I think these images are really compelling. However, there needs to be some notion of how the whole thing works... right now it looks like a futuristic burrito. I'm not trying to be mean, I really like this approach aside from understanding the mechanics of the silo and the feasibility issues of a stand-alone structure with a custom wrapper versus a modular system that can be easily adapted after the face to accommodate higher volumes of bikes. maybe we have to tiptoe the line between sensibility and fashion.
oh man futuristic burrito! I would not have thought that but I like it a lot better. I mean I thought that the original dowel-shape was diagrammatic anyway. I mean, initially those were drawn as though we could stack em up like 7 stories and now we're finding that they would only end up being 4 or 5, if that due to context. i don't think it changes the mechanical inter-workings since it's just an envelope, which it was all along as a framework for the foliage and signage. I mean, we are designing in the 21st century and copenhagen does expect a level of contemporary design that would intrigue the world... * "tiptoe the line between sensibility and fashion"... didn't we all go to DESIGN school? isn't this a competition? i think this is a simple way to push the envelope of the silo's exterior while still being able to modulate the system inside.
Hey, I don't disagree with you... the silo definitely had to be gussied up a bit and I'm sure the modularity could be retained to some degree. But you must remember, Scandinavian design is marked by ideals of utilitarianism and stoic refutation of unnecessary and unwarranted ornament. The point I was trying to make is that while it does look good, I'm just unsure of the intent of the shape itself. What BENEFIT (aside from sex appeal, which is certainly valuable in some instances) does this new shape bring to the FUNCTION of bike sharing and people's comprehension of that function? Listen... I'm not trying to shit talk your design, I think it looks cool, as I said before. Hell, I'm certain that those renderings will give us a better chance than my lame sketches would; I'm just trying to understand where the shape came from and why that shape as opposed to others (and so late in the game for that matter)? On that note, I also feel like this is sort of going in a completely unanticipated direction and (if we as a group decide to run with it) subverts a lot of the work I've been doing and loses some of it's cohesion with the rest of the sharing system... I don't what to just pitch all your work sherry, I'm just trying to be constructive and pragmatic here.
One of the guidelines was that we create a strong visual presence. I believe we cannot be shy about presenting an idea that is aesthetically forward and yet practical when it comes to application. There is no doubt in my mind that we can achieve a happy medium. We may have disparate aesthetic inclinations, however, we have to keep in mind that we are working towards a common goal. I believe the graphics that we have selected unanimously has not been lost in the design of the silo. On the contrary, I believe it is in line with our design aesthetic.We can discuss it further as a group later this evening. Also, I am not so convinced about Scandinavian ideal of utilitarianism and stoic refutation of unnecessary and unwarranted ornament. Yes, Scandinavians come out of that tradition. However, one only has to look as some of the projects coming out of Denmark today to see that the work being produced a far cry from utilitarian and stoic. Check out BIG, Bjarke Ingles Group, for example. Btw, I am enjoying this discussion. We can all benefit from more of this.
great discussion! something to add - what about including some more of the foilage? http://dynamicfreeformcezpeds.blogspot.com/2009/10/vertical-green-surfaces.html and the sex appeal of this is somewhat along the lines of the sex appeal of this http://dynamicfreeformcezpeds.blogspot.com/2009/10/copenhagen-metro-signage-wow.html something that already exists in Kobehavn - utilizing verticality and lighting. great work, darius.
i think we are having some of the most tough love/critical conversations necessary in these past two weeks and i think it is wonderful because this is how designs move on from the autodidactic state of brutish to refined. my biggest sort of inner worry since the launch of the first silo sketch has been the massive scale of these things (for which i am so happy we came to free form concept last week). i am worried that when the panelists look at this thing the first thing they are going to think of is industrical machinery... which now if you bear with me for a moment this is the proceeding thought bubble.. energy hungry, inefficient, dirty, loud, frequent repair.. now i realize there is an effort to make this not the case with this design but in a world of five minute presentations and two minute presentation board review immagery is power. this experimentation with a dynamic skin does not need to be viewed as an attack on the original concept. there is no way to loose the continuity in design at this point when in fact the original concept, executed most strongly in the mechanical innards, is still highly existent and prevalent...although it be an abstract core of rings through our current imagery (insert theoretical sectional mechanical drawings). i look at this progression and i get really excited because we now have a series of design expereimentations that begin to respond to a potential con. what if these skins with their wrapping slightly helical shape begin to respond to the requirements for cultivating a green siding or optimal solar panel placement (which by the way have we dropped this idea?). i look at these series of drawings all the way from erik sketch book to the most recent darius rendering and it reminds me of the series of drawing the guggenheim posted during the Frank Lloyd Wright exhibit of the guggenheim itself and all the completely seemingliy irrelevant unrealted exterior form versions of the Guggenheim. i mean christ there was a dodecahedron next to upside down snow cone. wright when through some options, we're going through some options... this is really good guys.
I think these images are really compelling. However, there needs to be some notion of how the whole thing works... right now it looks like a futuristic burrito. I'm not trying to be mean, I really like this approach aside from understanding the mechanics of the silo and the feasibility issues of a stand-alone structure with a custom wrapper versus a modular system that can be easily adapted after the face to accommodate higher volumes of bikes. maybe we have to tiptoe the line between sensibility and fashion.
ReplyDeleteoh man futuristic burrito! I would not have thought that but I like it a lot better. I mean I thought that the original dowel-shape was diagrammatic anyway. I mean, initially those were drawn as though we could stack em up like 7 stories and now we're finding that they would only end up being 4 or 5, if that due to context. i don't think it changes the mechanical inter-workings since it's just an envelope, which it was all along as a framework for the foliage and signage. I mean, we are designing in the 21st century and copenhagen does expect a level of contemporary design that would intrigue the world...
ReplyDelete* "tiptoe the line between sensibility and fashion"... didn't we all go to DESIGN school? isn't this a competition? i think this is a simple way to push the envelope of the silo's exterior while still being able to modulate the system inside.
Hey, I don't disagree with you... the silo definitely had to be gussied up a bit and I'm sure the modularity could be retained to some degree. But you must remember, Scandinavian design is marked by ideals of utilitarianism and stoic refutation of unnecessary and unwarranted ornament.
ReplyDeleteThe point I was trying to make is that while it does look good, I'm just unsure of the intent of the shape itself. What BENEFIT (aside from sex appeal, which is certainly valuable in some instances) does this new shape bring to the FUNCTION of bike sharing and people's comprehension of that function?
Listen... I'm not trying to shit talk your design, I think it looks cool, as I said before. Hell, I'm certain that those renderings will give us a better chance than my lame sketches would; I'm just trying to understand where the shape came from and why that shape as opposed to others (and so late in the game for that matter)?
On that note, I also feel like this is sort of going in a completely unanticipated direction and (if we as a group decide to run with it) subverts a lot of the work I've been doing and loses some of it's cohesion with the rest of the sharing system...
I don't what to just pitch all your work sherry, I'm just trying to be constructive and pragmatic here.
One of the guidelines was that we create a strong visual presence. I believe we cannot be shy about presenting an idea that is aesthetically forward and yet practical when it comes to application. There is no doubt in my mind that we can achieve a happy medium. We may have disparate aesthetic inclinations, however, we have to keep in mind that we are working towards a common goal. I believe the graphics that we have selected unanimously has not been lost in the design of the silo. On the contrary, I believe it is in line with our design aesthetic.We can discuss it further as a group later this evening. Also, I am not so convinced about Scandinavian ideal of utilitarianism and stoic refutation of unnecessary and unwarranted ornament. Yes, Scandinavians come out of that tradition. However, one only has to look as some of the projects coming out of Denmark today to see that the work being produced a far cry from utilitarian and stoic. Check out BIG, Bjarke Ingles Group, for example. Btw, I am enjoying this discussion. We can all benefit from more of this.
ReplyDeletegreat discussion! something to add - what about including some more of the foilage? http://dynamicfreeformcezpeds.blogspot.com/2009/10/vertical-green-surfaces.html and the sex appeal of this is somewhat along the lines of the sex appeal of this http://dynamicfreeformcezpeds.blogspot.com/2009/10/copenhagen-metro-signage-wow.html
ReplyDeletesomething that already exists in Kobehavn - utilizing verticality and lighting. great work, darius.
i think we are having some of the most tough love/critical conversations necessary in these past two weeks and i think it is wonderful because this is how designs move on from the autodidactic state of brutish to refined. my biggest sort of inner worry since the launch of the first silo sketch has been the massive scale of these things (for which i am so happy we came to free form concept last week). i am worried that when the panelists look at this thing the first thing they are going to think of is industrical machinery... which now if you bear with me for a moment this is the proceeding thought bubble.. energy hungry, inefficient, dirty, loud, frequent repair.. now i realize there is an effort to make this not the case with this design but in a world of five minute presentations and two minute presentation board review immagery is power. this experimentation with a dynamic skin does not need to be viewed as an attack on the original concept. there is no way to loose the continuity in design at this point when in fact the original concept, executed most strongly in the mechanical innards, is still highly existent and prevalent...although it be an abstract core of rings through our current imagery (insert theoretical sectional mechanical drawings). i look at this progression and i get really excited because we now have a series of design expereimentations that begin to respond to a potential con. what if these skins with their wrapping slightly helical shape begin to respond to the requirements for cultivating a green siding or optimal solar panel placement (which by the way have we dropped this idea?). i look at these series of drawings all the way from erik sketch book to the most recent darius rendering and it reminds me of the series of drawing the guggenheim posted during the Frank Lloyd Wright exhibit of the guggenheim itself and all the completely seemingliy irrelevant unrealted exterior form versions of the Guggenheim. i mean christ there was a dodecahedron next to upside down snow cone. wright when through some options, we're going through some options... this is really good guys.
ReplyDelete