It has been my understanding that the difference between shade and shadow is that the latter is a 2-dimensional surface, while the former is a volume of space. So, one can occupy shade, but not a shadow. While thinking about how to access light from my studio project, which is shaded by the TD tower, I realized that 'shade,' as a volume of shadowed space, doesn't exist!! What exists instead, is a realm that has the potential to project shadow onto a surface. But the air itself doesn't receive 'shadow' (except, perhaps at the scale of air particles, but I will have to look into that). I realized this when I was imagining myself on-site, looking North, and thinking (in the imagination), 'why can't I see the edge of the shaded region when I look up at the sky?' And my answer (encouraged by Evan, with whom I was discussing this phenomenon) was that there is only an edge of shade through shadow, which requires an object (or high humidity) in order to project its image; shade is really only an area of potential shadow.
How does this relate to theory? I think that the reason I was confused had to do with the method that I have studied shadows: 'shadow-studies' - diagramatic drawings of shaded (shadowed) regions, always shown in 2-dimensions (plan, elevation, sometimes axo). I have actually been substituting knowledge of a phenomenon with the lessons learned from a specific means of representation! So, I have a question for the group: can we learn something different about the projects we design through the different ways of 'representing' them? (Ie, would the project that you're currently working on develop or change if you choose a means of representation other than your current one(s)? Or, is the design purely in the brain and would turn out relatively the same, regardless of the means used to bring it into reality?
2 comments:
To answer Bobbies question:
There are things we can learn from alternate methods of representing our projects, there are always things to learn. I think the more pressing question is why, why would you chose to represent your project in paint rather than in a model. This questioned is answered by your ‘designers intuition’ we as designers have the obligation of representing our ideas using unspoken languages, such as drawing and modeling etc. I think that we intuitively pick up the benefits of each method of representation and how each perceived by our audience. So not only do we have to consider what we will learn from that method of representation but also, what we can teach. I have struggled a little with this idea lately because my project has been entirely digital, placing me in the category of ‘computer dependant’. Personally I find this upsetting because of the virtual (meaning unreal) and vulnerability of my thoughts/representations. But after much deliberation I have accepted that this method of representation is the best method of displaying my ideas so that my audience (keep in mind I am in the business studio) would understand my project more in tune with what I intend it to be.
I think that as passionate designers we should strive to explore new and more appropriate ways of representations. However, I find that these alternate forms of representation, whatever they may be, are more useful for your own personal design process. At least in my studio process, alternative languages are ways that I can work through multiple aspects of my design. For instance, I developed a narrative in the form of an animation to explore the ritual of a space. I would be weary of presenting such a thing to a client for a design proposal, however it is simply a tool that we have at our disposal. I think that is the nature of the work we do in architecture; to draw from multiple languages and strategies in order to grasp a concept in relation the greater picture or a narrow view. We have the freedom of abstraction and derivation and I think that while we are in school we should take advantage of that as much as we can. As it is I don’t think we take advantage of it enough. We tend to rely on traditional methods of representing design concepts, (ie. drawing, models), however useful, they are also limited. Digital media, animation, stop animation, photography, collage, script, poetry, etc. are all ways that we can further explore and inquire.
Post a Comment