I feel like I'm learning quite a bit about design concepts and visualization through all these videos, thanks for sharing your knowledge and opinions! :)
From these ones, i like 67 the best. But, it's exterior form reminds me of Löyly - public sauna in Helsinki. I think this competition proposal is either designed by Finnish or other Nordic architects. I'm Finnish myself, and 67 feels so familiar - something i already see around me so much. Because of that it of course is very fitting within our culture. I still wish to see something new and little bit different.
really enjoing this. been working in an architectural firm for 7 years now without a formal background and just haveing so many variations on a single building is really eye opeing.
Thank you and I find this to be one of the most interesting things about it! Reminds me of early architecture school when 60 students would get the same brief and produce 60 different projects!
@@cathalcrumley i am in my first year of architecture now and it was pretty helpful to see the way someone reads 60 different works and what they look for as the format is so similar to my class
Accessible roof might be the deal breaker for this project overall, not straight forward from a planning point of view as I understand it, still a very nice idea though!
I think ever since I saw number 30, I knew it would one of the top projects- one of my favourites. Loving the videos keen to see the rest of the reviews.
Tough to gauge, considering we don't have access to some of the material (plans, technical drawings), but 30 is the one from this batch I could see being built. I went ahead and checked the gallery, seems like a couple more are possibly going to stand out! Personally a fan of 170, though (optimistically) concerned with the -- spoiler alert -- translucent elements and... well, budget feasibility. The more I searched the page, the more I believed some beauty in simplicity is required here. And, judging from the submissions, simple isn't always easy. Haven't looked through all of them, though, since I'll be watching your videos. Don't stop!
haha thanks and yes, no spoilers! There is of course a proper criteria by which each of these submissions should be measured, a projects ability to be built being one of them!
glad you changed your mind on 67. I love the little details in the renders like the connection from the angled glulam columns meeting the base plate on the outside. Maybe its because I in general when glulam details aren't perfectly total wood and there is an exposed bit, it makes it look a lot more industrial
Were I a man betting on which submissions will go far, I feel glass curtains are at a massive disadvantage. Sculpted concrete forms, hermetic buildings with lots of repetition, and timber structures will probably have an easier time with the panel.
I'm not against the Idea of 49 but I doubt how it would work that well in real materials. I think it would look less like 'playful patchwork' and more 'scruffy scrapwork' with all those panels of different materials. Especially when a bit worn out and dirty, with the seams and different sections aging at different speeds I think it will easily look closer to Fallout than Teletubbies
The proposal 67 contains 7 renders, while it was explicitly stated that there couldn't be more than 5. They didn't understand the brief, or they chose not to care. Either way, not a good look. A competition result can be nullified if it's proven a participant was advantaged, which IMO is the case here. Before calling me sour, make sure to understand that if all the participants had the opportunity to add imagery of their projects and allow them to better present their concept, well, they totally would. The purpose of the limited amount of renders was, in my opinion, to limit the level of detail of the project to keep it conceptual, but also to democratize the process so it doesn't become a rendering competition where the gap between wealthy companies with access to a lot of resources and young architects can be ridiculously unbalanced.
Not calling you sour at all and thanks for bringing this up! I agree, the rules are the rules BUT as nice as the images are in this proposal, pretty cgis are not the sole reason I selected it for my shortlist, 067 still reads as an exciting project, regardless of the quality and or quantity of images.....i'll leave it for the judges to enforce the rules here. I agree though, this seems like an unfair advantage but at the same time 049 also made my shortlist and they had no professional cgi work.... my point is, if a project is unable to communicate its idea to the jury in 5 renders, not sure how an extra 2 will win it a place on the shortlist.... If they are disqualified then so be it.
67 was my best in the first 100 but looking it again and comparing within your top 3 I realized that the interior design is claustrophobic and pale. the project has no fun. On the opposite second one having too much fun. number 30 is giving the perfect balance and taste of these two projects. Only question in my mind, they should realy naile the facade material. Without that nice reflection it can became too banal.
30 is the perfect balance for me but I agree, glass can be tricky at concept stage I love what they're going for and I hope they get the chance to work on this in more detail!
5th place is really poor and I don't agree at all with your take. It's basically a bootleg Aalto-project. They have taken (basically stolen) the exact design language of a very famous building with very strong characteristics and applied it to their own project (while trying to get away with it framing it as "tradition of experimentation"). It would be understandable if Aalto did this project himself, but now it just seems like such a lack of own ideas.
All fair points and I don't think I can really disagree with any of them..... I really enjoyed the spirit of this submission and that's what I took away from it, practically speaking it might not even work but it's refreshing to see an entry that is at least attempting to engage with the people who will be making and using the building..... and not just showing us another archicad render of an escalator in the lobby! As for stealing an idea, all of these submissions are stealing from somewhere, this one just did it well IMO
@@cathalcrumley My problem regarding the stealing part, is that they are not adding anything of their own really. There's a difference between inspiration and theft. If they for example used the modular part of the Experimental House but applied other and new materials, then it would be all fine for me. Now, what we have, is the same modular concept, same materials, same colors. The whole design language is identical, just applied on a different shape.
You've become my go to channel for meals haha
Loving your series keep it up!
haha! Glad I can be of service! More soon!
I feel like I'm learning quite a bit about design concepts and visualization through all these videos, thanks for sharing your knowledge and opinions! :)
Both 67 and 30 are wonderful. However, 67 feels more "scandinavian" and it blends nicely with the surrounding area.
From these ones, i like 67 the best. But, it's exterior form reminds me of Löyly - public sauna in Helsinki.
I think this competition proposal is either designed by Finnish or other Nordic architects. I'm Finnish myself, and 67 feels so familiar - something i already see around me so much. Because of that it of course is very fitting within our culture. I still wish to see something new and little bit different.
It's nice to get some insight from a 'local'!
I think it's about finding the balance....
'New but familiar' ??
really enjoing this. been working in an architectural firm for 7 years now without a formal background and just haveing so many variations on a single building is really eye opeing.
Thank you and I find this to be one of the most interesting things about it!
Reminds me of early architecture school when 60 students would get the same brief and produce 60 different projects!
@@cathalcrumley i am in my first year of architecture now and it was pretty helpful to see the way someone reads 60 different works and what they look for as the format is so similar to my class
I like these. The hearth is my favorite because I do like an accessible roof. And it has great views of the water. Good stuff.
Accessible roof might be the deal breaker for this project overall, not straight forward from a planning point of view as I understand it, still a very nice idea though!
I think ever since I saw number 30, I knew it would one of the top projects- one of my favourites. Loving the videos keen to see the rest of the reviews.
thank you and yes, 30! 🤟
Tough to gauge, considering we don't have access to some of the material (plans, technical drawings), but 30 is the one from this batch I could see being built. I went ahead and checked the gallery, seems like a couple more are possibly going to stand out! Personally a fan of 170, though (optimistically) concerned with the -- spoiler alert -- translucent elements and... well, budget feasibility.
The more I searched the page, the more I believed some beauty in simplicity is required here. And, judging from the submissions, simple isn't always easy.
Haven't looked through all of them, though, since I'll be watching your videos. Don't stop!
haha thanks and yes, no spoilers!
There is of course a proper criteria by which each of these submissions should be measured, a projects ability to be built being one of them!
glad you changed your mind on 67. I love the little details in the renders like the connection from the angled glulam columns meeting the base plate on the outside. Maybe its because I in general when glulam details aren't perfectly total wood and there is an exposed bit, it makes it look a lot more industrial
Industrial is a good description for this one!
67 is the best by far.
Agree completely. Such a stunning proposal
I like it alot, images aside, it's a cool project!
Were I a man betting on which submissions will go far, I feel glass curtains are at a massive disadvantage. Sculpted concrete forms, hermetic buildings with lots of repetition, and timber structures will probably have an easier time with the panel.
Isn’t 30 just a square rebrand of the Natural Sciences Museum in Forum Barcelona?
I'm not against the Idea of 49 but I doubt how it would work that well in real materials. I think it would look less like 'playful patchwork' and more 'scruffy scrapwork' with all those panels of different materials. Especially when a bit worn out and dirty, with the seams and different sections aging at different speeds I think it will easily look closer to Fallout than Teletubbies
I love how project 40 doesn't look like nay building i have ever seen before
The proposal 67 contains 7 renders, while it was explicitly stated that there couldn't be more than 5. They didn't understand the brief, or they chose not to care. Either way, not a good look. A competition result can be nullified if it's proven a participant was advantaged, which IMO is the case here. Before calling me sour, make sure to understand that if all the participants had the opportunity to add imagery of their projects and allow them to better present their concept, well, they totally would.
The purpose of the limited amount of renders was, in my opinion, to limit the level of detail of the project to keep it conceptual, but also to democratize the process so it doesn't become a rendering competition where the gap between wealthy companies with access to a lot of resources and young architects can be ridiculously unbalanced.
Not calling you sour at all and thanks for bringing this up!
I agree, the rules are the rules BUT as nice as the images are in this proposal, pretty cgis are not the sole reason I selected it for my shortlist, 067 still reads as an exciting project, regardless of the quality and or quantity of images.....i'll leave it for the judges to enforce the rules here.
I agree though, this seems like an unfair advantage but at the same time 049 also made my shortlist and they had no professional cgi work.... my point is, if a project is unable to communicate its idea to the jury in 5 renders, not sure how an extra 2 will win it a place on the shortlist.... If they are disqualified then so be it.
Please create a competition for you to judge yourself for students possibly to win
67 was my best in the first 100 but looking it again and comparing within your top 3 I realized that the interior design is claustrophobic and pale. the project has no fun. On the opposite second one having too much fun. number 30 is giving the perfect balance and taste of these two projects. Only question in my mind, they should realy naile the facade material. Without that nice reflection it can became too banal.
30 is the perfect balance for me but I agree, glass can be tricky at concept stage
I love what they're going for and I hope they get the chance to work on this in more detail!
They're all great except for that horrific clunky first one, playful for sure but absolutely not fit for the test of time. Maybe for a pavillion?
Clunky is fair 🤣 not a fan of its overall massing!
5th place is really poor and I don't agree at all with your take. It's basically a bootleg Aalto-project. They have taken (basically stolen) the exact design language of a very famous building with very strong characteristics and applied it to their own project (while trying to get away with it framing it as "tradition of experimentation"). It would be understandable if Aalto did this project himself, but now it just seems like such a lack of own ideas.
All fair points and I don't think I can really disagree with any of them.....
I really enjoyed the spirit of this submission and that's what I took away from it, practically speaking it might not even work but it's refreshing to see an entry that is at least attempting to engage with the people who will be making and using the building..... and not just showing us another archicad render of an escalator in the lobby!
As for stealing an idea, all of these submissions are stealing from somewhere, this one just did it well IMO
@@cathalcrumley My problem regarding the stealing part, is that they are not adding anything of their own really. There's a difference between inspiration and theft. If they for example used the modular part of the Experimental House but applied other and new materials, then it would be all fine for me. Now, what we have, is the same modular concept, same materials, same colors. The whole design language is identical, just applied on a different shape.
These are all bad