The element of art that describes the usable interior space of an architectural form is known as “space”. This element encompasses the volume of a structure, the parts of a building we move through and experience. The dimensions of interior space, like spatial form, are directly related to the nature of a building’s structural system, such as the strength of its materials and the size and spacing of its.
The four key types of spaces in architecture are physical, perceptual, directional, and interwoven space, shaping built environments. The diversity of users in this group includes designers of workspaces, pattern makers, and pattern makers. Primary spaces represent the main function of the building, while secondary spaces make those primary spaces usable. These form the masses that enclose usable space.
The efficiency of a building design depends on the type of occupancy, the percentage of interior walls versus open spaces, and the efficiency of design. Some buildings have a balance between positive and negative space, creating harmony and stability. The Colossal Olmec heads are examples of the elements used to describe the usable interior space of an architectural form.
📹 Form Follows Function in Architecture
Form follows function is one the most important ideas in Modern architecture, yet most architects don’t fully understand this core …
What is a shallow surface sculpture called?
Bas-relief, also referred to as low relief, is a technique whereby the images are not markedly projected from the background and are situated in close proximity to the base plane of the sculpture.
What is shallow space in artwork?
The term “shallow space” is used to describe a lack of depth in a visual representation. This can be observed in images where the subject is two-dimensional, such as a flat tree with a flat flower, with no mountains in the background and no elements in front of the tree or flower.
What is the interior space in architecture?
Interior design is the process of selecting and arranging interior elements to create a visually organized space within a room. This often involves the incorporation of nonload-bearing partitions and suspended ceilings, which serve to modify the structural framework or shell of a building.
What element of art is used to describe the usable interior space of an architectural form?
The term “volume” is used in the context of art to describe the usable interior space of an architectural form. This encompasses the three-dimensional space occupied by a structure and is of great importance for both aesthetic and functional design considerations.
What is the context of the artwork?
Contextual information is crucial for understanding an artwork, as it includes factors that may have influenced it or its creator. It can enhance our understanding by providing additional information about the time, culture, and the artist. All artworks exist in multiple contexts, with historical context being the most basic and often overlooked. Artist context, which includes the artist’s background, culture, and other influences, is also essential for understanding the artwork’s historical context. By incorporating contextual information, we can gain a deeper understanding of the artwork and its creator.
What is space as an element of architecture?
Space is a crucial element in architecture design, as it is continuously studied for its usage. Architectural designs are created by carving, creating, and dividing space using various tools like geometry, colors, and shapes. Erdem Üngür, a German interior designer, highlights the undefinable space of architecture in his article “Space: The undefinable space of architecture” on Academia. edu.
What is the space form in art?
Real space in art refers to the feeling of depth or three dimensions, and can be influenced by the artist’s use of the picture plane. Negative space is the area around primary objects, while positive space is the space occupied by them. The relationship between positive and negative space can significantly impact a work of art. In this drawing, the man and his shadow occupy positive space, while the white space surrounding him is negative space. Artists like Pieter Saenredam create the illusion of three-dimensional space in two-dimensional works through perspective drawing techniques and shading.
What basic two dimensional element is used to define space in art?
Shape and form are essential elements in defining objects in space. Shapes have two dimensions, height and width, and are usually defined by lines. Forms exist in three dimensions, with height, width, and depth. Shapes are dominated by rectangles and ovals, while forms have depth, width, and height. Three-dimensional form is the foundation of sculpture, furniture, and decorative arts, and can be seen from multiple sides, like a sculpture of a rearing horse.
What are the four types of architectural space?
Architectural space can be divided into four types: physical, perceptual, directional, and interwoven. Physical space refers to the actual volume of a structure’s footprint on land, while perceptual space is the perceived space a building occupies based on a fixed viewpoint. For example, a window in the interior of a structure can increase perceptual space by pushing through the glass to the exterior.
The exterior of Hadid’s Rosenthal Center for Contemporary Art, a 91, 500 square foot structure, is characterized by its use of glazing, concrete, and black metal materials. The façade is organized into different sized squares and rectangles, creating an irregular rhythm that provides visual interest for passerby.
Directional space refers to the way a structure guides users in and through it. Non-directional space allows for open spaces that allow for wandering in any direction, while interwoven space is very open and allows easy access to adjacent rooms. Overall, architectural space plays a crucial role in shaping a building’s overall design and functionality.
What is the space around a sculpture called?
Real space in art refers to the feeling of depth or three dimensions, and can be influenced by the artist’s use of the picture plane. Negative space is the area around primary objects, while positive space is the space occupied by them. The relationship between positive and negative space can significantly impact a work of art. In this drawing, the man and his shadow occupy positive space, while the white space surrounding him is negative space. Artists like Pieter Saenredam create the illusion of three-dimensional space in two-dimensional works through perspective drawing techniques and shading.
What is considered interior space?
The text defines interior space as enclosed areas with roofs and walls that restrict outdoor air flow. Subleased premises refer to the airport lot portion as outlined in the site diagram. Landlord’s work includes constructing tenant improvements, while tenant’s work includes improvements, alterations, fixtures, equipment, signage installation, and furniture placement for the permitted use. Tenant’s work includes all necessary or appropriate work described in the Work Letter.
📹 How I Develop Innovative Architecture Concepts (Museum)
Architecture is the school of designing buildings, outdoor spaces, communities, and other environments, usually with a certain …
I just finished my university degree in architecture and I won’t lie I fell out of love with it towards the end, your articles have genuinely ignited the flame of passion I once had, making me realise the beauty behind design, giving it real purpose in society. It feels so bogged down especially in the uk where I’m from, there’s nothing inspiring here everything is copy and paste, great job with the articles you just gained a new subscriber please keep making more!!
I take pleaure in modernist aesthetics and I prefer the “form follows function” modes of design. I think there is beauty in an elegant, honest, and willful use of resources and materials that harmonizes with the ecosystem that we take part in. But the functions should be free and up for interpretation – beauty, practicality, inspiration, convenience, homeliness, intuitive interactions with moving parts, various social experiences, a sense of safety, or even provocation of action and thought, they can all be functions to design for and give form to. There’s a lot to take in, in these articles, and i do my best to understand!
I am really glad I saw this article. I recently tried to explain to my students the difference between modernism and postmodernism in architecture and design. I’m not an expert in any of this but I have lived long enough to see that interesting transition between the optimism, perhaps excessive, of the Modernists versus the cynicism and capitulationism of the postmodernists. The modernist believed that society would become increasingly equal and more democratic and more socially responsible. They boldly built skyscrapers in New York City where the you could see, from the curb where you exited a yellow cab, the lobby and elevators of the building, unencumbered and unprotected and only interrupted up by transparent glass doors. The post modern skyscraper is a fortress with no windows for as many as 10 stories (Bonaventure Hotel, LA). It accepts inequality and builds fortresses for the ruling class to feel protected and comfortable while living in ersatz fantasy world that often look like theme parks (“Viva Las Vegas” anyone?). So they put Chippendale hats on skyscrapers, or worse, twelve dancing gigantic angels on a chateau roof on top of a skyscraper (580 California Street). The pomos are relativists who pimp out their trade to the corporate cynics who have given us a dystopia.
Construction, no matter what will be always done to create a needed space. For resting, cooking, shelter, working, etc. You will be subject to the space you have and the money or materials that you can count on. One of the goals of the architect, is to make those spaces confortable physically in use and for the eye. The rest, I would say is a matter of personality. Both, from the architect and from the people who will use the space. A good architect will understand the need of his client, his taste and will be able to apply its knowledge to create the building that will fit his customer’s needs.
Fascinating. Thank you. As an architectural layman I admire forms (and their characteristic functionality) that have evolved through natural selection over geological periods of time: honed by nature and natural forces (including human activity). Many of the British Victorian-era designs (e.g. large railway stations) were based on mechanical aspects of plant biology (form and function).
Design is a basic human need, encompassing functionality, practicality, and aesthetics. A design solely focused on aesthetics tends to lack longevity as users may find certain elements awkward to use. On the other hand, a design purely based on functionality, neglecting aesthetics, can lead to user dissatisfaction and lower sales. Achieving the right balance between these two design aspects is crucial for a successful final product, although some degree of tension is inevitable. Throughout history, functional considerations often took precedence during the design process, with aesthetics coming later to enhance the appearance. Users attribute different values to functionality and aesthetics, and the market adapts accordingly. Simplicity and the “less is more” principle have been key factors in design for thousands of years. Principles like association/grouping and flow diagrams are vital in achieving practicality while contributing to the overall beauty of the design by creating order and coherence.
I prefer the Asian way of looking at things even if there are hints of pseudo science… but buildings should be about the energy the create funnel and absorb… so in a home how do you want to feel at home while eating reading a book sleeping? How do you want to feel when you return home? So design based on what you feel and how it creates harmony in your life
Brilliant article. It doesn’t matter if one agrees with the content or not. It is brilliant. I would love to see your views in your designs, how you conceptualize architecture. I perceive architecture as a way to frame society. If enough buildings have large balconies that protrude at least ten feet from the building with lookouts into the street below and the city beyond, that street becomes a main street, and the city itself becomes a beautiful place simply because it has been deemed worthy of attention. Architecture sets the stage in which human life takes place. How that is translated into design is not to think of buildings only as exercises in abstract design, but for abstract design to follow the purpose for which the building is intended, or in other words, form follows fuction. I see architecture as a good way to frame human life to make people happy. I’ve never concerned myself with style beyond universal aesthetic concepts of forms that flow so well that they emanate serenity and peace. Architecture has always been about branding. Name one example where it has not done so. Cathedrals, temples, parks, old and modern buildings have always branded something, either power, greed, an excessively large ego, leisure, capitalism, consumption, and a belief in a higher power. All along the way, artistry has hitched a ride to justify those founding principles of architecture. The problem today with architecture is that it has become too sterile, too much about winning design contests and not make the world a better place.
Functional spaces that are “like trees …where no elements are connected to other elements” reminds me of integration and connectivity diagrams in college that showed a functional modern apartment building with one main exit having no pedestrian paths crossing along the street versus traditional row home entrances with many paths crossing each other along the street.
Wonderful. Thank you. In architecture schools this wholistic study is never! presented and God knows why not! We architects leave our educational institutions blind and ignorant of the history and without that there is no substantial future hence why we’ve become slaves to client programs and consumption. I always knew that I didn’t want AutoCAD or Revit now but it’s forced down our throats and these programs have altered our work forever in the wrong direction.
About a year ago I started digging deeper into ancient architecture and sacred geometry. I wanted practical information yet knew there there was a spiritual connection too: I couldn’t find what I was looking for. Just the same generic information about Telstra numbers and such. To think you were out there making this content as I prayed you would, makes me feel so grateful. 🙏 Many thanks, Australia.
I just found your website, interesting article! I feel that the “form follows function” doctrine definitely has merit. BUT I also feel it is often forgotten what function can be other than the material needs: we are human beings and as such we have psychological needs – fresh air, rooms filled with daylight, “non-utilized” space that acts as a buffer, etc. etc. It makes me especially sad when I see those needs getting more and more ignored; just the other day I read an article about how some people want to make it legal in NY to build windowless bedrooms. The purpose of architecture of not making people depressed and miserable is an important yet often neglected function!
Sat down with my notes to write everything down as i wanted to dive a bit into the theory of architecture as college is all about drafting and planning, at least in the first year. But damn!! Its too complicated and a simple phrase “form follows function” isnt perhaps simple at all. Thought i had understood it when it was mentioned in class but god i was wrong. After perusal this article i am even more confused. But it was knowledgeable an insightful. Maybe i should watch it a couple more times and read a few books to fully grasp or at least a little bit of the whole functionalism concept. So many povs on a little phrase is really interesting. I wish you had broken down everything in a simple manner for people who arent aware of the terminologies much.
I’m glad I came across your website. Learning more than I did in school. With everything said, my thought on these is that function is often neglected these days because it brings about complex decisions that could counter your forms when considering natural lighting, ventilation, and comfort. Modern architects try as much to cut corners and rely more on artificial means in order to achieve extraordinary forms forgetting humans rely on the natural environment.
I wanted to be an architect, but I felt the education was disconnected from the building process and actual design. So I became an engineer. But still as a sub I feel divorced from the building, I provide a code compliant solution. The A/E world is so divorced from the building development, construction and needs after construction. I tell people I am a professional etch a sketcher. We need to merge all these philosophies into a multifaceted approach. For example Wright was in many ways a post-modernist, he created a brand of what a Wright building is. His symbols and buildings were logos icons and advertisement for Wright’s philosophy/architecture. How does having a brand affect the architectural practice? What if architecture designed around a company/client philosophy? We all know the Nike logo, what about a modern architecture that defines classical victory in the same modern way? what if a Nike style building could become part of the brand narrative AND be function for business operation and integration. A Nike building would be instantly identifiable, and operate with the needs of that business model. Art + problem solving & client image. The same should be true about how drawings and design are used for deliverables, how the A/E teams solves construction and site problems varying we integrate/operate with the trades, and how we deliver to the client. form and function must evolve beyond construction for the whole lifecycle of the building, maintenance, new owners, change in occupancy and technology, even demolition.
This is my first year in architecture school and I find myself rejecting the teaching being taught in my university, the main reason for this is I feel like it is centered around modernism as a way to reject colonialism but I strongly believe modernism promotes consumerism which was created by colonialism and imperialism. This movement regressive and our educators are stuck in the Industrial age, a lot is at play here.
I feel that Post-Modernism is correct that the “form follows function” is not the best design philosophy but I also think post-modernism solution is overly gluttonous and worst then modernism. Let’s look at the extremes. A completely functional building is a hospital. It is very rare (at least in America) where a hospital visit or stay is pleasing in any respect. No one wants to be in a hospital. But let’s look at the opposite, Las Vegas in terms of post-modernism. The existence of Las Vegas is 100% unsustainable as a community. What I think needs to happen is a revision of the modernist principal in a way that elevates form from being just an after thought over drywall. A principle like “Function follows need and form enhances function”. Yes function is first considered but then the form serves to improve that function. This is the difference between a regular chair and an ergonomic chair. They both serve the same function but the form of the former enhances the function of the chair. The problem with “form follows function” is that it makes form an afterthought to function. Buildings become steel and silica square products to serve functions instead of places people want to work and live at. Serving function without consideration of need is why Shibuya Crossing isn’t permanently closed to car traffic. The pedestrian has more severe greater needs then vehicle traffic at that intersection, so why maintain dual function to detract from the greater need. And the form of that intersection changing it into a walking plaza should serve to enhance that function.
Our human condition requires us to find meaning and purpose in what we do. Unfortunately there has been a fair amount of manipulation thru the media, in the bluring of the important, the necessary and the essential. Without clear sign posts for guidance, Architecture too, has become muddled in a state of confusing messages…’form follows function’ remains one of those truths that has stood the test of Time and society’s fickle need for change…for change sake. As we are faced with decreasing natural resources and the challenge of climate change…we will…revert back to a logical approach to creating great environments that respect the human spirit and the real need to survive, in our ever evolving social structures. A kinder city should emerge…hopefully. (Retired Architect)
I´m studying architecture, and I´m going, to be honest, maybe it wasn´t for me, but I´ve concluded that architecture is the science of human-environment development. It is not only the artistic part or the logical part; they both come together to create human spaces. That said, I do believe that form follows function. But everybody sees architecture differently.
I am not even an architecture, I am a software engineer and I already knew that computer science have borrowed a lot of concepts from other branches, most importantly from architecture, like design patterns, etc. But today I have learned a lot that I think, will improve my knowledge on my area of expertise, as computer scientists has also gone into similar debate like form vs function, but with different terminology, object-oriented vs functional programming.
Thank you very much, this article-essay and website in general are very helpful and interesting! Even though I’m from visual world, but not architect I believe form should follow basic human needs(which is oddly excluded from those existing principles) and only then make function possible. I mean true human needs which are beauty and mental stability, they are strongly impacted by environment. Also I believe all crazy experiments and capitalism influenced ideas with artificially constructed values and desires will gone and people will not have to escape cities in free time asap to stay sane and healthy. I admit all the mathematical and engineering beauty of modern and post-modern projects, but they’re better to stay on paper, because this is not for human to exist surrounded by these.
Basically what is the need to build skyscrapers? To accommodate as many dwellers as possible from different walks of life according to the needs of the ‘modern world’ for various purposes! Now if the skyscraper is fulfilling what the people(only those that are being accommodated) actually need from it then that’s all that matters! The world is ever evolving because humans made it possible and the rest of the people that need to evolve learn to adapt accordingly! Definitely a farmer will have an otherwise look at skyscrapers but I believe his children or, his grandchildren will have a prospective look at it! Well, what I’m trying to mean here is ‘what is function to compact & creative forms?’
I happen to come across this article by coincidence upon initial (separate-side) interest in architecture and general design-oriented careers. I happen to take greatest interest and research in system, diagramming, function, behavior, etc in general abstract. I cannot emphasize the greater significance this article/topic reaches and the ideas different in degree you have introduced to me. I love how you don’t just expand into architecture but rather its environment; or another way I could put it: instead of just form, emphasis on function(s) or rather of greater significance, role. I cannot applaud enough how great this article is!!!
In an ideal form all things present are used. What causes us to feel naturally compelled to perceive beauty is that we have learned in the past the appearance of function. The need for community and private space must be considered part of the functions to be balanced within the design of a building.
I’ve stumbled across this article when researching level design for article games. Most games have levels which are made to fulfill a function and I was looking into ways to break this pattern while also keeping the game entertaining. I do feel a bit smarter now that I’ve viewed this article, thank you for making it 🙂
I think all of these types/eras of architecture are important and at least till now (6th sem in architecture school), I want to merge the parts I like of all of them. Traditional architecture has a lot to teach us. I find it fascinating how people designed buildings back in the day: the materials and the design making even the harshest conditions livable without the use of any mechanical systems. We should try to revive those kinds of architecture. The beautiful, beautiful ornamentation making the architecture just breathtaking. Though, I don’t think most people in the present day and age would be able to afford such ornamentation in buildings. Unless we mass produce them which I feel degrades the value of those crafts. Nonetheless, those art forms should be preserved. Modern architecture is perhaps my least favorite period of architecture, both in design and philosophy but I don’t completely hate it either. I hate that modernism created this sterilized architecture that removed social spaces. I hate that everything was supposed to be purely functional and nothing else. I hate that modernist architects (at least, ones I know of) advocated to remove any and everything that had anything to do with past ages of architecture. I don’t think that goes with how humans operate. But I don’t hate that modern architecture happened. It allowed us to learn from its mistakes and more importantly, move forward in architecture. ‘Form follows function’, as well as ‘form and function go hand in hand’ are both good ideas in my opinion, just that their execution was poor because modern architecture/architects aimed for sterilized architecture instead of architecture where humans can thrive.
This is deceptive because it says a lot of things that are researched, but then says a generalization that reveals a total lack of comprehension of the material. The idea that meeting places or social spaces were not considered under “form follows function” is a conflation between utilitarian values, industrial capitalism, and modernism. Modernism simply posited that concepts have no inherent symbolic form. Postmodernism counter-posited that while abstract ideas do not have forms, no idea is truly abstract because to be an idea is to be bound to people, which do not live in abstract. Because of this, symbolic forms are concepts in and of themselves, and therefore have meaning. It’s simple really, modernism doesn’t say no gabled roofs, it says do not put gabled roofs in places that need to prioritize cooling over precipitation. Post-modernism says if your idea of a house has gabled roofs, then to build your idea of a house, you use a gabled roof, even if it’s not the most efficient form, because if it was any other form, it would no longer be your idea of a house.
It seems to me that architecture no matter what else is a material containment of space and scale. Most of the best architecture is essentially a material impossibility. And yet the measurement is the human being and we have learned to accept the spaces we are given. As an artist-musician, I have come to realize that any material spatial expression creates not only the spatial pattern but also the visual and aural resonance of that space.. It is perceived through the human senses and it is because of that assertion, I make these statements.
I’m not an architect, nor a designer, nor an artist. However, as someone with an enduring interest in architecture, systems thinking, & urban/regional development, I finished this article with the distinct impression that this is one of the most important and thought-provoking articles I’ve ever watched. I also happen to be a fan of the later works of Christopher Alexander (A Pattern Language, etc), so there’s that too! Thanks for this thoughtful work.
The example of the Greecian facade on the bank not following function is in error! One of the primary functions of a bank is to convey confidence that the bank is a very secure place to keep your money and that it will be there for a very long time. It doesn’t have to look like the Parthenon, but this is where modern architects betray their profession by not being sensitive to the “owner’s”real needs vice building the cheap looking structures where the principle motivation is creating the architect’s identity. While the Gothic cathedral certainly doesn’t fit today’s religion practice in form where people try to recreate god in their own image and have the living praise singers and dancers to entertain them, undoubtedly Gothic form greatly followed function when they were built in providing the inspiration that this was truly the place where the real Almighty God lives. Yes I watched to the end and must agree with you many structures of today fail the form follows function principle as well as fail to provide anything artistic … or even aesthetic! Deconstructionism is an example of modern architecture pedaling “invisible clothes.” However, it should be recognized in the pursuit for architectural perfection that the economic and financial workings of today generally place a premium on cost when settling in on form.
影片探討「形式追隨功能」在建築中的演變，從路易斯·沙利文的原始概念到現代主義與後現代主義的詮釋，強調建築應該反映其功能需求，而非單純追求形式美學。影片還提到，現代建築師面臨的挑戰是如何在設計中平衡功能與社會需求，並探討了後現代主義如何將建築視為符號和品牌的載體。 (00:00)(youtube.com/watch?v=DaxODmFnN6U&t=0.719) 建築中的形式追隨功能 – 羅伯特的建築中形式追隨功能} – 探討形式追隨功能的演變} – 路易斯·沙利文首次提出形式追隨功能} – 建築的形式應有機能需求而生} – 德國功能主義運動和包豪斯對形式追隨功能的影響} (02:37)(youtube.com/watch?v=DaxODmFnN6U&t=157.379) 建築中的形式追隨功能 – 傳統建築中形式和功能不分} – 現代主義建築對大規模生產和科學突破做出反應} – 建築師剝去建築物上的裝飾，展現純粹的形狀和形式} (05:15)(youtube.com/watch?v=DaxODmFnN6U&t=315.78) 建築中的形式隨功能而變 – 建築應根據使用者和機構的需求設計} – 建立功能性圖表並圍繞該圖表進行建築設計} – 功能主義的空間實踐將個人的日常生活與城市網絡連接起來} – 功能主義的都市主義源於設計師放棄傳統城市複雜結構的實踐} (07:53)(youtube.com/watch?v=DaxODmFnN6U&t=473.28) 建築中的形式追隨功能 – 物體的形式必須實現功能} – 符號和品牌的生產} – 所有人是否具有相同的需求} – 形式追隨符號和象徵} – 建築被重新詮釋為一種溝通形式} (10:31)(youtube.com/watch?v=DaxODmFnN6U&t=631.56) 建築中的形式追隨功能 – 1960年代末期對包豪斯方法的強烈反彈} – 建築圖解技術的誕生} – 建築圖解被完全放棄} – 後現代主義批評現代城市中的居住環境} (13:08)(youtube.com/watch?v=DaxODmFnN6U&t=788.639) 建築中的形式追隨功能 – 後現代主義者認為社會已經演變成純粹的消費社會} – 後工業城市中創造了虛假需求來強迫人們消費} – 建築師創建建築物作為品牌，讓人們產生虛假需求} – 後現代時期城市成為高端產品以供消費}
There’s a great deal of thought and theory behind all of this: a great deal of philosophy. I only wonder how worthwhile it all is. We’ve peoples choking in hideous or soulless or cynical architecture and I wonder if perhaps that might be because we’re thinking too much. Perhaps if we just decide we’re not gods out to improve people and simply find out what gives them joy. And then deliver that. And see what develops from it. Perhaps it’s our self importance that’s making people choke.
Depends on the end use mostly. I think its mostly form follows function but it doesn’t have to 100% of the time. I think they are intertwined like Frank Lloyd Wright said. I believe the best buildings/structures are the ones that take each into account. People want to work and live in beautiful spaces. A simple example is a garden in a house. They are both beautiful and practical. You could push it more towards the ornamental end in which cases its mostly geared towards beauty but they can be used to grow food, reduce stress, cultivate a skill, clean the air. Some of my favorite older buildings are Wrights waterfall house and most of John Lautner’s work
the expression “form follows function” does not belong to sullivan, but to an american sculptor who lived at the same time as sullivan and whose name I unfortunately cannot remember now. and in sculpture this expression really does make sense and it is literally visible (in the work of muscles, for example). in architecture it is complete nonsense. there is no more stupid and formally inarticulate phenomenon than the architecture of functionalism. if in architecture form follows something, it is not function, but fiction – form follows fiction.
There are no pauses, no time for breathing or absorbing what is being told, just sentences follow sentences follow sentences ra-ta-ta-ta-ta like a machine gun. So, if there are different points of view, one is not able to differentiate them. Just a rumble-jumble. 15 minutes of uninterrupted talk. If there is something to be understood, I didn’t get it. Do I have to play and pause it interminably every five seconds to really be able to listen it? Why!
The funny thing is that modernist architecture became less functional than traditional buildings. All the weird angles and shapes in modernist architecture arent very functional. So indeed traditional architecture is the most functional. Because it first designs a functional shape and on top of it just adds ornaments. But the core of traditional architecture still is just a very functional shape with some ornaments added on to it.
form has always followed function. The term was invented in the early 20th century as a marketing term to justify the rejection of the embrace of decoration in all the neo historical design movements of the 19th century. To assume that, in itself, it embodies some sort of universal truth of modernism per se is laughable.
I tried architecture school in 2010. I got accepted into an accelerated entry program where you complete the 1st year in one summer. It was so intense and I changed my major because of it. Fast forward through years of frustratingly purposeless call center and customer service jobs, I went back to school for a 1 year urban design program and graduated in July of 2019 and I am currently applying for MArch programs starting hopefully in August. I’m 30 years old which I still can’t believe. I’m choosing to go back to architecture because I feel that I am a designer at heart and I really just want skills I can market toward a number or design related professions. This is my last attempt at going back to school and I hope the experience helps me see myself in a new light and I hope good things come from it.
I’ve been perusal the website for a while now but this article is kind of funny to me because I’m currently working on my thesis project, an aircraft museum. I’ve skethed, write and think so much about it that it’s a bit all over the place and need to put it together. Is reassuring to see that your process wasn’t linear because mine hasn’t and is nice to know that I might be on the right track to something I could be proud of and that can represent my time studying architecture.
Im in my 3rd year of architecture school, and i still suck. My design just meh, my grades also meh, and honestly speaking it’s very hard for me for the last 2 years. In my 3rd year, which is right now, i felt that i need to improve & learn to enjoy this school.. but i feel so bad as i didn’t take the lesson properly in previous years, and it affect my dreams to fully enjoy & improving my skill. It feels like ive never learnt architecture and suddenly i have to face 3rd year student’s project. I feel so worthless. What should i do? I always feel like im not creative, only taking some design from pinterest and recreate it, very bad at drawing & modelling.. im so hopeless……. idk anymore.. i just want to improve my skill in architecture.. 😭😭
I just want to know how people make their designs structurally possible because even if I like a particular style and plan out according to it, I don’t know the details of such construction, which ends up in giving up or unrealistic and technically vague projects. Which materials do you refer to, to understand most of the construction techniques out there even if not in very detail? Please answer 😔
Thank you for the interesting info. I got please one question, if you can answer or any other archi student that would be awesome! Talking about the design process and this to come up with process, I actually still struggle with that! Or else I end up doing the worst project. Well I am trying to get out of that, and I am trying to find my way out. But still can’t find the answer on “How to come up with a Concept?” I keep having this question but no still can’t find any answers. I hope I can get some help, tips or advice from you! Thank you in advance