The conceptual theory is very solid and the rationale for form creation is very sound. Only problem I have is in regards to site specificity, in particular cultural heritage (different societies and different places perceive form differently. These forms although variable as he explains, are all part of one form type). This "one style fits all" approach was also the problem of the modernist movement - if implemented too widely without regard to place it eventually becomes inadequate, boring and outdates itself. I think Tectonism should be considered as just another style, with its own merits, but not superior to the rest. Whoever wants to pay for Tectonist buildings or urban designs should do so and it will be another valuable addition to the ever-evolving urban landscape. Just my 2 cents.
I think the idea of tectonism is fully against a 'one style fits all' approach, but rather for one design process fits all. Just as in nature, organisms evolve based on the environmental conditions they live in (which has prooduced an insane number of species), and with architecture, tectonism would mean buildings that respond to their local materials, surroundings and people in the most efficient and natural way possible.
form and funcionality...when they work for each other human can achieve beatifull things.... when funcionality follows form you start having the wet dream of an starquitect
Very interesting indeed, what Zaha Hadid revolution used to let us feel is how to enjoy modern architectures as an asset, the famous German pragmatism, new investors for sure, they seek for good deals, such as saving electrical power expences, saving money to raise up buildings perfectly sustainable. Smart structures can be used as new shield or coat for old buildings, a huge opportunity for architects indeed, think about it Ok?
The conceptual theory is very solid and the rationale for form creation is very sound. Only problem I have is in regards to site specificity, in particular cultural heritage (different societies and different places perceive form differently. These forms although variable as he explains, are all part of one form type). This "one style fits all" approach was also the problem of the modernist movement - if implemented too widely without regard to place it eventually becomes inadequate, boring and outdates itself. I think Tectonism should be considered as just another style, with its own merits, but not superior to the rest. Whoever wants to pay for Tectonist buildings or urban designs should do so and it will be another valuable addition to the ever-evolving urban landscape. Just my 2 cents.
agreed!
I think the idea of tectonism is fully against a 'one style fits all' approach, but rather for one design process fits all. Just as in nature, organisms evolve based on the environmental conditions they live in (which has prooduced an insane number of species), and with architecture, tectonism would mean buildings that respond to their local materials, surroundings and people in the most efficient and natural way possible.
Very exciting. Looking forward to learning more about Tectonism and in particular about topology optimisation.
Pure Brilliance
muchas gracias,
form and funcionality...when they work for each other human can achieve beatifull things.... when funcionality follows form you start having the wet dream of an starquitect
next level of architecture. These guys deserve a nobal price.
i think so dude
True🤞they deserve to win one
Thank you
How to get to learn this new approach as architects?
Genius
oaaaaaaaaaa miren al patrick
What kind of softwares do they use to conceptualize the buildings ?
Mainly, Rhino + Grasshopper, and some Structural sorftware to understand distribution of force over the surface or solid
@@bokeikhankamza9676 thanks a lot man
have a good day
Very interesting indeed, what Zaha Hadid revolution used to let us feel is how to enjoy modern architectures as an asset, the famous German pragmatism, new investors for sure, they seek for good deals, such as saving electrical power expences, saving money to raise up buildings perfectly sustainable. Smart structures can be used as new shield or coat for old buildings, a huge opportunity for architects indeed, think about it Ok?
❤️❤️❤️
Its all inspired by nature. Dont pretend it is about enginnering. It is only engineering that has figured out how to copy some natural forms.
so basicaly lets use computers because we can, but in the real world construction costs are a parameter too
One could include construction cost as a parameter
@@jasperkrebs4097 ...a building not being built, is the cheapest.
such a gem of a video, but y did they fart in the intro edit?
0:03
Using computers to ultimately generate ...neo-elvish architecture!
The problem here is not the technology, but the results. Everything looks sterile, shallow and out of scale
Does this solve the total corruption and outrageous cost of housing that no normal person can ever afford?
so basicaly lets use computers because we can, but in the real world construction costs are a parameter too
yeah so the amount of material used could also be a parameter for the computers, hence solving the cost problem too
@@darpanhans6273 rubbish...I am afraid to say...look at the factual costs of high profile architecture, although based on building information models!