Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Experiment 1 Feedback

Experiment 1 Feedback

The intention of publishing the feedback below is so that all students can benefit by understanding the strengths and weakness’ of a range of projects. Please take the time to review other students work with these comments in mind. If you have any questions or would like any further clarification don’t hesitate to ask me during the studio session.

Ashley Marie Wells
Strength: Thorough documentation of design considerations from conception to final proposal.
Weakness: Final design did not entirely resolve complex forms and architectural elements.

Benny Shuo Zheng
Strength: The scheme shows an endeavour to maintain consistency between hand-drawn section and 3D architectural model.
Weakness: Did not utilise the section(s) in the animation in order to show important design features, such as the roof and stairs, and their relationship with the rest of the architecture. Uses of textures in 3D model do not enhance or emphasise aspects of the design.

Chenghao (Roger) Tang
Strength: Early progress of exterior architectural form derived from sketched section.
Weakness: Lack of high detail in the resolution between stairs+architecture, interior+exterior, materials+form.

Demas Rusli
Strength: Final combination of three sections and its development into a cohesive architecture that considers interior and exterior formal relationships.
Weakness: Sketched sections and textures lack consideration and care, especially when compared to model.

Dong-Hyuk (Alan) Kim
Strength: Richness and variety in the custom textures which explore different techniques and patterns.
Weakness: Unresolved model makes it difficult to distinguish draft models from final developed model.

Hei Cheng Carol (Alexandra) Ong
Strength: Final sketches, textures and architecture are all highly developed compared to the drafts.
Weakness: Simplistic stair design that feels isolated from the rest of the architecture.

Millicent Lakos
Strength: Cohesiveness of architecture and its juxtaposition to the stairs. Evidence of experimentation in the sketches.
Weakness: Rushed textures and sections seem to lack evidence of care; should consider drawing a lower quantity to a higher quality.

Nasuha Abd Salam
Strength: Persistence throughout whole design process to develop sketched section into 3D model whilst maintaining key aspects.
Weakness: Less experimentation in the production of custom textures compared to sketched sections. Also low quality scans/photographs of some sketches.

Rachael McCallum
Strength: Presentation of sections and textures has been considered. Attempt at a difficult and risky scheme, whilst endeavouring to resolve spatial relationship between stairs, architecture, entrance and studios.
Weakness: More care and consideration required in the sketched sections and textures.

Rosemarie Still
Strength: The precision and care put into both sections and textures to create delicate yet vibrant drawings.
Weakness: Simplistic external form of architecture does not seem cohesive with initial concept drawing nor stair designs. Addition of some complexity could give building orientation, selective (rather than generic) views and a spectrum of privacy/publicity.

Sarah Cao
Strength: Collection of sections demonstrates drawing experimentation and spatial exploration.
Weakness: The selected section seems to be a “safe” choice, whilst the skills demonstrated by the student evidently show they are capable of taking upon a “riskier” challenge. Did not capitalise on the use of the “section” to reveal significant aspects of the scheme in the animation.

Shamma Hasan
Strength: The final stair design and relationship to the interior space.
Weakness: Sketched sections could be improved greatly by a steadier and more considerate drawing technique that uses finer line work.

Tao (Keith) Xue
Strength: Good use of section cuts in the animation that communicates the multi-level connection between stairs clearly.
Weakness: Inconsistency between a highly developed and articulated staircase and a simplistic one which lacks thoughtfulness.

Tayon Rahman
Strength: The submitted textures show evidence of experimentation and the intent to create a variety of patterns.
Weakness: Poor quality scans of images, textures and sections. Did not submit animations of SketchUp model.

Uzair Shaikh
Strength: Sensible and controlled arrangement of spaces that suggests a very intentional spatial relationship between each artists’ studio and gallery.
Weakness: Animations do not highlight the features of the architecture; their composition seems to lack control.

Veronica Ho
Strength: Clever arrangement of spaces to create a public point of interest at the entrance that harbours movement in six directions of space. Use of sectional animation capitalises by showing the most predominant aspects of the design.
Weakness: Sketches and textures would benefit from a more considerate graphic presentation.

Xinyun (Alex) Cheng
Strength: Cohesive architecture that pays particularly attention to openings and resolves the junctions between opposing geometric forms. Sections and textures are drawn with care and consideration.
Weakness: Poor quality scans/photos of both sections and textures.

Yaqi Guo
Strength: Below ground staircase flows smoothly from above ground space. Early signs of a consideration to capture architecture dynamically using strategic points of view.
Weakness: Lack of understanding of the section and its use to describe space in architecture.

Yi Lin
Strength: Precision and care evident in sketched sections. Gallery stairs are distinctly prominent and addresses the entry.
Weakness: Small scans of textures. Resolution of the roof structure and its relationship to the rest of the architecture seems only partially resolved.

Zhiyou (Amie) Fan
Strength: The architecture as a whole is unified and shows evidence of interior and exterior consideration. Sections and textures are detailed and demonstrate thoughtfulness.
Weakness: The stair designs, although modestly allowing the architectural form to flourish, do not seem to contain equal levels of consideration.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

File hosting on MediaFire

MediaFire - Free File Hosting Made Simple
MediaFire - Free File Hosting Made Simple