spacial perception....discuss

[DrunkenMonkey]

Hello

 

We all know that most clients have a hard time understanding plans and sections. So how does the use of 3d rendering, models and walkthroughs allow the client to have a better perception of space. What is it about their involvment in a 3d space that increases their understanding.

 

Id like to hear peoples views on virtual space and what the future and latest technology allow us to acheive in the sence of placing a client within a scheme.

[Crazy Homeless Guy]

with plans and sections you have to be able to interpret depth, distance, and space. you have to be able to read the line weights to understand what is in front, and what is in back. you have to understand that when something is in front, and you see a line, it might be a control joint, but the same weight of line, might also represent something that passes behind the object in front, if it is not contained within the outline of the front object.

 

as you can see, reading section, plans, and elevations can be quite tricky. i am sure towards the end of my paragraph above, you had to think about what i was saying, even though you are probably familiar with how to read them. now imagine someone who does not work with this stuff on a regular basis looking at this stuff for the first time. ....or at least really looking at it for the first time.

 

he/she might be used to interpreting reports, or talking to people, but lans and sections seem foreign to them. anyone can talk to someone, but not everyone is talented at talking to someone, or is skilled at the art of talking to someone. anyone can look at the section and plans on paper, but not everyone is skilled at understanding what the lines mean, and how they translate to real life.

 

it is our job to create images that help people understand what the lines mean. their entire life they have experienced space as they walk through a building or down a street. their entire life they have looked at photos of objects and buildings. their entire life they have watched tv or movies. they understand how space works in those mediums compared to how it works in the real world.

 

there is a common understanding that when something dissapears behind something in a photo or movie, that it is still there. it is just hidden by what is in front of it. we gre up with images and movies present in pop cultrue. few people grow up with plans and sections.

 

the first motion picture were of objects moving across the screen, and that was it. the one i am thinking of in particular was created in 1895?, it was 'l'arrivee d'un train a la ciotat (the arrival of a train at a station), by Louis Lumiere. it involved a camera sitting about 10 feet off a train track, and a train coming towards the camera, then passing by the camera. it made for a dramatic angle as the train approached, then passed. the people watching the movie had never seen a movie before. they ran from the room screaming because they thought a train was going to bust through the wall, and run them over. they did not understand the concept of movies, and how the space and medium of movies related to the space in the real world. they had to learn about a movie, and what it was. true story.

 

so now, 100 years later, everyone has a grasp of photos and movies. they understand the 3-dimensial space of a photo. so if we can turn the plans and sections into something familiar to them, it makes it extremely easy for them to understand.

[JamesTaylor]

the use of 3d renderings is a means of communicating something in manner a person can identify with from experince. this is what they see all day everyday, they are used to it and can comprehend it.

 

architects communicate via plans / elevations - they identify and comprehend the information from previous experience.

[afegadi]

bi dimensional graphics has that trouble of comprehenssion, even for people related to this professions, architecture and design. [they have to understand layers, linetypes, and weights of these plans made by others, with a differente way of drawing]

 

from the beginning, we [architects] have always needed to show that air captured in within those walls we design and want it to say, that is space and to show space we require 3dimensional models, if they are in wood, paper or plastic; or now that they are from digital water and light

 

now, with this new technologies, anyone who learn to deal with this softwares, can make 3d models

 

but you have to keep one thing in mind

the 4th dimension : time

time that you see in layers

time you feel in the same space, in of course, different hours of day, different months of the year

[IC]

Hmmmm. I was just thinking the first two definitions were far too coherent.

 

Good point about time though. Animations or walkthroughs are what give the real feeling of space. Some laymen find getting from one place to another on plan and how those places relate to one another quite tricky, especially when there are stairs involved.

[Finster]

I work in packaging, and 3d tools are bringing simular visualization changes to packagin as to architecture. I've been looking at "flat" proofs for so long it suprises me when someone can't see the 3d box it is going to be. We are now getting more tools that allow us to combine graphics with the CAD files and create quicktime movies of the box folding and rotating. It's an amazing tool to present to the customer. First, they like the techno-coolness factor. It's something they haven't seen before. Secondly, it give's them better understanding on how the product will look on the shelf - face out, side out, etc.

 

It can also quickly point out things that don't work, either practically or aesthetically. As many boxes as I have seen, I can still be surpised when graphics do not line up right across folds/scores, or ... worst case scenario... part of a UPC is covered up when the box folds up. The new tools available to us are a quick visual check and are becoming part of our QC process.

 

Just some thoughts from the print world.

[afegadi]

what about the perception of other related person and people with construction, but they dont do design, or at leat their work is more technical farther than architecture ?????

those people that make our design with technic, beacuse we spent hours, days, and month into one design, with a complexity of problems, needs and esthetic, but when we wanna make it true, some of these guy [from my experience down here, not to be generalized] they say, isnt too wide/thin for people, or for the light, or isnt too tall to paint it, too dark for a restaurant

But when is to get compromissed with the work he has to do, he simply says, "its your design", and they simply wash their hands when there is a problem

architects are problems solver from origin

so my point is, when you go to a doctor, and he says you have diabetes, you go to another doctor to hear another oppinnion, and move on to that reccomendations

why do not our clients, or associates do that with our ideas ????

just to think about it . . . .