I am actually familiar with Terzidis Algorithmic Architecture and this week's reading was really insightful. To be a bit I didn't appreciate or like math until my senior year of college. Logic and structure (specifically with regards to math) never came natural and through out my academic career arithmetic was by far my weakest subject, but one of my major studio projects during the last semester of my undergraduate degree required an intense amount of math. The problems were no longer abstract or ethereal, they were real and the solutions were needed in order to make my project work (I was designing a large scale clock that counted time very abstractly).
The project was ultimately a success and by coupling math and architecture I was able to realize a project that I attach a lot of pride in. In other chapters of Algorithmic Architecture equations and scripts are used to develop solutions to architectural problems. When I first flipped through the book I thought the math process would be impossible to decipher or apply to my own work, but as I move through this course and continue to develop parametric based solutions I'm realizing more and more that I am making progress towards algorithmic fluency.
Aside from the mathematical aspect of this week's reading I find the idea of process, workflow, and logic very intriguing. Architectural firms are constantly attempting to hone efficiency and process in order to deliver better work faster. Programs like Catia, Rhino, and Revit are big pieces to this process. I feel there is a balance between utilizing systems/programs in ways which improve workflow and efficiency and practical pencil to paper design work; the two are not totally separate, and they are not totally synonymous.
Even though this chapter of Algorithmic Architecture focused on the history of generative based architectural solutions my fear is the next major design age will rely on algorithms and parametric solutions and discard or totally diminish the architect's input.
No comments:
Post a Comment