Comments from Experiment 1 – Apologies for the delay as this 'Task' got lost somewhere in the world of 'to do'. However, here it is and you can still learn from these comments as the Experiments are related as well as distinct from subsequent Experiments! The comments posted here closely correspond with those in your feedback sheet as I have reworded them to some degree for some students. Comments from Experiment 2 will be posted shortly after the marking process has been completed. Hope you all had a relaxing break!
Anu
_____________________
Renee
Incomplete submission but a good section
George
Section is good but needed more development as 3 distinct but related habitable spaces. Could have been improved by avoiding a three dimensional extrusion of the section. More exploration of stairs.
James
The submission is well handled and crafted carefully; the scheme shows equal attention to formal aspects as well as occupational aspects (scale and art work); and the section is 'enlarged' to an object and is not merely an extrusion.
Hayden C
Good blog and interesting final scheme ans it considers the interior occupation and is not just form based. However , the impact of crystalline forms on the interior is not always clear. The datum line is not articulated. The process work demonstrating development of the scheme is missing.
Michelle
complete, neat and well handled submission. The scheme could have been stronger through the exploration of the spaces below the datum more strongly. Could have been improved by avoiding a three dimensional extrusion of the section.
Alyse
Good hand drawings and strong ideas; However, a strong grasp on three dimensional sensibility was not demonstrated fully. Also the relation between the above and below the datum line needed to articulated and thought through. A lot more practice of sketch up was needed.
Daniel
Stair explorations were promising but not completely followed through. However, more studio application would have helped; Awareness of architectural precedents, conventions, and three dimensional visualisation needed to have been demonstrated; Engagement with the material presented in the course lecture would have helped; key weakness was the lack of articulation of relationship between below, above and datum line, and the occupation of the interior with respect to the artist/artwork.
Freddie
Some attention has been directed to interior spaces in terms of texture and occupation. Future submissions can be improved by paying more attention to architectural conventions and precedents discussed in the lecture, and by practising hand drawing and sketch up.
Matt
Distinctive approach to above, below, and datum level, and attention to display conditions and strong use of textures; submission could have been more complete (stairs) and hand drawings could improve.
Anthony
complete and methodical submission; strong sketch up exploration of interstitial spaces; however the datum level remains the weak point in establishing and mediating the relationship between above and below the datum line; stair explorations could have been more radical or experimental?
David
Struggled to understand the concept of the section as a cut through form which has an interior and an exterior; the final scheme shows attention to interior spaces but they do not delineate a relation between the datum, above and below; the shots of the sketch up model are truncated awkwardly.
Dean
Submission could have benefited from an awareness of architectural precedents, language, and conventions, and a demonstrable connection with the rich material presented in the course lectures; struggled to demonstrate an understanding of the section and develop that into a three dimensional object with an interior and exterior; Could have benefited from developing agility and competence in graphic and drawing skills.
Patrick
Strong interest in the interior and a reasonable grasp of the section; need to demonstrate willingness to experiment and test multiple strategies; sketch up skills could have been improved though hand drawings skills are good.
Robert
It is recommended that student produce a complete submission and demonstrate substantial studio work; Explorations ought to have a more disciplined formality to them, and they need to respond to the specific tasks set out for the experiment on a weekly basis.
Hayden W
A well handled submissions in terms of formality of exploration, strategies used, and presentation techniques; possible scope for improvement would have been a stronger use of textures in the interior.
Bryan
A complete and methodical submission; stair exploration could have been stronger; struggled to understand the sections as enclosing habitable spaces but nevertheless there is attention to interiority; could have been improved by demonstrating more awareness of architectural precedents and conventions.
Ed
A strong and complete submission; rigorous attention to requirements of the experiment; The only weaknesses was the three dimensional extrusion of the section as the building envelope which could have been strengthened by ascribing a sense of complexity and other nuances to the section; the stairs could have been designed and detailed to develop into architectural features; textures could have been used a little more imaginatively.
Dominik
Competence in visualisation of section in relation to datum line, and the notion of interior and exterior; the weakness was the limited exploration of the section; key strength of the scheme was the notion of the blurring of the datum line.
Amy
Struggled to understand the sections as enclosing habitable spaces and interior and exterior; more studio work needed to have been demonstrated; risk taking imaginative work recommended; a stronger demonstration of architectural precedents and conventions recommended as presented in lectures is recommended.
Frank
The below datum line could have been developed further; hand drawing could have been stronger as it demonstrates potential for improvement;
No comments:
Post a Comment