Cathedral

[William Alexander]

Here is a "Modern" take or Cathedral Form revisited with Modern Construction techniques and Materials. Just conceptual in nature.

 

Primarily looking for Crits on improving the Illustration.

 

Design, Architecturally, is fully open for comment- synthesis is heavily aided from a 'historical' charactor. Being of a religious slant I hesitate to go heavily into the subject, although it's just a 'story', for all practical purposes.

 

ADT 2005

Max 6 MR

Multiple passes comped in PS

Dirt, additional texturing, sky and general T/U in PS

 

BTW the horizon is off a bit, imho (kind of like 'DAH')

 

Thanks

WDA

[kicks]

[MooseDog]

cool model and great modelling. i'll leave the design and construction thoughts to the engineers

 

as far as the image, it doesn't do justice to the design and its intended purpose. i would think you'd like it to be more "heroic" for lack of a better word. historically, cathedrals were meant to inspire awe upon seeing and entering them. perhaps a lower shot looking up as one approaches. also remember the rule of thirds when creating an image so as to hold the viewers attention and draw it to where you wish. volumetric lighting tends to accomplish this as well.

 

great project so far, keep going!

[STRAT]

not a fan of the rendering much, but i'm certainly chuffed by the design. like a cross between SW ep 1 and l.o.t.r. very impressive. can we see some elevations and a few close-up wires?

[William Alexander]

Strat,

 

Chuffed huh, is like chaffed in a good way? BTW I so enjoy you Brit's vernacular,

 

Well, looks like hyper focused on the design (again) and missed the Illustration mark. It was a combo Archy Design & Illustration competition. Ran very short on time (Tunnel Vision).

 

Link to thread, with sketches, some other views & info.

 

http://3dallusions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=310

 

A dangerous question, if you choose to answer: What would make you a fan of the Illustration?

 

 

 

 

Thanks all for the comments!

 

WDA

[TheAllusionisst]

I thought it was a very interesting idea to use supports along the force/thrust vectors of traditional flying buttress, I thought it created 'complexities and contradictions' to quote Venturi. I think since the excercise was to create a wonder, you needed to stretch the boundries of what we expect, I think you did that.

[STRAT]

chuffed = happy yup, us brits got some funny terms

 

love the sketches.

 

why dont i like the illustrations?

 

thats probably my hangups and not your rendering. im personally not a fan of conceptural or wip looking imagery (hopefully not offending you here m8). i always like a clean photo-real-as-poss type of image. but as i say, thats just my funny opinion.

[speedline]

WDA...great work!! impressive and imponent the scale

I'm seeing new images here, very well.

I like the architecture in solitude.

Cheers

[salf]

mmmmmmmm.........

 

Dont know how to say it, but.....dont quite like it....but thats just subjective remark.

 

I know is just conceptual, but even at that stage, it obvioulsy looks that the building doesnt need all that structural effort you made with the side supports (sorry, dont know the term in english) even if you take away all those supports, the building stands still, it wont fall. Atleast thats how it looks like.

 

I think it suits you more if it was a sci-fi scenario, since all those side supports, currently look more like "plugged cables", you know?..like a life support system or something.

 

Dont take me the wrong way, just saying my thoughts.

[William Alexander]

(hopefully not offending you here m8)

The "Second Skin" is thick, from another boards crit, "hope I didn't give you sun burn with that blazing crit", my response; "I use Sunblock with SPF 10,000".

 

It's a none issue by me, plus I respect your "Minds Eye" and the Cosmopolitan or Urban sense you so often capture in your renderings. Real familar look to me, similar climates maybe- close to large bodies of water, that ever present haze and impending fog.

 

Thanks for the comments. I would really like to take this bugger to ultra photo real. It's going take some creative mapping, comp and a little patience-lot's of raytracing going on. Ran a test in C4D, trying to grab the beauty GI pass, deadly slow even with minimal radiosity settings. Going to have to work on that one!

 

Speedline,

Yes, I'm not done with this just yet. First maybe a double barreled weapon for my friend the cop with the lazy eye, it's about 45 degrees out of line! LOL

 

WDA

[William Alexander]

mmmmmmmm.........

 

Dont know how to say it, but.....dont quite like it....but thats just subjective remark.

 

I know is just conceptual, but even at that stage, it obvioulsy looks that the building doesnt need all that structural effort you made with the side supports (sorry, dont know the term in english) even if you take away all those supports, the building stands still, it wont fall. Atleast thats how it looks like.

 

I think it suits you more if it was a sci-fi scenario, since all those side supports, currently look more like "plugged cables", you know?..like a life support system or something.

 

Dont take me the wrong way, just saying my thoughts.

Salf,

 

Plugged cables, no they look like blasting caps in plastic explosives (C4).

 

The columns are tensioned tubes (rods create the flutted effect). Mountain top side wind loading and being theorectically in Japan earth quake issues. The "buttresses" being tensioned should be able to eliminate harmonics and allow for flexing of large 'face' areas- kind of like polygons. The hierarchy of mass allows for a very tuned and flexible approach- in theory! My theory (excuse;) ) to design this way.

 

Thanks for your thoughts, I have had some of the same.

 

WDA

[salf]

c4 cables , eh?.....lol

 

Ok, i understand after what you explained that you are considering inherits conditions of the location, wind, earthquakes and others, heres my thoughts:

 

1- Still the building could survive an earthquake type of movement without the "tensioned tubes", of course, im saying this based on what i see, not doing any structural calculation. Sure the church is pretty high, but it appears to be long and wide enough to handle that height. So slenderness is not an issue in here, of course, bellow the earth level you'll have some really huge foundations.

 

2- Now, the wind effect, the "tensioned tubes" are actually not doing nothing. Why?...theyre not tensioned. Theyre curved, and will tend to rotate along the imaginary axis between their 2 ends, unless theres some kinda of secondary structure that will "Tie" all of them together in a longitudinal axis.

 

Youre trying to "Tie" the church on some point, lets say on the top, and then "Pull" this structural tube down to the earth, there you anchor the tube on the earth with a concrete foundation, of course the church will fall down towards the side its being pulled, but because youre doing this on both sides, it will be standing.

 

But to achieve this the "tensioned tubes" need to be straight, not curved.

[William Alexander]

salf,

 

That's Structural 101:) .

 

Now consider a bow and arrow- the bow and the tension created. I'm splitting hairs, but with the bow the linear vectors of force (your straight lines) are implied, and the extremes are conditional on the properties of the tubes/bow.

Now this is just out loud theory thinking. The ability to dampen forces (waves) with hydrolics and a 'lantency' time to respond (greater evaluation) and evenly apply a countering force. A dampening of the countering force would be inherent, albiet not really required.

 

A practical use / application......

In the trades this sort of thing is called a 'spring board'. A 1x4 is enough to create some pretty imposing forces. It's very flexible and strong- used for straigtening walls that have very heavy bows in them, before capping with a floor holding them in place. Steel framing and historically wood framing.

 

 

Also being able to trade lots of mass in the columns for asthetic/structural element to make up the difference. The series of arcs and actual vectors work like a truss- being very similar, in volume, to a buttress made out of masonry components, and many are, arcs- described as flying. There is still much debate as to how they work- but they do, go figure.

 

I'll certianly concede this is not a very practical solution, even if it's feasible. Then again twisting and distorting buildings for asthectics.......

 

Thanks for your feedback,

WDA

[bully712]

Interesting Design... I would like to see a night shot...