(article previously published in May 2016)
Is the pencil good for Architecture?
Is the use of the computer good for Architecture?
They are TOOLS.
What are plans, technical or artistic documents?
Progress in the development of an architectural project was marked, at the end of the 1980s, by the incorporation of computers in the studios. There was reluctance, but, little by little, everyone made the transition. As an anecdote I will tell you that in 1992 I handed in my PFC (Final Project) being one of the first to do it by computer.
It was not well regarded by the professors, although some of them were beginning to use them in their offices, but their use was looked down upon. It was undoubtedly the fear of the unknown.
The computerized delineation seemed to put an end to the architect’s artistic personalism when it came to drawing his work.
This ridiculous paternalism has not yet been overcome by many architects, even now, in the age of BIM.
Photography used to be the devil
At that time, before the birth of the Internet, architectural magazines were guilty of this predilection for the image over the project. In fact, it was their golden age.
Numerous publications appeared and all of them showed the same projects and the same photos.
What is a render for? Is it useful?
Renderings did not yet exist, but projects designed to be photographed were already being spoken of in a pejorative way.
Later came renders and the attitude against them was similar to that suffered by architectural photography.
Remember that the phrase that describes our work is :
GAYARRE infografia photograph the non-existent
I think this is the key question to determine, depending on the answer, whether or not the tool is suitable for Architecture and/or for the process of developing a project.
Depending on the moment, it can be used to…
project…
If someone masters a 3d program, at best, they will match the manual capability of a sketch, like an intimate checking mechanism.
It is the most direct way to graphically express an idea.
Even if you master a 3d tool, the hand is faster, more natural, it doesn’t need any technical consideration to activate.
However, although it is less natural in handling, it has virtues such as versatility, duplication capacity, deletion, … which undoubtedly makes it a very useful tool for the development of a project.
In the same way that the hand sketch has served to express an idea through drawings, rendering can serve as a new graphic mechanism of expression.
Both forms of expression are useful and each architect will choose the one that best suits his or her way of designing.
In both cases, we will find examples of magnificent projects.
explain…
When you design as a team, you also explain, but in this case, I am referring to the stage in which, once the project has been defined, the architect wants to explain it to third parties.
It is no longer a verification tool.
It becomes a tool of seduction. The architect wants the final recipient to be convinced of his project. And, in this mission, it seems that anything goes.
The same person has to play two roles: that of author and that of salesperson. This is where problems arise. The best author is not always the best salesperson and vice versa.
Intent to deceive
Architecture needs the image. It doesn’t matter what that image looks like. It doesn’t matter if the image is an engraving or a hyper-realistic render.
There will always be agents involved in the process who are not technical and need the image to understand, approve or even show off the project. Before it was the drawings and now, for the moment, it seems to be the renders. Another day I will talk about new representation mechanisms.
The key is that there is no intent to deceive.
“The fraudulent use of the image as a mechanism for concealing reality”.
…, the difference between being and appearing has no future.
Another day I will talk about those picturesque images that use ridiculous resources to reach the customer’s hearts in a superficial way. This is not honest and I find it indefensible.
The keys to the correct use of rendering
For me, these are the 5 keys:
1. To think about the reason for its realization.
A presentation to a client in private is not the same as a presentation to the press.
2. Know the final recipient
Although the project is the same,
is not worth the same image to convince a buyer of an apartment that the jury of a contest.
3. You have to create your own style.
It is your image, that of your project. You need to master the technique in order not to be limited.
4. Choice of the right number of images.
No project is perfect from any point of view.
It is necessary to find the most suitable ones.
5. If you don’t know how to do it, trust a specialized company.
as you do with the calculation of structures or installations.
I think that’s the fear that my teachers at the School of Architecture had:
“That the image, because it is visual, blinds our capacity for reasoning and analysis…”
…to understand Architecture with capital letters.
[I digress to emphasize the use of the word architecture with capital letters. The profession as method and process and not as a result full of artifice and empty of essence].
Zaha Hadid, from sketched architecture to Pritzker Prize winner
Undoubtedly, the abuse in the use of the image trying to deceive is very common. It is normal that the most purists repudiate these practices. However, this is not always the case.
Zaha’s case is paradigmatic in this sense.
When renders were not yet in use, she used graphic representation systems that were highly criticized.
It didn’t take long for the “great architects” to appear to speak of drawn architecture, of architecture that was impossible to build.
It is curious to see how his representations, throughout his career, also had an evolution. They went from abstraction to hyperrealism. Surely, the need to demonstrate, before building, that his project was real and viable, forced him to make that decision.