How is this stuff done,..??? any idea,.?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Vicente Soler on September 17, 2009 at 7:26pm

Some of them seem more artistic than anything else. No need for rigurous parametric modeling. They could be done in many different software, even Autocad (i wouldn't try it).
You can always ask David for a "create cool-alien-like-structures" component. One input could be an "awesomeness" threshold.

Permalink Reply by Luis Fraguada on September 17, 2009 at 7:43pm

That made my early morning...

Permalink Reply by voronoiii on September 17, 2009 at 9:24pm

Hahaha,.. ok,... Any one else ,.. any more guesses,.??

Permalink Reply by oladayo on September 18, 2009 at 1:15am

the second image was done by a friend of mine from sci-arc and the model was basically done with maya.....

Permalink Reply by SamuElf on September 18, 2009 at 1:48am

Definitely, David should create more such component or even better component called: "the Architect". Then, we could define which architect, in that case, Zarah Hadid...

Krish, there are no one push button to generate such complicated and unruled geometry. Seriously, if you don't understand a geometry, how can you solve the structural needs and the bloody fabrication. Giant fast prototyping machines doesn't exist!

In a era where ressources and energy is getting scarce, I don't understand this trend of fancy no sence look like organic buildings. They just look organic in our human perception. Nature builds things with define physical and biochemicals rules, and this is why when they grow, they look like that. You should study Frei Otto publication from the 80's.. the IL publications. They were using physical models to generate physical structures that would be build in the physical world. Computers and softwares are dangerous as we distach from reality.

We put all this effort to generate these fancy forms, but no brain is put in structural optimization, energy efficiency (for instance in relation with the sun, or other natural elements)

IT technology goes faster than the time we have to reflect about it. (not talking about the technics).

As Frei Otto told me personally in our last discussion (talking about philosophy and architecture): " We have to define the OPEN QUESTIONS. Once these questions will be defined, you'll get answers".
I think we are getting to a question here: " How to use this technology to solve problems in Architecture?" Before that " What are the real problems in architecture?"

Maybe David should make a component for that? For instance, a button that could solve the loging and infrastructure problems for these millions of people living in the slums of Mumbai...
What about that Krish Raj?

Permalink Reply by Ritchie Jackson on September 18, 2009 at 2:59am

Precisely !
The question should be "Why is it done?" rather than "How is it done?"

Permalink Reply by Damien Alomar on September 18, 2009 at 8:01am

Great Response..."Its cool" is almost never the reason why things get done, and its a poor explanation in light of the actual issues that architecture has to deal with.

Permalink Reply by voronoiii on September 18, 2009 at 11:24am

.

Permalink Reply by voronoiii on September 18, 2009 at 11:26am

Thanks for your reply,.. First of all, I did'nt post those images to start a debate about Architecture and tools, Also knowing about how some things are done is not wrong, My intention was just to know about the tools through which those things are done. Later its the matter of application of those tools, some people missuse them some people use them in a better way
I have'nt studied about those buildings(or)Art (images that i have posted), So i dont want to make any generalised comment over them by dragging Zaha hadid or ghery into this issue, If you have studied about them(the images) and made comment then its good for you.
""We"" put all this effort to generate these fancy forms, but no brain is put in structural optimization, energy efficiency (for instance in relation with the sun, or other natural elements)"" I dont agree with the word "WE" thats too much of generalisation,..
Lets not let this small topic branch out into something which was not intended and make it too personal and emotional at this point/thread.
But i really apprieciate for posting about Frie Otto, i would like to look into his publication

Thanks

Permalink Reply by SamuElf on September 18, 2009 at 3:32am

For Gaia?
Then Maya will save us.. great! Thanks Bulut

Permalink Reply by voronoiii on September 18, 2009 at 11:33am

Dude SamuElf,.. Maya/3Dmax/Rhino/Grasshopper can never save us or planet,...
It was just a straight forward answer for my question by bulut,..
Please dont divert the issue, Lets not prolong this, thanks for your time.