I enjoy Eisenman's knowledge of history, and his philosophical thoughts. To me, the experience of digital architecture depraves the sensory needs of users. With digital architecture, the richness and complexity of nature is reduced to wholly phenomenological conceptions of space and observation always leads into an ontology of LCD's, flashing lights and lack of touch.
As an architect, i have a certain feeling and confort by hand scketching, planning and thinking, a computer can only express exactly what the architect come up as a solution, i remenber one of my teacher telling me, with the computer "garbage in garbage out". i use computer a lot but it is just a tool, like a sheet of paper and a pencil, i can either rendering with computer or scketch paper, or colouring pencil. i really like that subject.
What is interesting, is that architects who do spend allot of time in front of computers, as I do, should know full well how dissatisfying it is to live, mentally, in a digital space. As an architecture student during the late 90's, I jumped into digital design and documentation as many others did. What is most apparent in my reflection is how much time I've spent staring at screens. I predict that architects who mostly use computers will tend to run shorter careers if not for health reasons.
Poink Poink Poink vs Wshooo. I need to be disciplined in a personality of the author to understand 70 % of what Peter is talking about. One thing is sure Peter Is not a designer he is a Critic/Theoretician.
This guy has some of the most interesting lectures!
I enjoy Eisenman's knowledge of history, and his philosophical thoughts. To me, the experience of digital architecture depraves the sensory needs of users. With digital architecture, the richness and complexity of nature is reduced to wholly phenomenological conceptions of space and observation always leads into an ontology of LCD's, flashing lights and lack of touch.
always brutal honesty
As an architect, i have a certain feeling and confort by hand scketching, planning and thinking, a computer can only express exactly what the architect come up as a solution, i remenber one of my teacher telling me, with the computer "garbage in garbage out". i use computer a lot but it is just a tool, like a sheet of paper and a pencil, i can either rendering with computer or scketch paper, or colouring pencil. i really like that subject.
What is interesting, is that architects who do spend allot of time in front of computers, as I do, should know full well how dissatisfying it is to live, mentally, in a digital space. As an architecture student during the late 90's, I jumped into digital design and documentation as many others did. What is most apparent in my reflection is how much time I've spent staring at screens. I predict that architects who mostly use computers will tend to run shorter careers if not for health reasons.
Having a balance between the virtual and the physical is my aim, which sadly doesn't happen with big firms.
Shorter careers or shorter life spans? i prefer the latter. :0
That is very interesting, !
Not me listening to this lecture while tracing my drawings in computer:) , it would be interesting to see his thoughts on AI
50:27 fun😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
Applied art major holding court pretending to be complex for the zombies
Poink Poink Poink vs Wshooo. I need to be disciplined in a personality of the author to understand 70 % of what Peter is talking about. One thing is sure Peter Is not a designer he is a Critic/Theoretician.
Classical architecture was boring. Not such a good yardstick.
Which architecture is not boring for you? Your mother's house?
eisenman , u stay that way, u will loose !!
ivan date hehehe