Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Animate Form
Although I find all of Greg Lynn's writings extremely insightful and exciting, what I would like to discuss in this entry is something that I struggled to justify in my most current analysis of modeling subjects and the implied forms created via movement with respect to time. I was conflicted when it came to the actual modeling of the movement analysis because of the limited methods by which I knew to tackle the problem. The idea of modeling time based on frame captures of a film on a given interval made me question the legitimacy of my analysis based purely on the fact that I was attempting to model fluid form based on multiple frames of static moments. I had no way to accurately represent the movement occurring between the static frames except via intuition and memory. "The dominant mode for discussing motion in architecture has been the cinematic model, where the multiplication and sequencing of static snap-shots simulates movement. The problem with the motion-picture analogy is that architecture occupies the role of the static frame through which motion progresses. Force and motion are eliminated from form only to be reintroduced, after the fact of design, through concepts and techniques of optical procession." - Greg Lynn
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment