This year there is a workshop prepared and given by instructors from our faculty every week. The true core of this project is to make us feel more familiar with computer programs that enable us to design and represent designs that would be not very convenient without using an online software. There are many programs attached to our agenda and in this week, we start with SketchUp: an intuitive way to create 3d models.
Before lecture started our instructor made several important arguments about the common understanding of computer programming and how it is useful to us. There is no proper “knowing” a software which many designers aim to achieve. You can never fully “know” a program. Even the people who created that code that allow this program to work do not fully make use of the programs full capabilities. We should instead strive to know enough about the software that gets the job done. If you solve your problems using this you know this software. Simple as that. And also we are in the age of endless knowledge that is so very easily accessible to everyone, anytime that learning what you aim to solve should be the ultimate goal knowingly.
Our other instructor showed how to first grasp the overall basic structure of SketchUp and how to get accustomed to it. We learned how to draw, push to get 3d objects, move surfaces and how to multiply several elements. We saw how to work in several components, edit groups simultaneously and offset geometrical elements to get various results.
The endless possibilities of this technology also allows us to create quick render-like images that allow the main idea to come through in an organized and realistic manner using help from Photoshop.
I am very excited to start using SketchUp more and produce models that will have a gigantic effect on my designing process.
Because of the rich character and well-designed nature of the Middle East Technical University Campus, our instructors decided to take us on an educational trip to experience this campus. Our aim in this study was to vary the studio environment where we learn by experience to also affect our ability to design by seeing and documenting those different uses of design solutions. This trip was a continuation of the on-going studio times that will continue to shift environments from time to time in order to observe and analyze different design problems and how we can shift these solutions to implement our design problems in our own projects.
We also focused on the specific spatial use of
“hinge” in these buildings. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the word “hinge” in this architectural context, a hinge can be defined as how two elements are connected. As hinges in the context of attaching doors or windows change and adapt as the elements that are being connected to differentiate, hinges in the architectural means also adapt to differentiating conditions.
For example, if two elements form a junction or corner, they cannot just do that without any reaction to one another if they are not the same element. This results in a hinge solution that is unique to every design problem. Although these conditions are unique, we can also take note from these instances and apply a similar approach to other problems hence our trip to METU.
While talking about hinges, it is wise to ask how a hinge can be identified. There are no specific rules about this condition but it can be said that hinges are an in-between state between being considered as a gap or a mistake. This gap should be proportionally in a way that acts as a part of a plane. At certain parts reaction of one element to another can be in the form of a hinge but we need to ask ourselves whether it is a space or a hinge. Space can also act as a hinge but we need to draw a line between spatial hinges and surface hinges. The surface use of hinge can be used to exemplify certain spatial qualities but a spatial use of hinge can directly act as a space that is the result of two reacting spaces.
Proportionally the hinge is very small therefore it is experienced as part of the connection between two critical elements and not as a space/element itself. The use of light in surface treatments is also important when it comes to altering the spatial experience of the space.
Hi everyone, we started to explore the concept of mapping in the first step of the mapping assignment. In this step, we are supposed to divide the given image into 5×5 pixels and change these pixels’ transparencies. These alterations should be according to criteria which are a complex one containing at least 2 criteria within itself. It is like the effect of one on the other that can be seen through the different degrees of transparencies. So it can be said that they are interlinked.
While doing this assignment, making the differentiation clear and readable therefore consistent within itself is very important. In order to accomplish this the difference between the pixels can be altered drastically to make it more visible.
Another interesting aspect of this assignment is that whether it is wise to keep the overall idea of the image. This is an abstract representation and mapping should reflect this mindset so designing an abstract design is encouraged more.
Research about the passage and Adolf Loos
” In 1908, the Austrian architect, designer, and theorist Adolf Loos published an incendiary treatise entitled “Ornament and Crime.” The essay equated the use of ornamentation in late nineteenth and early twentieth century architecture and design with the destruction of culture and society. Loos felt strongly that ornament had no meaning or place within contemporary culture, even going so far as to argue that ornament actually hindered society’s progress. Specifically, Loos viewed superfluous ornament as an epidemic, one that contributed to the obsolescence of objects. He advocated for simplicity, because simple objects never go out of style and therefore would be treasured for all time.
Even today, Loos’s questioning of the role of ornamentation still resonates within the architecture and the decorative arts communities. Academics, critics, students, artists, and curators regularly discuss and debate the topic, asking themselves such questions as: What purpose does ornament serve the design of an object? Is it simply a function of style? Does ornament contribute anything meaningful to objects today? “*
“All of these reasons are suggested in architect Adolf Loos outrageous 1908 manifesto “Ornament and Crime,” an essay designed to infuriate fine artists, as it suggests they are decadent if not infantile, stuck in a primitive state of mental development. “The evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament from objects of daily use,” Loos declares, flatly rejecting the idea that lack of ornament implies an ascetic self-denial—and then proceeds to insult anyone who might disagree. For those who ornament their bodies with tattoos, he declares, “The modern man who tattoos himself is a criminal or a degenerate. There are prisons where 80 percent of the inmates bear tattoos. Those who are tattooed but not are not imprisoned are latent criminals or degenerate aristocrats” (or post-collegiate hipsters). Of those who like to dress up, he wonders how they can stand to “walk about in red velvet trousers with gold braids like monkeys at a fair.” Of the impulse to paint, he explains that “Erotic excess” drives painters to make their marks on canvas, the way caveman marked walls and vandals graffiti lavatories. Those who look to the past in nostalgia to revive the accoutrements of past luxuries, he says “impede the cultural development of nations and humanity itself,” and are thus “criminals.” In response to the fallacy that planned obsolescence in fashion creates more work and thus propels the economy, he suggests that the Austrian empire be burned to the ground every so often so it could be the most prosperous nation in the world.”**
Personal comments and ideas
In “Ornament and Crime”, a strong opposition towards the use of ornaments in everyday objects all the way to large buildings is sensed drastically. The creation of these is thought to be a waste of much-needed labour. Also he had two main ideas that supported his anti-ornament ideas which were that it is a misuse of the valuable worksmanship of workers and that it harms the mental health which results in the dellaying of the improvement in society and culture.
I think Adolf Loos’s ideas are very compelling and attractive towards many people because of its use of relatable but also harsh critisizing comparisons. He made a really good use of the interconnected ideas which is that with the missed labour the health is also affected. But also, he was short to draw somewhat clear distinction between what is an ornament and what is not. When these differences arent that much studied in an expression which centers around the abandoning the use of ornaments, this expression is weakened.
References for the reseach
In this assignment, we were asked to study the relations and their variations through planes and lines. Working through physical models and drawings at the same time really helped with the overall design of the constructs. As the first stages of the assignments, we had very specific requirements to fulfill like down to the exact dimensions of the planes and lines. This helped us narrow down the decision-making process in order to start designing efficiently.
We did not yet attempt a more complex assignment where there are lots of design problems and design parameters to control. Therefore these assignments are very well designed in the core that these basic assignments still hold their significance and challenging problems are still creating learning environments and discussions on how things are done in the studio.
The main goal of this assignment, in general, was to open new ways of discoveries. Below are the first attempts for the next steps which go to a more complex design problem every time. But because we learn as we go, each assignment kept its difficulty.
After the critics, we had the chance to revise the models;