Exp2 Feedback

Below is the feedback given to each of you for experiment 2.
By posting it to the blog the intention is that you will get benefit out of seeing how your peers assignments were assessed.
They are in no particular order.

Vasilia Dokos
Key strength of the scheme:
Use of textures and combination of concepts into an overall scheme, and experimentation with inside/outside spaces while still having clear destinations or focal points
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The placement of the monuments within the landscape and the limited consideration to the approach of the visitor to the site.

Tiankuan Xie
Key strength of the scheme:
The concept of ‘dynamic’ and the way it works against the Phenomenology monument is well developed
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The development of the landscape to bring the students together is unclear.

Natalie Carleton
Key strength of the scheme:
Use of the landscape to situate the scheme and provide unique experiences. Light is well managed to highlight the concept and link the spaces together and is successfully captured in the images chosen
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Detail elements could have been incorporated to highlight aspects of the scheme, particularly throughout the landform

Bach Trang
Key strength of the scheme:
Consideration given to the various student approaches and integration of the concepts to preserve the site while allowing a symbiosis between inside and outside
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Detail elements such as the stairs and grating could have been better integrated into the scheme as they currently seem obvious additions

Nell Hardy
Key strength of the scheme:
The combination of concepts is quite successful, and is reinforced through the use of textures and moving elements
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The positioning of the monument within the landscape, despite being reasoned for ease of access, misses the opportunity to engage with the concepts of symbiosis and flexible space more 3 dimensionally.

Alex Galego
Key strength of the scheme:
Unique development of the landscape and use of the waterfall to link the monuments physically and conceptually
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Bridges and stairs don’t seem to share this conceptual link and are at odds with the overall scheme

Amy Meng
Key strength of the scheme:
Lighting and materials are well used to convey the concept of phenomenology and the relationship of the water to the mountain walls adds to this concept
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The approach taken to bring students together in the scheme is unclear and the positioning of the monument and it’s scale within the landscape could have been better developed

Yunjing Guan
Key strength of the scheme:
Development of the parallax concept is well developed, opening up views within the monument and encouraging movement through the space to reveal new spaces.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
While the bridging of the river shows promise, the bringing together of the students is not well demonstrated. Images are not well chosen to demonstrate concepts such as parallax from a human scale

Jiang Qian
Key strength of the scheme:
The combination of the two concepts into the one monument is achieved well and the porosity section does take on quite a monumental form.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The relationship to the landscape could have been better resolved and the approach taken to bringing the students together is unclear

Robert Lam
Key strength of the scheme:
Scheme is well placed to emphasise the monument and begins to suggest areas for bringing together students to experience the space
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The surrounding landscape development and its link with the monument is unclear, as is the monuments development from the original concepts. Textures are unfinished.

Matt Lomax
Key strength of the scheme:
The concepts are well thought out and represented in the axos. The final scheme is well positioned within the landscape to connect and provide views for the students
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The glass texture is overused and missed the opportunity to ‘create’ views, especially as the concept of parallax was used, and has resulted in an empty space. Other than connecting the two sides of the river there is little development of the landscape and the bringing together of students

Yan Chuyue
Key strength of the scheme:
Consideration of the landform and how the students approach the monument in relation to memory and cooperation is well thought out as is the use of framed views within the monument
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Despite the landscape being well developed for the approach to the monument, the monument itself and the way it sits within the landscape could have been further developed, especially considering your ideas of symbiosis as ‘two parts connected together… can’t exist or perform without each other”

Cayle Horder
Key strength of the scheme:
Application of textures to highlight the concepts is quite successful. The use of the bridge to link the landscape physically and conceptually  is well achieved
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The positioning of the monuments within the landscape, ie, burying them within the cliff, tends to weaken the concepts, especially in terms of ‘dynamic architecture’. The approach of the students through the landscape (not just the connection of the bridge) seems to have been neglected and the images could have been better chosen to show the monuments from the human scale

Dimitar Taseski
Key strength of the scheme:
Design of and consideration given to the approaches of the students through what is a well developed and complex landscape.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The monuments having much the same relative sizes and proportions miss out on an opportunity to represent the viewing angle and disparaging shape concepts

Kaung Myat Htoo Kyi
Key strength of the scheme:
Textures are well chosen and applied to the scheme. Positioning of the monument to allow access underneath while bridging between the two hills is promising
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Landscape is underdeveloped and the approach taken to bringing the students together is unclear.

Hanlin Zhu
Key strength of the scheme:
Layering of the circulation space around the ‘phenomenology’ space to allow for different experiences of the same space from different angles
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The positioning of the monument within the landscape could have been improved to better demonstrate how the students move throughout and are brought together

Andre Sanossian
Key strength of the scheme:
The application of textures and use of detail elements combine well to highlight the concepts of the monument
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The landform and how the monument is situated within it could have been further developed in 3 dimensions, as could the approaches of the students

Todd Norcott
Key strength of the scheme:
Concepts are well represented through the linear repetition of changing forms and the axis of view towards the river
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
The approach to bringing the students together is unclear and the monuments positioning within the landscape could have been further developed in 3 dimensions

Sam Rich
Key strength of the scheme:
Relationship and interaction of the monument with the landscape is well demonstrated through use of colours and enclosure to frame and reflect the views
Most significant weakness of the scheme:
Approach taken to bringing the students together through the landscape is unclear and the landscape in connection with the monument could have been developed further in 3 dimensions. The 18 axos are incomplete

The bridge... Maybe a bit of a different take on what a bridge could be. While it is designed to move boats up or down a canal without the need for lochs it might inspire some ideas about habitation within a bridge, the use of lifts and the movement of people

This is a flowgraph showing how to get an object to move backwards and forwards after pressing the 'k' key

Concepts - Steven Holl and Kisho Kurokawa

Kisho Kurokawa
Metabolist / Dynamic architecture
Flexible interchangeable reversible extendible
City changing with people
Technology as an expansion of humanity

Symbiosis
Outside and In
Old and New – Technology and Natural
Cultural exhanges – KL Airport

Abstract Symbolism
Cones, spheres Pyramids as symbols for many cultures

Steven Holl
Phenomenolgy through the use of Paralax/Angled Views
The experience of the architecture – spaces changing and revealing itself
Psychological experience through materials and form

Preserve Site and Memory
Not impacting environment – Hang Zhou Triaxial Field

Porosity
Of building envelope, people movement, light

Hinged Spaces/Interactivity
Flexibility of space – similar to metabolist idea of dynamic architecture

Exp2

Check your blog links

Hi everyone,
can you all please check your blog addresses that you have supplied, as some appear to be incorrect.
Check them by clicking on your blog in the tute group list on the right side - if they don't link to where they should let me know as soon as possible in the comments of this post.
Cheers
Jules

A moving section example

I've posted this in previous years as it was relevant to the client (Jacque Cousteau) but it still holds up as an interesting take on a moving section to tell a story - and clever set design



It's from the movie "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou"