I admit, I didn't make it down to Kent to watch the proposals in person. I was thinking I could live stream it via the KentUtubevideo channel I posted earlier. I was able to see some images, mostly disjointed from the audio, with a whole bunch of hiccups, freezing and skips. About 5 sentences into Westlake Reed Leskosky's proposal I couldn't take the video player's horrible-ness and just gave up.
KentPatch did post some images that they received from the school regarding the proposals and I am trying to get in contact with folks about sharing the video link somewheres on the internets.
I don't have many comments (at this time) but I will say this, when illustrating a crit space in use, put the model on a table so that someone can actually see the damn thing from eyelevel, every time I see a model on the floor I question the entire design premise. Sure, it looks great for seagulls but what about the folks who have to interact with it. When I see something like that in an architect's proposal I get a little flustered. It just means that the designer who put these slides together missed a very important element in their design studio and I start to question everything. Over-thinking of schematic proposals is not a good idea.
That's a Pro-tip, write it down.
Kent Patch Article: Kent State Architecture Proposals Unveiled
UPDATE!
Videos have been posted online (they are near the bottom with yesterday's date).
relinked below for your clicking/scrolling pleasure:
Team 1 - Bowen + Weiss/Manfredi
Team 2 - Bialosky + ARO
Team 3 - Westlake Reed Leskosky
Team 4 - The Collaborative + Muller Hull
UPDATE!
Videos have been posted online (they are near the bottom with yesterday's date).
relinked below for your clicking/scrolling pleasure:
Team 1 - Bowen + Weiss/Manfredi
Team 2 - Bialosky + ARO
Team 3 - Westlake Reed Leskosky
Team 4 - The Collaborative + Muller Hull
No comments:
Post a Comment