Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro
Well, again (and not to sound condescending):
The render was called a concept model for two reasons, to wit the operative words in that phrase.
A concept is usually not required to show anymore details than the basic outline of the plan. A model can oftentimes be nothing more than a rough visual aid to help clarify maybe one or two aspects of the objectified thing's whole, case and point the cantilever renders for the Nordstrom tower.
Now...render, at least IMO, is a different kind of animal. It seems to function as a catalyst for bringing the thing objectified out of concept mode into something whose architectural merits can be more intelligently debated.
What I see here is precisely what the person who shared it with us said it was, and not quite yet at the render stage I suggested above.
2¢
PS: Pre-War, "Neo-" or otherwise, decidedly doesn't fit in, say, the greater portion of L.A.'s Bunker Hill skyline. City Hall is too far out IMO to be caught in DTLA's Modernist gravitational pull. And QF vice-versa. I can name other cities (of course not here lest I wander too far afield) whose growth-fueled skylines over the past decade or so where pre-war not only ill-conformed, but never seemed to be in demand from an urban aesthetics POV.
A nickel.
|
I hope youre right about the rendering. Clealy it leaves me wanting and extremely disappointed, but if what you say is true, there is some hope yet for this project.
As for neo-pre war "fitting in" I dont believe great architecture need fit into its surroundings or conform to the cityscape it is joining. If it is indeed great architecture, it can stand on its own head and shoulders above the evironment it was built into. Perhaps its all just a matter of taste.
Threaded Mode