No, this is not a discussion about 3Dh, I simply wanna see some fancy graphics. I'm talkin' 'bout fly money shots, sick presentation boards, kick ass portfolios, and maybe dope fly-throughs. I figure this can be a discussion of all things CG, illustrator, and photoshop where we show off our 1337 w4aRez and discuss mad h4x of programs such as Max, Maya, Rhino, Form Z, et al. I mean hell, if you're paying 50Gs just to go to places like Columbia and Sci-arc that specialize in this stuff you might as well show off a bit eh?
Me first:
Modeled in Rhino, rendered in Maxwell, finished in Photoshop.
Project I did in China last semester. I admit it may be a bit "blobby" but I thought it was a neat project considering we had 5 weeks to put it together.
And you still can't see a reson for a computer generated building core ?
--- Why not just make everything at display in this tread buildable, best way are a computer generated framework you must have realised .
actually Per I figured most of the stuff in that building would be made of concrete formwork. By the way, Per, you are allowed to post here, but please for the love of god, do not show us any of those old 3Dh gifs. Post somethin' new and impressive will ya?
True but that's how things allready are ; I havn't posted any new frame structures for a very long time ; painting you know. And bside concreate also often in moddern building structures are sheet form akkready, then more important are the interiours the structure, what need not be covered anymore, --- That's the blessing with computed building core, that what you form in Silids with a computer, are buildable in the scale you prefere, then ofcaurse there are multible scales , many way's , but acturly easy way's, to get what is as important as the distant expression.
Most fancy renderings I seen, newer focused on the main volume of the structures, the structure itself, now this 3dh force me to see this in a very different way, but then then everything are buildable and you get exactly what you see, -- nothing wrong about that, but back to subject , see it newer was my obligation, to do anything but develob the method discover that computers realy do 3D well,
And please let me add ; --- if you havn't even tried, don't even know what exelent spaces would be crafted within, how floors would interconnect, why logics would flow so soft, if you can't even emagine as you would not try even it would be a wonder ---- then please don't blame me, let the worlds blame you.
Why wouldn't you even have a peep , just look and see, what a genuine structural framework would do. Try it with a 3dh core, shuld be easy , or what ?
-------- Anyway it would be great ; a tread with all the Solid Modeling wonders you would emagine, but worked thru so when the building core are generated , there are a gurantie for buildability, by this tread in this Fora, an explotion of creativity of all those fancy buildings you can project down tinyist frame , by a number of contribuatirs anyone who are good presaving you or me, that their Design are most beautifull ; then architecture can finaly move, anyone would know, that only the scale of the framework, what materials for the frames and it's density, scale gadgets , is all that need to be figured out, the rest the computer do by instant.
OK.. this is a really dumb comment, but even though I'm a longtime user of Archinect I have absolutely no clue how to post graphics here.. I mean, I'd be happy to if somebody could only tell me how to do so... Alright. I admit it. I'm stupid.
The image has to be hosted on a website somewhere. You can't link to an image on your hard drive. You can upload to Imageshack for example. Then you get the web address of your image and link to it using the little bit of markup code which you can find in faint grey underneath the 'post a response' box.
- Is this tread starting to become exactly the opposite of what was suggested ?
I think so -- talks, words, not any serious fancy graphics just clown talks and small talk ; now was that a good answer to all the complains, just to hijack another tread for smalltalk, just becaurse now that tread was at the top ?
Per, don't get mad....but I have some fancy graphics for you. I hope you like this, and please understand that this is not intended to be mean. Maybe we can all have a good chuckle (hopefully).
Just perfect -- isn't this what is a wonderfull suggestion but ;
How would you think Fallingwater would display, how would a 3D topographic map, make sure all foundations level , to support the structure unseen. Emagine how perfect the most difficult thing, the basic foundations would smooth to any level, ensuring perfect foundations following the grounds.
I say this without a graphic to explain, but look at your graphic and note, note how grounds are flat, just emagine how the concept of generating the framework, will work under any condisions, at any grounds.
But you know -- that is not my job ; what fun would there be, if I wade in with design, method, parts list, N,C, codes for calculating cost, vilume weight and whatever. My attibute to this, is that I done my job, I am not a very good designer as such, I am sure there are better designers, who know more about architecture than I, more about renderers about Solid modeling --- so isn't it a better way to keep it that way ?
Sure I see myself as designer, but that is desiger of methods , this system is just my suggestion to solve a lot of those structural issues that is holding so much wonderfull design back, -- it simply is not my job to do any designs, only examples of what can be made with a different attitude towerds the build works.
Apurimac --- what do you mean with "This is the stuff I'm talking about!" ; where and for what ( no offence) , but is this going to make fancy graphics or specific data for making building compoments, sorry but I don't realy get it -- from my point of view architecture are a boring time consuming thing, sure it is nice with parametic programming esp. when you oposed my times don't has to program it yourself as such, but can use modern screen menu's but --- except from we all want fancy graphics --- isn't there supposed to be more to it , --- no offence at all, but isn't the art , to make it relevant in terms of building the house, sure that is fine on a screen, but isn't CAD about getting the thing out from the screen into something real, like a building compoments, to do it in real, now I appriciate advanced programming, but where would you use it, when there are so few methods, to acturly bring it into real ; That's what I don't get. We can continue programming more and more fantasy worlds, we can continue to build houses as how they was done even more skillfull, even in concrete, more than a hundred years ago , -- but why is there so little new thinking, why so many fancy graphics and so few new idears to make these things on a screen in real, things that is newer thought to be taken out into the real but used for anything else, --- promoting, selling, exebitions, discussing ,but newer a thought about making a practic link so to be able to build it. use the computer for that to --- why is there so little of that. Is "what I am talking about" just fancy graphics, without a serious attemt to make it so it is not just fancy graphics ?
Per, I'm so sorry I don't care about 3D-H, and yes, I want to see pretty graphics, i don't want to see the same blurry low-res render of your 3D-h system. Please stop it with that. What program do you even use to make that stuff in anyway?
I'm giving serious thought to starting a another thread with a different title for us to post some graphics in. This time around though I'm flame per if he posts anything related to 3D-H.
Apurimac what's your idear about allway's commenting my graphics like an arogant "I know better" idiot --- with idiot I mean a guy who think only his own high gloss sales thing are relevant ?
What sort of argument in this tread is it to make it into another "harras Per Corell" tread ; tell me have you so high thoughts about your way of drawing , then why don't you go out and critic the blurred lines of any other sketch by any other architect ?
Do you realy think someone now find you a very very tough guy, after dancing after the class bully's pipe and yet another time destroy a tread by not ansvering one single question but passing the exame of usenet Trolls, by personal attacks, by arogance towerds others work --- tell me how many times you tried to down my sketches becaurse you know only one way to do things, and that is your own --- and as I uses low resolution graphics this give you the right to spit on others work and ontop you are so arogant to ask me what program I use ; tell me are you a child ???
Who offtracked by not answering but instantly connect with the old saur usenet trolls I pointed out , ---I point these out just so you would know what smelly sad charecters you join up with ; tell me why you havn't even answered the humble suggestion I made, and instead jumped onto the dirt waggon ; do you relay think you would like the company if you just for a moment understood what dirty minds we are talking about ?
Now it was Ok that you "borrowed" the start for a succesfull tread by name --- but your acting towerds someone who has just a slightly different graphic language is that of an amature I say that strait out, as by joining the personal attacks you don't even realise what you are doing, and belive me your critics and meaning about my graphics are that of an amature , also by giving thise trolls that has nothing to say but personal attacks -- those who fill up this fora with personal attacks with no arguments and your sad oppinion about others working with architecture,
So you borrow halve the name for a tread and go ahead joining the personal attacks towerds a single person who contribuate with somthing else than only personal attacks, you justify this with your oppinion and arogance towerds other artists and you still think you are an artist ?
---------- You ruined this tread yourself , by giving it to those dirtbags instead of taking it serious and make something out of it ; I tell you now you are the one they are laughing of -- a guy who are so stupid that he hand over a brilliant promise for a tread, to people who all the time prove their only "architecture" are dirty personal attacks people who know nothing about architecture if you read their posts you would know , that they are outsiders who find joy in destroying this fora by attacking a single person, the one who show most drive and has most fantasy --- for that price you give up your tread and join the scum band .
If you had answered my suggestion , but no architecture is about high gloss renderings and those who make low resolution graphics do not have a right to do so. --- Eh but did you mention your oppinion aout the style, the angled supports , the buildability NO, becaurse this fora can not realise it's real enemy.
And isn't it strange, that this real enemy is about how far we can go, in personal attacks, how much personal attacks we want to hear --- did you like the things I said about your glossy sales promotion graphics those without a soul.
And why do you say that --- you and I make compleatly different things, still without even mention the core issue, the actural core structure and what hold those panels in the air, you blame me my privileage to express my works -- my works are new structures remember -- by whatever low resolution graphics I chose enough to describe the design.
You don't answer, don't answer when I tell that what I do is not surface but building core -- there you arogantly down my sketches as you think I am in the rendering buisness ; you uses arguments that would be relevant in your buisness to down a structural idear even none of what you do relate just slightly, to develobment of new structural methods.
On top by adding so silli arguments you happily join the poison spreading outsiders who could not care less about new building methods -- your measures for that, is how it display or rather how you think my work shuld display with expensive renderers ; totaly irelevant .
Oh --- I know , you proberly halve way read one of my posts where I questioned if high gloss renderings realy are the core issue, and you proberly became angry that I pointed out that it is sad focus are pointed towerds 2D representations when nothing is more important than what those gloss Icons are made of , sorry but the fact I take my work serious can in no way treaden your renderings ; you see I privileage myself to use whatever sketch technike I prefere, as long as the messeage come thru --- that messeage is about how you build a structure , and that is the compleatly opposite than how you present the build structure, so not even did you join the poison crowd openly started to harras me in secure safety protected by the class bully.
, but you also put words in my mouth and started using dirty words.
--------- All becaurse you don't like that I point out, that there are more important things in construction, than how renders work -- in fact that was you bringing this up, something totaly irevalant but the only way you could start bitching, as even I didn't make one word about rendering, you didn't make one word about construction , and again forgot to answer how the looks of things come from what make things.
Per, my problem with you is that we've given you ample opprotunity to "prove" your "system" by elaborating how it works beyond simple renders. It has been almost 4 years since i saw your postings on Design Community and subsequently here about 3D-H and it looks just as irrelevant as the day I first saw it. When asked, you respond "but i am just an artist, an idea man, its not my responsibility to make it (sp)acturaly(sp) work". A man who does not take initiative with his ideas and expand upon them to make them realizable in a digital sense, like many ideas that come out of the AA, is just plain lazy.
What aggravates me the most though, is how you look down at designers who take pride in their 3D, by calling them out as too conceptual. To be perfectly blunt, you are a massive hypocrite. That translates into danish doesn't it? Tasty+Suave's beautiful renderings of a fish skeleton have more to do with architecture and structure than your system ever will unless you actually start to convey your ideas in ways that are readable and functional. Basically your renderings, your 3D work in general, is as broken and indecipherable as your English. To think I defended you to an extent back in '04 is laughable now, and I'm ashamed I even started this thread as it has once more degenerated into a debate about your "system". I will not respond to this post so when your write 5000 words worth of response claiming how you're a misunderstood genius, they will fall on deaf ears. But you will write them anyway because obviously you have nothing better to do than troll this forum, whereas you could be making your 3D-H system "work" and starting your "revolution".
Excuse me it should read A man who does not take initiative with his ideas and expand upon them even to make them realizeable in a digital sense, like many experiments from the AA that make sense in a digital sense, let alone the real world, is just plain lazy
Not at all, the only one who Troll this fora is you and SDR, your great companion in the heroic act of ruining my life by commenting each and every of my mails ,spreading poison about me, about my method, and this you do constantly --- now what is that called, not to stay away ,but constantly with two other "old friends" , constantly harassing a guy who's only crime is a great idea.
"It has been almost 4 years since i saw your postings on Design Community and subsequently here about 3D-H and it looks just as irrelevant as the day I first saw it."
That is not difficult , but now I want an answer not just as you agrea years of poison , just becaurse you do not "understand" -- please look
What do you call that -- is this "just lazy" --- what do you know about the work before what you think is so simple anyone would figure that out , don't you even know that no one before , had this simple idear, and don't you know that the greatest advanteages are exactly "so simple that anyone would figure that out" but they did not, and there are the fact.
Who are you to judge an artists way , how he present his work, who are you agreaing to for years harassing a nice guy, making sure ruining his life, his family, his work ?
I don't know why I'm bothering to post, but I can't take this anymore…(and I'm sorry for contributing to the hijack)
3Dh is mildly interesting, but to call the system (not the name) entirely original is ludicrous. Personally, I've done similar things as far back as 11 years ago when I was researching stress-skins. I'm not sure, but I think that predates archinect and your posts and possibly even your invention of 3Dh (forgive me, I don't have the time to wade through all of you posts)
look at calculus and integrals--breaking curves up into discrete areas in order to solve the entire area:
looks pretty similar to what you're taking credit for "inventing", albeit in a strictly 2D plane, but it doesn't take much of a leap to extend it to 3D especially when dealing with anticlastic curvature and the like…
The OFFICIAL Fancy Graphics Thread!
No, this is not a discussion about 3Dh, I simply wanna see some fancy graphics. I'm talkin' 'bout fly money shots, sick presentation boards, kick ass portfolios, and maybe dope fly-throughs. I figure this can be a discussion of all things CG, illustrator, and photoshop where we show off our 1337 w4aRez and discuss mad h4x of programs such as Max, Maya, Rhino, Form Z, et al. I mean hell, if you're paying 50Gs just to go to places like Columbia and Sci-arc that specialize in this stuff you might as well show off a bit eh?
Me first:
Modeled in Rhino, rendered in Maxwell, finished in Photoshop.
Project I did in China last semester. I admit it may be a bit "blobby" but I thought it was a neat project considering we had 5 weeks to put it together.
Modeled with sharpie, Rendered with paint
Apurimac, That is an awesome rendering. Although I'm not sure about the car. Is that a Ferrari?
Aston
and DFIX, that's pretty funny
And you still can't see a reson for a computer generated building core ?
--- Why not just make everything at display in this tread buildable, best way are a computer generated framework you must have realised .
actually Per I figured most of the stuff in that building would be made of concrete formwork. By the way, Per, you are allowed to post here, but please for the love of god, do not show us any of those old 3Dh gifs. Post somethin' new and impressive will ya?
True but that's how things allready are ; I havn't posted any new frame structures for a very long time ; painting you know. And bside concreate also often in moddern building structures are sheet form akkready, then more important are the interiours the structure, what need not be covered anymore, --- That's the blessing with computed building core, that what you form in Silids with a computer, are buildable in the scale you prefere, then ofcaurse there are multible scales , many way's , but acturly easy way's, to get what is as important as the distant expression.
Most fancy renderings I seen, newer focused on the main volume of the structures, the structure itself, now this 3dh force me to see this in a very different way, but then then everything are buildable and you get exactly what you see, -- nothing wrong about that, but back to subject , see it newer was my obligation, to do anything but develob the method discover that computers realy do 3D well,
And please let me add ; --- if you havn't even tried, don't even know what exelent spaces would be crafted within, how floors would interconnect, why logics would flow so soft, if you can't even emagine as you would not try even it would be a wonder ---- then please don't blame me, let the worlds blame you.
Why wouldn't you even have a peep , just look and see, what a genuine structural framework would do. Try it with a 3dh core, shuld be easy , or what ?
But ofcaurse, other forms, even square would also render fine.
-------- Anyway it would be great ; a tread with all the Solid Modeling wonders you would emagine, but worked thru so when the building core are generated , there are a gurantie for buildability, by this tread in this Fora, an explotion of creativity of all those fancy buildings you can project down tinyist frame , by a number of contribuatirs anyone who are good presaving you or me, that their Design are most beautifull ; then architecture can finaly move, anyone would know, that only the scale of the framework, what materials for the frames and it's density, scale gadgets , is all that need to be figured out, the rest the computer do by instant.
I take a PB&J on my 3dh and a So' DER!
1111001010001110011110101010011111111100101001000101010
10110101100010101010101001010101010100101010101010101011
01000011 01000110 00101100 00100000 01101101 01111001 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01100001 00100000 01101100 01101001 01110100 01110100 01101100 01100101 00100000 01110010 01110101 01110011 01110100 01111001 00100000 01100010 01110101 01110100 00100000 01001001 00100111 01101101 00100000 01110000 01110010 01100101 01110100 01110100 01111001 00100000 01110011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01101010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01110011 01110000 01100101 01110111 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101010 01101001 01100010 01100101 01110010 01101001 01110011 01101000
Looks like the thread's getting hijacked. More pictures and less words please. Seriously, I think this could be an interesting thread.
thread
i'm not gonna let this thread die with cockroachvomit as the last man to post here.
OK.. this is a really dumb comment, but even though I'm a longtime user of Archinect I have absolutely no clue how to post graphics here.. I mean, I'd be happy to if somebody could only tell me how to do so... Alright. I admit it. I'm stupid.
The image has to be hosted on a website somewhere. You can't link to an image on your hard drive. You can upload to Imageshack for example. Then you get the web address of your image and link to it using the little bit of markup code which you can find in faint grey underneath the 'post a response' box.
the image I used was off of my myspace.
Myspace has some seriously fancy graphics.
Does Flickr work for hosting images linked to here?
yes, it does Urbanist.
Lib, i almost had a seizure lookin' at that dudes page
Myspace is pretty offensive. It is just so easy to make it ugly! How could you not?
- Is this tread starting to become exactly the opposite of what was suggested ?
I think so -- talks, words, not any serious fancy graphics just clown talks and small talk ; now was that a good answer to all the complains, just to hijack another tread for smalltalk, just becaurse now that tread was at the top ?
Per, don't get mad....but I have some fancy graphics for you. I hope you like this, and please understand that this is not intended to be mean. Maybe we can all have a good chuckle (hopefully).
Q: How can we improve the Villa Savoye? A: 3d-h
Just perfect -- isn't this what is a wonderfull suggestion but ;
How would you think Fallingwater would display, how would a 3D topographic map, make sure all foundations level , to support the structure unseen. Emagine how perfect the most difficult thing, the basic foundations would smooth to any level, ensuring perfect foundations following the grounds.
I say this without a graphic to explain, but look at your graphic and note, note how grounds are flat, just emagine how the concept of generating the framework, will work under any condisions, at any grounds.
Please exchouse the age of this, but this will be an answer to your suggestion, --- not the same design, but it indicate what would render ;
Sorry wrong format try this ;
http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2000.jpg
that's not nearly fancy enough per. Do better. (Hint, your renderer sucks!)
But you know -- that is not my job ; what fun would there be, if I wade in with design, method, parts list, N,C, codes for calculating cost, vilume weight and whatever. My attibute to this, is that I done my job, I am not a very good designer as such, I am sure there are better designers, who know more about architecture than I, more about renderers about Solid modeling --- so isn't it a better way to keep it that way ?
Sure I see myself as designer, but that is desiger of methods , this system is just my suggestion to solve a lot of those structural issues that is holding so much wonderfull design back, -- it simply is not my job to do any designs, only examples of what can be made with a different attitude towerds the build works.
modeled in Maya , rendered in Maya spent over 50 K in tuition and all i have is bones...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIFHKx2SzAA
Good stuff tasty, i still need how to figure how to use Maya. This is the stuff I'm talking about!
Apurimac --- what do you mean with "This is the stuff I'm talking about!" ; where and for what ( no offence) , but is this going to make fancy graphics or specific data for making building compoments, sorry but I don't realy get it -- from my point of view architecture are a boring time consuming thing, sure it is nice with parametic programming esp. when you oposed my times don't has to program it yourself as such, but can use modern screen menu's but --- except from we all want fancy graphics --- isn't there supposed to be more to it , --- no offence at all, but isn't the art , to make it relevant in terms of building the house, sure that is fine on a screen, but isn't CAD about getting the thing out from the screen into something real, like a building compoments, to do it in real, now I appriciate advanced programming, but where would you use it, when there are so few methods, to acturly bring it into real ; That's what I don't get. We can continue programming more and more fantasy worlds, we can continue to build houses as how they was done even more skillfull, even in concrete, more than a hundred years ago , -- but why is there so little new thinking, why so many fancy graphics and so few new idears to make these things on a screen in real, things that is newer thought to be taken out into the real but used for anything else, --- promoting, selling, exebitions, discussing ,but newer a thought about making a practic link so to be able to build it. use the computer for that to --- why is there so little of that. Is "what I am talking about" just fancy graphics, without a serious attemt to make it so it is not just fancy graphics ?
Per, I'm so sorry I don't care about 3D-H, and yes, I want to see pretty graphics, i don't want to see the same blurry low-res render of your 3D-h system. Please stop it with that. What program do you even use to make that stuff in anyway?
I seriously think you may have singlehandedly killed this thread too by the way.
i second Apurimac's opinion. keep that stuff off this thread. please.
I'm giving serious thought to starting a another thread with a different title for us to post some graphics in. This time around though I'm flame per if he posts anything related to 3D-H.
^excuse me i'll flame
Here is one from a while back...before I knew how to control MANY variables.
that curtain wall's beautiful grid.
Lol, liebchen how long did it take you to put that together?
Apurimac what's your idear about allway's commenting my graphics like an arogant "I know better" idiot --- with idiot I mean a guy who think only his own high gloss sales thing are relevant ?
What sort of argument in this tread is it to make it into another "harras Per Corell" tread ; tell me have you so high thoughts about your way of drawing , then why don't you go out and critic the blurred lines of any other sketch by any other architect ?
Do you realy think someone now find you a very very tough guy, after dancing after the class bully's pipe and yet another time destroy a tread by not ansvering one single question but passing the exame of usenet Trolls, by personal attacks, by arogance towerds others work --- tell me how many times you tried to down my sketches becaurse you know only one way to do things, and that is your own --- and as I uses low resolution graphics this give you the right to spit on others work and ontop you are so arogant to ask me what program I use ; tell me are you a child ???
Who offtracked by not answering but instantly connect with the old saur usenet trolls I pointed out , ---I point these out just so you would know what smelly sad charecters you join up with ; tell me why you havn't even answered the humble suggestion I made, and instead jumped onto the dirt waggon ; do you relay think you would like the company if you just for a moment understood what dirty minds we are talking about ?
Now it was Ok that you "borrowed" the start for a succesfull tread by name --- but your acting towerds someone who has just a slightly different graphic language is that of an amature I say that strait out, as by joining the personal attacks you don't even realise what you are doing, and belive me your critics and meaning about my graphics are that of an amature , also by giving thise trolls that has nothing to say but personal attacks -- those who fill up this fora with personal attacks with no arguments and your sad oppinion about others working with architecture,
So you borrow halve the name for a tread and go ahead joining the personal attacks towerds a single person who contribuate with somthing else than only personal attacks, you justify this with your oppinion and arogance towerds other artists and you still think you are an artist ?
---------- You ruined this tread yourself , by giving it to those dirtbags instead of taking it serious and make something out of it ; I tell you now you are the one they are laughing of -- a guy who are so stupid that he hand over a brilliant promise for a tread, to people who all the time prove their only "architecture" are dirty personal attacks people who know nothing about architecture if you read their posts you would know , that they are outsiders who find joy in destroying this fora by attacking a single person, the one who show most drive and has most fantasy --- for that price you give up your tread and join the scum band .
If you had answered my suggestion , but no architecture is about high gloss renderings and those who make low resolution graphics do not have a right to do so. --- Eh but did you mention your oppinion aout the style, the angled supports , the buildability NO, becaurse this fora can not realise it's real enemy.
And isn't it strange, that this real enemy is about how far we can go, in personal attacks, how much personal attacks we want to hear --- did you like the things I said about your glossy sales promotion graphics those without a soul.
Per, stop, I'm warning you.
Just a remindeer to tread othes as you want to be treaded yourself !
exactly pal.
And why do you say that --- you and I make compleatly different things, still without even mention the core issue, the actural core structure and what hold those panels in the air, you blame me my privileage to express my works -- my works are new structures remember -- by whatever low resolution graphics I chose enough to describe the design.
You don't answer, don't answer when I tell that what I do is not surface but building core -- there you arogantly down my sketches as you think I am in the rendering buisness ; you uses arguments that would be relevant in your buisness to down a structural idear even none of what you do relate just slightly, to develobment of new structural methods.
On top by adding so silli arguments you happily join the poison spreading outsiders who could not care less about new building methods -- your measures for that, is how it display or rather how you think my work shuld display with expensive renderers ; totaly irelevant .
Oh --- I know , you proberly halve way read one of my posts where I questioned if high gloss renderings realy are the core issue, and you proberly became angry that I pointed out that it is sad focus are pointed towerds 2D representations when nothing is more important than what those gloss Icons are made of , sorry but the fact I take my work serious can in no way treaden your renderings ; you see I privileage myself to use whatever sketch technike I prefere, as long as the messeage come thru --- that messeage is about how you build a structure , and that is the compleatly opposite than how you present the build structure, so not even did you join the poison crowd openly started to harras me in secure safety protected by the class bully.
, but you also put words in my mouth and started using dirty words.
--------- All becaurse you don't like that I point out, that there are more important things in construction, than how renders work -- in fact that was you bringing this up, something totaly irevalant but the only way you could start bitching, as even I didn't make one word about rendering, you didn't make one word about construction , and again forgot to answer how the looks of things come from what make things.
Per, my problem with you is that we've given you ample opprotunity to "prove" your "system" by elaborating how it works beyond simple renders. It has been almost 4 years since i saw your postings on Design Community and subsequently here about 3D-H and it looks just as irrelevant as the day I first saw it. When asked, you respond "but i am just an artist, an idea man, its not my responsibility to make it (sp)acturaly(sp) work". A man who does not take initiative with his ideas and expand upon them to make them realizable in a digital sense, like many ideas that come out of the AA, is just plain lazy.
What aggravates me the most though, is how you look down at designers who take pride in their 3D, by calling them out as too conceptual. To be perfectly blunt, you are a massive hypocrite. That translates into danish doesn't it? Tasty+Suave's beautiful renderings of a fish skeleton have more to do with architecture and structure than your system ever will unless you actually start to convey your ideas in ways that are readable and functional. Basically your renderings, your 3D work in general, is as broken and indecipherable as your English. To think I defended you to an extent back in '04 is laughable now, and I'm ashamed I even started this thread as it has once more degenerated into a debate about your "system". I will not respond to this post so when your write 5000 words worth of response claiming how you're a misunderstood genius, they will fall on deaf ears. But you will write them anyway because obviously you have nothing better to do than troll this forum, whereas you could be making your 3D-H system "work" and starting your "revolution".
Good luck translating that.
Excuse me it should read A man who does not take initiative with his ideas and expand upon them even to make them realizeable in a digital sense, like many experiments from the AA that make sense in a digital sense, let alone the real world, is just plain lazy
Not at all, the only one who Troll this fora is you and SDR, your great companion in the heroic act of ruining my life by commenting each and every of my mails ,spreading poison about me, about my method, and this you do constantly --- now what is that called, not to stay away ,but constantly with two other "old friends" , constantly harassing a guy who's only crime is a great idea.
"It has been almost 4 years since i saw your postings on Design Community and subsequently here about 3D-H and it looks just as irrelevant as the day I first saw it."
That is not difficult , but now I want an answer not just as you agrea years of poison , just becaurse you do not "understand" -- please look
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/06/02/PH2005060202107.jpg
http://www.archidose.org/Blog/HD23a.jpg
http://www.archined.nl/archined/uploads/pics/SonO-10.jpg
http://www.archined.nl/archined/uploads/pics/SonO2.jpg
What do you call that -- is this "just lazy" --- what do you know about the work before what you think is so simple anyone would figure that out , don't you even know that no one before , had this simple idear, and don't you know that the greatest advanteages are exactly "so simple that anyone would figure that out" but they did not, and there are the fact.
Who are you to judge an artists way , how he present his work, who are you agreaing to for years harassing a nice guy, making sure ruining his life, his family, his work ?
I don't know why I'm bothering to post, but I can't take this anymore…(and I'm sorry for contributing to the hijack)
3Dh is mildly interesting, but to call the system (not the name) entirely original is ludicrous. Personally, I've done similar things as far back as 11 years ago when I was researching stress-skins. I'm not sure, but I think that predates archinect and your posts and possibly even your invention of 3Dh (forgive me, I don't have the time to wade through all of you posts)
look at calculus and integrals--breaking curves up into discrete areas in order to solve the entire area:
looks pretty similar to what you're taking credit for "inventing", albeit in a strictly 2D plane, but it doesn't take much of a leap to extend it to 3D especially when dealing with anticlastic curvature and the like…
also:
and
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.