PROCESS MATTERS 02 (the evolution of an idea)

Yes, I am still writing about the design process.  I am interested not only in the final product, but how as a design studio we arrived at that solution.  And I think the design process matters – like REALLY matters.  How a design project develops and evolves is critical for design excellence.  It is important to understand how a design concept evolves, and what is explored and tested along the way.  Often, the first study has a fragment of something that will eventually become something important to the design, but in this early beginning it is often only a hint at something.  Great design requires a rigorous design process to move a project from that initial spark into something of value.

This post will take a closer look at the design process specifically related to the project we are constructing this summer.  Looking backwards, you can easily trace the thread of the idea all the way through.  The challenge for the designer, of course, is that the creative process often only makes sense looking backward. 

Or as the author E.L. Doctorow says about the writing process “Writing is like driving at night in the fog.  You can only see as far as your headlights, but you can make the whole trip that way.” 

The Architectural design process is like that too.  In real time, it is impossible to see the end of the journey.  But looking back at the process reveals the embedded logic that is often present, The strands of thought that link the studies together, and it can be an informative process of self-reflection.  For a designer, an awareness of how we work creatively is crucial for producing work that is authentic and meaningful.

Here was the first design sketch.  

Not great right?  But the idea was born here.  These first models, even in their crude diagrammatic form, were exploring something important.  The exploration is about a roof pattern.  A repetitive pattern or geometry, creating a mosaic of sorts, casting shadow patterns that move across a space.  This was the beginning, and an important start indeed.

One initial critique was concerned with connecting the roof form with the seating elements below.  This next study, while incomplete, attempted to address this concern. It also foreshadows a potential solution for the integration of structure and roof pattern that would be an essential design improvement later on.

As the project evolved, the explorations began to focus more directly on the relationship of bench and seating to roof form.  These studies attempt to tie the project into one single gesture.  The relationship between structure and pattern is also a growing concern at this point in the process, as these studies attempt to preliminary resolve these issues.

These next studies begins to focus more on the idea of creating a space defined by shadows.  The big design move here is to wrap the roof element into the south wall to create a continuous form that modulates light throughout the day.  This study also gets serious in attempting to resolve the roof structure, integrating the pattern of boxes into the 2x6 roof grid. Design is always a sort of give and take and as the structural grid regulated the geometry, some of the rhythmic quality of the design began to get lost.  The solution was to transfer the rhythmic pattern of the roof from the plan into the section. By varying the heights of the boxes slightly, the rhythm of the form is retained for the space below, while the plan geometry simplifies to address the structural concerns of the scheme.

During the final selection process, some of the class felt that this scheme (above) was too monolithic.  So, during the final critique I sketched a quick idea to discuss the possibility of a formal shift, splitting the form into two half to open up the space to the south and west approach.  

This sketch lead into the final development of the structure.

And eventually to a final model and renderings.

What this illustration fails to address is that simultaneously in the studio, other unique schemes were being pursued in the same manner.  Some of these included roof forms and shadow patterns.  As these other ideas evolved, they of course began to influence this scheme.  A good studio is a fertile ground for ideas, students all influencing each other, allowing for cross pollination to occur.

What is illustrated, I hope, is the importance of process in creative work.  It would have been impossible to start at the end.  As a studio, we needed those initial studies, even as fragments of ideas, to eventually get to the more developed and sophisticated final solution.

Sometimes, in a design studio, I think students feel like the initial studies are errors, or something they have done wrong.  Students are always quick to want to solve the problem "correctly" the first time.  But the creative process doesn't quite work that way.  The initial studies are a necessary (and perhaps most important) part of the process, because you cant get to the end without them.

IN PRAISE OF SHADOWS

"In making ourselves a place to live, we first spread a parasol to throw shadow on the earth, and in the pale light of the shadow, we put together a house."

"We find beauty not in the thing itself but in the patterns of shadows, the light and the darkness, that one thing against another creates."
Jun'ichiro Tanizaki, from In Praise of Shadows

Umbra = latin for Shade / Shadow.  also a phantom or shadowy apparition.
82 = The number of white boxes we will build.

A project that explores the modulation of light, shadow, and pattern.  A mosaic or tapestry of pattern and shadow.  A light modulator.  A space that captures the ephemeral characteristics of daylight.

3 SCHEMES

We began construction today, but before I get to that I wanted to share a little bit more about how we got to this point. 

Last week, the class presented 3 developed design schemes (shown above) to be considered for this summer’s build project.  Here are a few images and conceptual thoughts on each.

SCHEME A: Light and Shadow

This scheme is an exploration of light and shadow.  The design concept is to create a gathering space that is a mosaic of shadow and pattern, which will move throughout the day to enrich the space.  Undulating boxes create a rhythmic roof and wall pattern that gives the space a dynamic presence. 

This scheme is well developed and well executed.  One critique is that it could be too simple.  Another concern was about the construction time it would take to build and paint all of the white boxes. 

In the end, this was the scheme that was ultimately selected, but the design was developed to include a staggering of the form, opening it up to the south side which was perhaps too enclosed in this initial version.

SCHEME B: Folded Roof

This scheme is an exploration of a folded roof form with a sculptural presence.  The scheme is long and linear, creating a space with a simple, staggered bench below a dynamic roof form.  The design concept explores engaging the artistic context of the MAC with a sculptural object that marks the site.  Views from many vantage points, coupled with the movement of the form, will enhance the presence of the pavilion.

While this scheme is the most dynamic formally of the three, one concern was with its lack of detail and development.  The structural system was still unresolved, and the design needed more careful study to become the project we pursued. With another week of work, this might have been a more serious contender.

Scheme B2 is a variation on the dynamic roof form scheme, exploring the alternate orientation on the site to create more repetition.  This version was also very strong sculpturally, yet seemed diagrammatic and perhaps too safe.

SCHEME C: Trapezoidal Curve

This scheme is a series of furniture pieces; twelve trapezoidal benches that can be arranged to create a sinuous form.  Each bench varies in seat height and roof height, creating a rhythmic formal presence for the structure.  This scheme has strong potential for the way in which it can be infinitely reconfigured on the site, although the intent is to pick one configuration and bolt the pieces together.  A herringbone wood trellis creates a shadow pattern with an organic character that compliments the curvilinear form of the plan.

This scheme was well resolved and definitely buildable.  One strength was the modularity and ability to scale the scheme.  Build as many pieces as you have time, and then configure them.  There were aesthetic concerns raised about this scheme in the critique.  While it was well developed, it seemed formally a bit heavy handed, and needed some sculptural development, particularly with the bench to roof form.  This scheme initially received many votes, but after discussion it was decided to go in another direction.

THE FINAL DESIGN

Here are a few images of the final model after the design has been developed.  The scheme still uses shadow and pattern as its primary peacemaking strategy.  The form has been shifted, to open the structure up to views and access across the site, and makes the scheme less monolithic, giving the structure a more sculptural presence that the initial study.  

FINAL RENDERINGS

The Design + Build studio is working to develop final drawings for our summer pavilion.  Here is a sneak peak at the final design renderings for the project.

We are also anxious to get into the shop and start building, so today we prototyped a section of the roof element.  (the lighting is bad in this image, but we are thrilled with the results)

WE WILL BUILD THIS

The Arch Design + Build studio picked a scheme today.

Then we argued about it, developed it, discussed, and have now landed here.

We will build this.

I will post a lot more about how we arrived at this point over the next week, but for now, we have a scheme.

A STUDIO CLASS (OR A DESIGN FIRM?)

This is a different kind of design studio courses.  To begin with, the class is essentially working on one large group design project.  Unlike a traditional studio course where each student has the freedom to explore their own ideas (within the limits and context of the project), this class is working toward the same goal, to design and build one structure by the end of July.  Another difference is that the build portion of the studio is funded by the COD foundation through a ‘Resources for Excellence’ grant.  This puts a little bit more pressure on us as a class to have a ‘successful’ final project, as the college is committing a significant resource towards this activity.  Finally, the structure we build will have a visible presence far beyond a normal studio project.  This gathering pavilion will likely live for several years on campus (outlasting the students in the course who will have transferred on) and as a result is both a reflection on our class as well as representative of the Architecture program as a whole. 

For all of these reasons, I tend to try to model the class on a small architectural office.  We have essentially the same challenges as design firm working on a project, which is to work collaboratively, creatively, as a team to produce a set of drawings and documents that will ultimately result in a built object.  (Unlike a firm, however, we are also responsible to build this thing as well)

So as an instructor, I tend to be a little bit more hands on, and involved in the day to day design work.  The challenge for me has been to find an appropriate balance between demonstrating (teaching by doing) and letting the students drive the process.  Recently I have been attempting to model expectations through producing work  myself, without stifling their creativity, or worse yet, giving them the impression that I am going to design the project for them. 

As an example, during the first critique I made this sketch as a response to one of the student models.  Sketching during a crit is not uncommon for me.  What is unusual, however, is after the critique I got on a computer and developed the sketch into a scheme (See design images below), just to see how it might work.  My hope was to model for the students how to take an idea from an initial sketch, into something more developed.  As I have written about before, one of my ongoing challenges as a design studio instructor is to get students to develop an idea into a sophisticated scheme.  Students often seem to get stuck in the first idea, stuck in a diagram (with potential), yet have trouble developing the work beyond a sketch.  My hope is to use my quick design study to show the class how I want them to take their first ideas and push them into a developed structure that we can actually build.

I am not sure if this is working or not?  The effectiveness of the experiment is yet to be determined.  I am concerned that perhaps I overreached and that this was counterproductive, as the team developing this scheme seemed to initially lose momentum after seeing my renderings.

I will know more after seeing the developed design studies this week.  None the less, the class is making progress this toward more buildable, and beautiful schemes.  Albeit slower that I would like at times.

And I am attempting to manage the group as if it were a small design office, not a traditional college class.

In the end, (I think) this will be a positive learning experience for the students.