collisions, architecture

[own1221]

Didnt quite know where to post,

 

Its for a studio project not totally relevant to 3ds max but I wish to use it, please read to understant..

 

Design - for a tribunal i.e. place where people with a disagreement come to resolve them, its like a court but less formal and there is no judge... just a mediator

 

My concept, explore the idea of conflicts.

 

My first idea/approach (which I haven't done yet) is use the surrounding trees, pedestrian paths, buildings, a bus shelter to "collide" with the building. This result in these things creating indentations, and incisions on the building. These "scars" may be made more jagged and the incisions become windows that allow light in which people can see from the inside.

Just that idea for now.

 

I'm thinking to showing the collisions almost diagrammatically, through a series of models showing each collision. I'm sure that there are many architects that sort of do this, just want some good examples to present this, and also how to model the collisions in 3ds max. I'm thinking either soft selection or boolean+smooth , reactor... any suggestions?

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

Is it a requirement to create a digital model of this at this stage? I would suggest exploring your ideas through sketch, and chipboard model before diving into a digital model. You will be able to crank out several studies and concepts in a fraction of the time. A digital model will probably get you bogged down into the process of how to create things, and bogged down by focus on details that simply are not relevant to conceptual design.

[own1221]

Isn't it possible to do some really rough, quick models in max?

 

I'm thinking really simple things little push pulling meshes not actually trying to model something directly.

[own1221]

Isn't it possible to do some really rough, quick models in max?

 

I'm thinking

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

yes, of course it is, and many people will agree with you. however, you must make sure you keep it simple to achieve your goal. the computer model is essentially scaleless. you can look at the model at any size. you can view it from far away, or you can get right up on it. even though it has a real world scale, it is essentially scaleless. one you are working with a physical model, you might work at 1/8" or whatever, and the amount of detail to get your point across is reduced because it will never be viewed larger than what it actually is in real life. also, if you are working with a chipboard model, it also is always going to be a chipboard model. you aren't going to get caught up in materials, or whether or not your grass is tiling because of a poor map.

 

so, if you proceed with the digital model, and it sounds like you are, make sure you stay focussed, and don't bother making it any more detail than what you would the equivalent chipboard model. ...i wouldn't bother texturing it either. you basically you need the person you are showing it to be able to fill in the detail with their mind, and not get distracted because the maps you are using are not of the best quality, or maybe they start reacting negatively because they don't think the concept was explored enough before you started thinking about materials. i know you need to be thinking about materials at this stage, but that doesn't mean that you need to be literal in the way that you are representing them. the advantage that you have is that you are presenting to someone with a design driven mind, so their ability to complete the details in their mind is greatly increased over a lay persons.

[Ernest Burden III]

Travis' initial reaction is probably the best one--just start drawing. If you can't draw what you're thinking, you probably can't build it. Some people think more sculpturally than graphically, so if that's you then start with cardboard, stiff paper of plasticine. Once you have a good direction then working in 3D will be much quicker because you will have the object internalized.

 

Good luck, and please post WIPs if you can, your project sounds interesting.

[AJLynn]

When I read your first post I assumed you were doing digital parametric modeling. Could you clarify - do you want to do Max models in lieu of / as a supplement to sketches and models? Or do you want to use Max because you want to do simulations of things colliding with your initial form, and the computer is the best way of doing it?

[own1221]

"Or do you want to use Max because you want to do simulations of things colliding with your initial form" - that was my initial intention, I didnt know if it could be easily done, I have made some simple reactor simulations e.g. car going though a pile of boxs, balls falling down ramps. I didnt want to be too realistic just a rough play of collisions.

 

Travis- yes I totally agree with you about the detail stuff, never wanted the models to be textured, detailed, just a series of quick models.

 

If someone could show me how to simulate a ball crashing a jelly like object in max that would be great! it might not be used in the end but worth a try ( i still use max 8 but have access if I have to to 2008) and any examples of architect's work that is relevant.

 

Will post images when I start these experiments.

[salvador]

Maybe, just maybe:

1) Jacques Herzog & Pierre DeMeuron

2) Coop Himmelb(l)au

3) Zaha Hadid

 

None of the above is strictly "de-constrictive" as what I assume is what you are looking for (IMO). But the dramatic (or should we say "dream-atic") way of treating the geometry of the buildings and the fitting into their context is certainly an inspiration for all the non-minimalist designers or anyone searching for the vast, sometimes unbelievable, possibilities of the form.

 

Hope this is helpful;

[AJLynn]

My old professor's firm: o-s-a.com

 

His studios have a tendency to make books that aren't publicly available. I've got one sitting around somewhere and it's full of stuff where people used some Max feature to simulate some physical operation on some site or building. Interesting stuff.