Maxwell Render | Official public forum

Well, here is a personal project i have just finished. But i will add some context to the images of what happen.
I have just finished Graduate design 2 and this was my project for the semester. It was required to use some art pieces to provide for the concept of the residense, although this was too forced, i chose a Palazuela piece. From the piece i took the layering of colors and made the argument that all the different shades and color could imply a sequence of spaces that if could be looked in 3d would reveal other planes and colors. From this i desighned a house in a highly priced residential area (key biscayne) on the shore. The house explored this concept by providing a transitional hose that provided a different sacial feeling that could only be realized once reached that point. i.e. from the front the scale of the home starts small in orther to ascend and it give the appearance of a volumetric home, nothing more. Before i forget the home had also had to have a gallery.
So, i developed the project and had various process for it that explained the large retaining walls, structure, bla, bla. Now we get to the final resentation and my turn comes. I GET TRASHED!!!! WTF. Spend literaly 45 min. talking about the GD renderings, no query about the project itself. Even with numerous attemps to clearly tell them to forguet about the renderings until they looked at the rest of the presentation, everything pinned up ofcourse. That it looked too real and that i had made decisions in materiality, well dhuu. We are in grad design 2 not undergrad design. At the end the concensus was that i should of had a concept of a house and not a realistic home.
What the heck is going on with schools in the US. They push and push these conceptual architecture that is fine for undergrad exploration, but for the semester before your thesis? Am I that wrong in thinkig that a project should be developed in its entirety?
Whatever i don't even enjoy these images anymore, specially after spending 4 days in developing them and taking my attention away from my pay projects.
The other point about these images, not even my professor is a license architect, neither the four other women that attended the jury. Isn't this a bit abnormal for this level of education? i mean i worked ata firm for two years with my "professor's" ex-boyfriend, and they are all Cad-Monkey just as i was for six years, and here they are trying to convince me how the real world is, making sure that a superiority line was drawn on their side, hypocracy is what i say. I would pay to see their faces if they found out i have already designed built a house in Spain, not Ando, but my first baby.
Anyway, you probably can tell my frustration, and than you for reading if you got this far.

Well, enjoy, maybe somebody will. I know there are a few mistakes, please forgive me it was all done in three and a half days.

I like them all, you did all this in 3 1/2 days?

Do not remind me, althoug i guess that it really is 3 and a half days times two, since i only took a couple of hours of sleep. The plans and the project were developed during the semeater. I guess it is much eassier when you know the project and exactly what you want to see. No clients
Thanks.

My guess about the critique is that you didn't have enough conceptual "proof", a narrative or sketches or whatever to explain why you were doing the things that you were doing, but I wasn't there so I can't say for sure--if you want another opinion you could send me PDFs of your boards (I teach studio at the Boston Architectural College)

To be honest, I may have been just as harsh (or even more so--I've been known to "outlaw" cg techniques in studio since many students get hung up on presentation technique instead of the development of ideas) about the renderings if there wasn't enough design work presented to justify the concept(s)

The other thing to remember is that critics are people too and sometimes they're wrong. . .

i love the last one @

These are really great images mate, regardless of the time-scale. Knowing nothing about how the courses are run, I can only remark on that

Cheers,
Dr Merman

The other thing to remember is that critics are people too and sometimes they're wrong. . .

Thank you, you just hit the nail in the head. I have been a jury in many undergrad studios, always going with the mind of frame that my critique is suppose to be a constructive one, and not a preMadona attitude. The funny thing in this case is that although all of the process was there, they all decided to jump straight onto the images and critique the one thing i do not think that ir should be chastazed, esthetics. I am of the believe that an architectural work, weather you like its esthetics or not, should be looked always first as a concept that works or does not work at whatever level. i.e. I've have found myself in conversations with many students and "proffesors" (typically the unexperienced ones) that started sue to a coment such as ..'Calatrava Sucks'. I do not think that anyone is in title of making such a statement about any architect. One can say 'although i do not like the projects i have to admit they work in concept, plan, or program. Lately i have been heraing this a lot about Zaha, Calatrava, Gehry, and PEI. And always putting them second to the one firm i do not understand, Herzog. The only projects i do like of them is the winery in california and the Museum, greatlu detailed and followed. Yet their later projects to me lack the level of detail and connections that i would expect from them, Even REM with his bold and rough connections inspires more thought to me. Yet i would never say i hate their projects based on sthetics. I guess my school, even tho i only took a two year brake from undergrad to grad, is now consodered old.
The other issue i have is that school have and are pushing the digital arena as much as they can, and will accept a crappy rendering of a project that in reallity hurts the project and makes the student fixed with the image and not the project.

or even more so--I've been known to "outlaw" cg techniques in studio since many students get hung up on presentation technique instead of the development of ideas

I agree with you on that as well. I never touch the computer ntil the last week of a project, also because for me is money as well, but mainly because i do not agree with it. But what happens when you have someone that has a level of controll over the computer, and can project what he/she wants and not what the computer gives them.
This is aproject that "Rhino" did mainly because i know the student who is a best frend doing master in Penn, and i know that he just learned houw to beguin to use nurbs and nurbs controll him still.

[/quote]

Teaching/critiquing should be done without ego and most of us seem to forget that. It's difficult, especially in design profession. There should always be something good about a project, and if there isn't it's your job as a teacher or critic to figure out why there isn't and offer a response to rectify the situation. I think most design instructors get into teaching as a way to stroke their own egos or torture their students the way they were tortured in studio.

I was on Archinect a few weeks ago and was disgusted by the rampant "hating" of other designers. It doesn't help; it doesn't make you a better designer and it certainly doesn't make you a better person. I know I'm guilty of trashing Gehry, Zaha, Herzog (I do like that winery though), and others in the past--I'm just not going to do it anymore. It doesn't make me a better designer, though being able to articulate why I don't find a particular building successful in a constructive way might…The profession has problems and some of them stem from studio culture and the inarticulate egomaniacal instructors that we've all come across.

but I'm on another rant about architecture and this is a forum for Maxwell.

So--

I do like those renders of yours

lol

Could not agree with you more. Thanks!!

Hey man the images look great and you should forget what those jury members said about your work. I always hated going to jury it always seemed like a big waste of time to me. You have a group of people who are supposed to be there to help you out by giving you constructive criticism but nine times out of ten they don't know what there talking about. I'm supposed to believe that they can understand in 10 minutes what took you months to plan and build. You’re also talking about people who are usually academic architects instead of working architects and to me there is a big difference in the two. Add to the fact that they weren’t registered and I can see that most of them have no practical experience in the design build process. These people usually have a chip on their shoulders anyway and they are really there to put you down and make them selves feel superior.

Gahhh this brings back bad memories.

Although in the real world 3d imagery is used all the time, when using it for presentation work at uni you're just asking for a kicking as I know only too well. Because you present a series of convincing images the tutors usually assume that you havent thought through everything ( especially if others before have pinned up doodles ). Therefore they'll make a point of reaming you out.

If I had to go back to uni I'd still use the computer but I'd use it to provide underlays and freehand over the top.

besides that plan... di you have sections, elevations all the works?

what University are you attending?

i

Well, Leo. Obviously there were four more boards with sections and elevations and about seven physical Models. FIU, and regretably the faculty is getting wors every year. Last year i had the opportunity of working with a IM PEI protege, that worked on many known projects with him and Gehry. So the issue is that there is no balance.

You'll find that some teachers are more open than other (or should I said less close minded).

You can either:
A. Give them what they want... even if you don't fully agree on their teachings
or
B. Do what you please and have controversial jury.

Also, don;t expect school to be anything like the real world... even at the graduate level.

B. Do what you please and have controversial jury.

Always

Also, don;t expect school to be anything like the real world... even at the graduate level.

Leo,
It seems that you are giving me the sma espeech. I know very well what the real world is like. I have to deal with it in order to keep my company alive. Besides, i have worked for 3 counties, a major construction company, and three Architectural firms. all combining eight years of work esperience; experience that has allowed me to design build a 6,000 square feet home overseas. But thanks anyhow mate.