection of shapes and colours that help establish your ideology. Well thought our spatial consideration of what it would be like to be inside the studios. The connection of the below ground studio and how it relates to the ground line is very well considered.

Most significant weakness of the scheme: Try to avoid extraction of a 2d image to create a 3d response. Opportunity to work with your forms but have them sitting forward and back to help establish more interesting response to the brief. Opportunity lost in making the stairs relate more to the architectural spaces and integrated more into the design philosophy.

















































No posts.
No posts.