Research paper comparing Generative Components, Dynamo and Grasshopper

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318748973_Comparative_eval...

I've found this research paper weird for a few reasons:

1. It talks about data trees approaches as an important (almost crucial) element to learn a computational design tool. Why?

2. It talks about 'Liveliness' and it's only using an example so basic that nothing would be non-lively, unless I'm missing something. Except for his issue about non-baked objects not being locatable, which is fair, but I'm pretty sure I don't want all my stuff baked all the time.

3. No mentions of the visual elements of programming in each software and how that makes a product more intuitive to learn, understand, decode. But Maybe is because the authors probably never understood the value of design and visual UX in these kind of tools?

4. No mentions at all in this paper that Robert, If I understand correctly, created Generative Components and now works with Autodesk developing Dynamo? Only credit says:

Robert Aish and Sean Hanna, The Bartlett School of Architecture, University

College London.

Kind of weird, ugh?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Aaron Bourgoin on August 21, 2017 at 6:42pm

the link to the article is missing/broken.

Permalink Reply by gustavo fontana on August 21, 2017 at 7:33pm

sorry, here's correct link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318748973_Comparative_eval...;

Permalink Reply by David Rutten on August 22, 2017 at 5:07am

As for (4), there is some problem here about not being open about affiliations, but as far as I know Robert Aish no longer works for/with AutoDESK at all. He was involved heavily in DesignScript, but was not given the resources to properly develop the language. I'm not sure he was ever involved with Dynamo.

I read the paper a while ago but found it confusing. I was having a hard time figuring out exactly what the methodology of the research was (someone at McNeel with a stronger grasp on academic publications is looking into it for me). I also felt that the particular case presented seemed somewhat cherry picked.

RSS