what about the contents...

[alexandre]

hello everyone,

 

as this forum is getting more and more "philosophical" i'd like to have your opinion on that age-old subject of wrapping vs contents in architectural visualisation: i.e. is state-of-the-art-rendered poor architecture (or fantasy) more impressive than moderately-well-rendered fine designs ?

 

many of us out here depend on the quality of our clients' designs to showcase our own production and have too little time to do personal projects or tests - how do you feel about that ?

[STRAT]

personally speaking it doesn't bother me.

 

architecture like art is completely subjective/objective. there is no right and wrong.

 

in all my years of proffesional work i dont have 1 architectural visualisation (which is 100% of my daily work) of my own design in my portfolio. I've produced literally hundreds and hundreds of images and models but not 1 of my own design.

 

This completely doesn't bother me atall. not one little bit. and to be honest i dont have the time for personal projects. I do wat my boss breifs me on. shitty design or beautifull design - means nothing to me. i got such a passion for my work i put as much into each job as my dead line and budget allows, so each job to me i take pleasure in showing my work. for me, if i no like a design im given then i model and visualise and compose it to look good and enjoyable to work on.

 

but on the other hand, if i won the lottery and could retire tomorrow and just do CGI with no worries for the rest of my life then still, i'd probably stick with architecture. And in this aspect the answer for me is this - no matter wat the design is, the more time and effort put into it, the more i'm impressed.

 

um, does this make sense?

[nisus]

Hi lads,

 

Here I my thoughts about the two questions:

 

1) wrapping - content:

 

Although this depends a lot on the topic, I think initially wrapping and eventually content wins the battle.

 

Why? Whenever you sell a product (buildings, cars, books,...) people assume that the content is great or okay. So when first seeing a project, content only matters for about 7% of the whole presentation. This means that the way how you sell things is very important, much in the way that you only have 30seconds to make a good first impression.

 

But - although content is initially responsible for only 7% - if the product is NOT good, it can ruin your first impression totally. Therefore this 7% is eventually is very important.

 

So if one only makes good projects, wrapping is the way to go. This way, content is not an issue at all.

If one has a bad product/design but still want to sell it - basicly you fool the client - wrapping can hide a lot of course, but content can bring it all down. This way, content is the goal.

 

But this is really an ethical question...

Sometimes in real-estate content is not an issue, because lots of contractors only care about realizing the product, not if the end-buyers are happy in their homes/shops/offices.

 

I still presume we want to make good things, not make bad things, or betrade on our client, but many says I'm living a virtual life.

 

Anyway trouble water is not deep, clear water is! Making lot's of smoke and steam is just a way to hide something. I think it's better to put energy in a great design than in finding houndreds of ways to fool a client.

 

Unfortunately good designs presented badly won't win the game/battle either. So I think both are important and do matter a lot!

 

2) presenting not your own design

 

This is just your choice. If you want to design, design! If you want to visualise, visualise! If you want to visualize your own designs, do that!

 

Personally, this does not matter to me. It is so subjective, and you don't discuss taste, colors and woman .

I just try to make something great out of anything, just as long as I don't have to lie.

 

But if you got a problem with it, don't do it!

If you don't like the situation that you're in: change it! If you don't change it yourself, don't complain

Eventually, you're the only one controlling your own life and although one is made to believe this is not true, it is!

 

rgds

 

nisus

[alexandre]

thank you both for sharing your thoughts;

 

nisus, hell, i'm not complaining - i make a good life out of cg and, even if i'm a trained architect i find real pleasure in doing it (and i've been doing it for ten years)- don't get me wrong- but sometimes, just sometimes, i'd rather work for calatrava (hi, jeff) than for the local carpet-seller

[Jeff Mottle]

Originally posted by alexandre:

i'd rather work for calatrava (hi, jeff) than for the local carpet-seller [/QB]

Me too. I don't work for Calatrava..I wish...I work for a office interiors company, so I'm in the same boat as you. I just really like Calatrava's work, thus my avatar.

[nisus]

Hi all,

 

Actually I don't want to work for a famous architect. In the past, I've worked in the office of a famous Belgian (female) architect, but it's hell. You'll allways be a number, just doing your job, seeing them once and a while. There not interested in you, it's pure profit.

 

Being a partner in our firm, we meet lots of famous (Belgian) architects. We speak to them personnally, they rely on us etc.

It's another level. We work with them as a partner of a team on the same level of the principal architect.

 

Even yesterday, we were debriefing a project for a campus in Versailles (France) with the leading architect and a few employees whom I use to study with.

They don't take important descissions, it's up to the boss. And we cooperate with him.

You got another view on the world and the working these offices too.

In the past I knew how one office worked (or mainly how it didn't) and all about a few projects, now I have a good view uppon lots of offices in belgium and even more projects.

I used to work along the employees, whereas now we work with principals. That's just so great.

 

rgds

 

nisus