"ain't nothing like the real thing, baby."
you've heard the song right?
"i'm well aware nothing can take the place of being there."
a line from the song. nothing can take the place of actually experiencing the architecture.
here is my question:
why would someone want to experience a place only in a model or picture representation? why not just experience it first hand?
2 comments:
The question of why would we would choose to only see something in model or picture form is not always a choice we can make. I doubt that these methods would be chosen over a first hand experience but as for any building thats 3,000 miles away there needs to be some form of representation of experience for people who are not there. Pictures, and maybe even a model, are the lifeline of these buildings to other countries but there is no intention for them to take the place but merely to envoke a want to see more. Curiosity is what makes us never settle for these lifeless demonstrations and as we do visit these places we realize why.
i understand that experiencing real spaces in computer model or pictures is sometimes the only option for some, but the question was referring to electronic worlds. meaning the only way to experience a space from an electronic world is through electronics.
there is nothing like experiencing a place first hand, and if that is not even an option, then what is the point of even designing it in the first place? what is the intent of designing something that no one can actually ever experience? the only thing that can walk through the space and experience it is a computer generated avatar.
and as a designer i want my spaces to be experienced by real people, not by avatars.
Post a Comment