Sketchup at AA
-
I read the article and could not really understand it fully but I got the impression that he was being negative about sketchup without really knowing it. I know exactly the kind of argument that states that sketchup drawings are "ugly" and that the app is not for precision work because I have heard it a few times at my own school.
thus I decided to drop dear sam a note:
@unknownuser said:
I came across your text on sketchup just by chance and a number of reasons put in the mood to write to you.
firstly, i am an AA graduate myself, an ancient one at that since I got my diploma in 1980! secondly, I am a sketchup enthusiast, a daily user and a moderator in the main sketchup forum.
my comment to what you wrote is somewhat tangential. I just felt it could interest you to hear the opinion of a hardened user.
- the models people put in google earth do not represent the real power of sketchup. they are just skin deep models unrelated to design and construction. the view many people have of sketchup as being an app for amateurs is totally wrong. the fact that mateurs can use it for their own ends should obscure its enourmous value for architects.
- I use sketchup in class and in practice as design tool as it allows one to construct forms rather than to represent them (of course, the same could be said about many other apps).
- with sketchup I recovered the pleasure of drawing that I experimented in the old times of pencil and paper.
- some of the main points in favor of sketchup are its short learning curve, the enormous amount of resources to be found on the internet, and the fact that hardly a week goes by without a new plugin being created for it, most of them free.
- today you can model virtually anything with sketchup, thanks to some incredible plugins.
- my focus is design, not archviz. sketchup allows me to concentrate on that.
best regards.
being an AA graduate I can say it does not surprise me in the least to find such a criticism coming from there. it used to be an important place as far as architectural discussion is concerned. during my time there some of the tutors were, just to name a few, rem koolhaas, bernard tschumi, peter cook, zaha hadid, rodrigo perez de arce, among others of the same caliber. however, in the last two decades it became an inconsequential and snobbish place with very slim ties to reality, where simplicity is berated and complication is mixed up with complexity.
of course, for people who think like that sketchup is too simple, it lacks the glamour connected with more expensive and fashionable software.
-
It's worth re-reading the original quotation.
I dont think he is being negative about Sketch-up...
@unknownuser said:
This has caused much snooty tutting from the massed Grasshopper and Maya ranks that make up majority of the school
The users of Maya and Grasshopper are negative towards it.
@unknownuser said:
These are on the whole amateur products
I wouldnt disagree with him that the bulk of the contents on the 3D warehouse are just that.
@unknownuser said:
And when we start to look closely, isn’t there some kind of strange sublime operating in the SketchUp landscape?
@unknownuser said:
What if we just looked into this landscape. What would we see? What would we learn?
Is this not the crux of the article...What can we learn, understand, gain from Sketchup? Is there a use for it beyond producing an image of a model we have crafted?
-
just read the comments on the article.
if you havent already you should check back and see the second to last comment.
@unknownuser said:
Just to clarify, the post wasn’t a criticism of SketchUp in any way!
In fact, it’s a fantastic tool...
-
bocomofo
You may be at the heart if the matter. Although there could be debate as to whether or not the article is ,or is not rapping the SketchUp knuckle, the tone , and dramatic overuse of metonymy and hyperbole (sorry , couldn't resist)....
What I mean is, the article says nothing, all the time insinuating that the writer has an almost Shakespeare like brilliance.It seems to be catchy at the old AA. Below is the abstract form a dissertation by one of it's students. (with apologies to Mr Shah for singling him out.) Sound familiar?
the full dissertation can be read at.. http://www.generativeart.com/on/cic/papers2005/30.MahnazShah.htm
The Modular: An Analysis into Generative Architecture
Mahnaz Shah
PhD Candidate, Architectural Association, School of Architecture London
Abstract
Le Corbusier’s city grids, domestic layouts and the Modular are generally considered to be expressive of the spatial innovations of the new sciences, thus providing an homogenous, quantitative, infinitely extensible continuum.
Jack H. Williamson [1986] reads this into the alleged ‘dematerialization’ of Le Corbusier’s interiors and christens it the ‘anti-object paradigm’. He considers this spatial development to be parallel to the loss of autonomous individuality under the new collectivist and determinist social and psychological sciences.
Andrew McNamara [1992] similarly reads Le Corbusier’s grid as an evidence of a desire to collapse all boundaries – natural, spatial, social and aesthetic – into an undifferentiated field. Le Corbusier is apparently committed to imposing this field at all levels, ‘to transform it into a broad social vision encompassing every aspect of life’.
According to Richards[2003]; although these readings maybe applicable to other modernists grids, they are not applicable to Le Corbusier.
This Paper proposes to challenge Richards[2003] assumptions and tries to prove that, through Le Corbusier’s final project; the Venice Hospital 1964-65, the Modular formulated a code that is capable of articulating dynamic, generative architecture.PS. Is this why it is called an "Abstract"
-
Sounds like someone was having a bet with their buddies to see who could cram the most architectural buzzwords into their paper. My guess is that this guy won.
-Brodie
-
Reminds me of the "Mission Statement Generator":
http://www.laughing-buddha.net/toys/mission -
@ecuadorian said:
Reminds me of the "Mission Statement Generator":
http://www.laughing-buddha.net/toys/mission
-
many so-called theory books nowadays are like that.
-
I must say, there is SketchUp horror out there too!
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=237064a5ed8725626790da1246b6161d&prevstart=144
-
@tfdesign said:
I must say, there is SketchUp horror out there too!
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=237064a5ed8725626790da1246b6161d&prevstart=144
"Made with Building Maker
This model was made using Building Maker, an online 3D modeling tool from Google."
-
@tfdesign said:
I must say, there is SketchUp horror out there too!
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=237064a5ed8725626790da1246b6161d&prevstart=144
This one is a keeper!
-
Wasn't it "Le Modulor"? Maybe my old synapses are fried.
-
@johnsenior1973 said:
@tfdesign said:
I must say, there is SketchUp horror out there too!
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=237064a5ed8725626790da1246b6161d&prevstart=144
"Made with Building Maker
This model was made using Building Maker, an online 3D modeling tool from Google."
Perhaps it should be renamed "box maker"?
-
@tfdesign said:
I must say, there is SketchUp horror out there too!
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=237064a5ed8725626790da1246b6161d&prevstart=144
Eeek!
Perhaps it was a theoretical model!!!!
-
@tfdesign said:
@johnsenior1973 said:
@tfdesign said:
I must say, there is SketchUp horror out there too!
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=237064a5ed8725626790da1246b6161d&prevstart=144
"Made with Building Maker
This model was made using Building Maker, an online 3D modeling tool from Google."
Perhaps it should be renamed "box maker"?
Aren't you just being as ignorant towards BM as many people are towards SU?
I personally feel there's just as much ignorance shown towards BM and 3DW from Sketchucationers as there is of SU by outsiders.
-
I'm pretty sure that building maker is a useful tool in the right hands.
But a model like this doesn't exactly scream 'QUALITY' to me!I dont think that is ignorance.
-
@bocomofo said:
But a model like this doesn't exactly scream 'QUALITY' to me!
Consider it's designed intention: populate the Google Earth layer with very low-poly boxes representing building seen from a distance.
-
Oh come on...
I get it has to be very low poly for the purposes of populating google earth.
However its still a box with a photo of the roof on its gable!!!! -
Which is the quality needed by Google Earth... It do and make what it needs to - nothing more. We're not talking about presentation illustrations here.
-
So what does it need to do? Is its purpose just to let people know there is a building there...it doesnt matter what the building looks like or what size it is or roughly what shape it is...but there is a building there.
What is the point of adding anyhting at all if its not correct.Apologies if I have taken this topic off of the original point, so this is the last I will say on this. If I cared enough about it I would start a new thread specifically about Building Maker.
Advertisement