i recently attended the Jean Trottier lecture regarding the design process and the influence of digital media technology. Jean questioned the value of relying of CAD programs and other digital image making programs during the design process. He seemed to side with the notion that digital media hinders the design process. One of his reasonings was that the human body becomes disconnected from the lines of the image, as the hand is not physically dictating it, and another was that scale becomes somewhat lost on a computer image. I think there are certainly qualities to a hand drawn image that cannot be replicated on the computer, however CAD has many abilities that hand drawing does not. In terms of scale I dont think either hand nor computer can really provide an accurate scale description, only the actual 1:1 representation can do that. In regards to process making with the computer i think there are possibilities that have not been explored. We tend to use the computer to genereate final images, however it can just as easily be used to generate a narrative of process work by simply reinterpreting how it is used. I think by denying the importance of the computer in everyday life, especially in the education system is dangerous. It is obviously a valuable medium and i think we are sending our graduates out into the real world unprepared for the demands of the workforce.
3 comments:
It's true that the hand is removed from the process, but is it the hand that designs, or the mind? Maybe a combination of the mind and medium - so, if I'm designing through drawing with a pencil, the process may yield a different result than from designing through with a mouse, but is one mode 'better' than the other? Nah, they're just different. I'm inclined to feel more 'free' when drawing with a computer program, since it's so easy (and not messy) to make changes. But (and I don't have an explanation for this), I do feel more involved with a project when drawing with a pencil over all other media. (Is it because that was the first drawing instrument I learned to use? If so, maybe kids who learn to use a computer before a pencil will feel more 'involved' in the process when using a mouse...)
In terms of scale, drawing on the computer lets you switch between scales rapidly, so you aren't confined to the permanence associated with hand drawings. On the other hand, you can't really tell what scale you're working at just by looking at the computer screen... Still, I feel comfortable designing with certain scales more than others, and sometimes those scales are incompatible with hand drawing (too big for certain projects, unless I want to draw 4'x3' drawings - cumbersome!).
I agree with Larraine - it is not healthy to deny the existence and validity of computers in architecture, but at the same time, I would rather take a drawing course than a cad course - cad, I can learn that on my own - drawing (in terms of renderings), now that's a skill I need someone to show me... I would prefer to keep cad as an optional elective.
i just had some additional thoughts to make on what i had previously wrote. I was thinking about the comparison again between hand produced media and digital media, in relation to photography. I think one valid point in favor of hand done work would be physical properties of the actual medium. Like drawing, photographic paper has particular physical and chemical properties that have defined limits and characteristics. Digital media like photoshop or CAD, however, have very few limitations that are based in the natural world. In that sense you do not understand the resistence of the materiality which should be intrinsic to producing architecture.
Or maybe the lack of limitations could be seen as a design opportunity - a new way of thinking about architecture, or a new way of thinking about 'process'...
Post a Comment