Figure 2: Isometric drawing of the first quadrant showing figure, field, half-wall and figure bounding lines.
Figure 3: Isometric drawing of the second quadrant showing figure, field, half-wall and figure bounding lines.
Figure 4: Isometric drawing of the third quadrant showing figure, field, half-wall and figure bounding lines.
Figure 5: Isometric drawing of the fourth quadrant showing figure, field, half-wall and figure bounding lines.
drawing will serve the purpose. Both offer the simple expedience of consistent scale for all linear measurements. The plan oblique drawing – often referred to as an in architectural parlance – has the benefit of using true angular measurement. The isometric drawing – shown here and throughout this project – is, in turn, less visually distorted.
In keeping with the pattern thus far, we examine each quadrant indepen-dently (-). Isolating the quadrants has the benefit of reducing the complex-ity of individual drawings, while also prompting increased practice in making four examples. Comparing the model, the paraline drawings and the plan dia-grams, prompts a discussion of intent. In this instance, both types of draw-ings serve as the platform for the next stage of development.
Drawn with the proper edge-contrast, we can observe the isometric images as diagrams. The examples to the left use four line weights to differentiate appropriate edges. The figures, half-walls and fields exhibit lighter lines along their interior edges and heavier lines at their perimeters. A darker edge sur-rounds each composition’s outline, while still lighter lines mark the bounding lines. The visible result of these tactics gives a distinct emphasis to the axial interplay of figures against a ground.
The visual character of each quadrant is quite distinct. In the first quad-rant, we notice that the wall stands as a lone sentinel opposite the figure sit-ting along the edge of its field (). The elements in the second quadrant, in contrast, presents a more unified configuration, defining a courtyard space between the figure and half-wall, as well as a companion space to the opposite side (). The grouping in the third quadrant shares some similarities to that of the first. Its principal differences reflect the severe spatial orientation of the figure away from the half-wall. The fact that the field continues past the wall implies a division in the rear court (). In the fourth quadrant, we find the half-wall combining with the field and both running in a direction counter to the figure. The result is less spatial than the other quadrants, while seeming slightly more kinetic ().
These interpretations are admittedly brief, but they make an important point. Orchestrating a good design drawing relies on the rules of visual gestalt, and meaning follows observations that are inherently diagrammatic. Beyond presenting a design, they also prompt analysis, from which inference can lead to further refinement in the design.
Adding fields & overhead planes
In the continuing narrative of the project, we move to adding complexity to the ground in the form of two new fields. The intent that motivates the first additional field is to increase the complexity of the emerging shallow relief.
The purpose of the exercise is deliberately formal – it enriches the link to two-dimensional visualization. At the same time, it provides a mechanism for reac-tivating the underlying relational grid that began with the first phase of the project.
In the absence of a real site, the further development of the shallow relief also helps to generate a richer context for the spatial exercise. Built architec-ture has the luxury and possibility of responding to an interpretation of con-text in the physical world. In response, our educational fiction includes the creation and management of the ground as a means of moving beyond a ster-ile flat plane.
The intention for the new field is to improve the presence of visual grain for the ground. As in previous stages, the procedure begins with four
dia-
original field, partially bracket-ing and assertbracket-ing a vertical direction for the negative space.
Figure 7: In quadrant two the grain field follows the grain of the field and its interior wall echoes the field’s center axis.
Figure 8: The grain field in surrounds the figure, crosses the original field and divides quadrant three at its center.
The result asserts a stronger visual equivalence between the two halves.
Figure 9: The new field in quadrant four provides a hori-zontal center that strengthens the balance between the wall and figure in the fourth quadrant.
Figure 10: The complete com-position with added grain fields and showing those boundary lines and axes that cross reference two or more edges or centers. Thus far the elements best structure the area shared by four original figures.
lines. We use these lines – products of the original grid and figure – to iden-tify opportunities to enhance the condition of grain within each composition.
This enhancement takes the form of a grain dominant gesture overlaid as a transparent field in each quadrant. Where fields overlap, the tone darkens appropriately.
This addition requires an evaluation of the conditions of order present in each composition. As they stand, the play a dominant role in determining the size and placement of both figure and field. It follows, therefore, that subsequent manipulations of the compositions first include an examination of those regulating lines.
The rules of engagement for the grain field are simple:
· The new field divides each quadrant into two or three distinct areas or subdivisions.
· Each field spans the quadrant either horizontally or vertically.
· Each field is orthogonal.
There are several potential visual results in placing the grain field. The field can simply amplify each quadrant as an individual composition. It might also modify the quadrant composition, as it benefits the overall group of four quadrants. The objective of the analysis is to determine a synthesis responsive to both the individual quadrant and the overall scheme. When we view all four fields as an ensemble, therefore, they should also enrich the texture and com-plexity of the ground, appropriate to the individual elements and the whole composition.
The four diagrams to the right demonstrate an array of responses to the particular dynamics of the four quadrants (–). The two fields, rendered as transparent, interact with one another. The addition of the grain field in each instance generates broad spatial structure and overall direction. In all four examples, there are also areas of overlap that define a distinct sub-field of greater visual weight. The diagram below shows the visual character across the boundaries (). The overall result continues to structure the center of the composition.
Figure 11: The composition to the left shows elected and grain fields with engaged boundary and axis lines superimposed over the original combined relational grid.
Figure 12: This virtual plan view of the quadrant one model demonstrates the result of subdividing the shallow relief. The fields and ground plane, responding to the original grid, exhibit three levels of height, adjusting the compositional elements. The half–wall has changed in response as well.
Figure 13: Virtual plan view shows the entire four-quadrant composition with subdivided shallow relief shaded for emphasis.
Figure 14: Isometric view of the composition shows shallow relief articulating elective fields and grain fields subdivided by selected boundary and axis lines.
The suggestion of deep complexity, implied by the areas of overlap, prompts the next investigation. When we reintroduce the original relational grid, we also introduce a means of articulating a greater sub-division within the shal-low relief (). Reintroducing the grid provides a relevant filter through which it is possible to amend the visual texture, to reflect both the overlaps in the fields and the originating order. The model for this change offers the oppor-tunity to further elaborate the structure of the shallow relief. A plan view of quadrant one serves to demonstrate the general results. The illustration high-lights the four levels of the relief with hierarchical shades of gray ().
The results of these additions remind us that the project began as a dia-grammatic enterprise. In architecture, there is an important boundary between formal concept and phenomena. Designers and alert viewers traverse that border back and forth. A courtyard space – a purposeful enclosure – gains meaning and nuance exactly at the moment that we recognize it as a court-yard of particular form. That recognition can direct the design process towards greater clarity and articulation of purpose.
half-wall schemes, do not share a similar level of complexity. Within the arc of the project, this serves as a prompt for further development. While our pat-tern of using orthographic drawings or physical models might serve the pur-pose, for illustrating fundamental practices in design thinking, this provides an opportunity to introduce one of the designer’s best tools for exploring spa-tial structure: the section.
The as drawing convention makes visible a structural reality. Slic-ing through any object reveals its cross-section, and when that object is hol-low, the result exposes the internal space and its relationship to the substance – a self-contained image of figure-ground (). As noted earlier, the
architec-tural plan itself is a horizontal section, a fictional slice through a building – usually at eye level. Seen as a diagram, the section allows for analysis.
Vertical sections, commonly oriented with or across the compositional grain, can both support analysis and determine rhetorical bias. That is to say, choosing a particular location for a section reflects an assessment of where important design decisions occur. In that sense, the designer sorts through her intentions for a particular space to examine and emphasize one axis by locating a significant point for design development.
Working in section also counters the inherent bias of designing in plan. As an example, a plan may show three identical spaces in succession. The section, in contrast, may reveal that the spaces and doorways have different heights or that the windows do not align on the vertical (). In multi-storied projects, section is the visual tool that reveals relationships among plan levels.
In our project sequence, we introduce section to reflect plan geometries along a vertical axis. While this is not a routine procedure in architectural practice, it follows from the use of relational geometries as an organizing prin-ciple. Furthermore, it serves to demonstrate relational logic between plan and section, a strategy with origins in the Italian Renaissance. We conflate eleva-tion with seceleva-tion, as it also lies on the vertical plane. It is, therefore, what we see as the parallel plane behind the literal section (). Thus it fosters a com-parison between the faces along a path or axis and the encountered mass or poché that defines the space.
Figure 17: A section cut at the central axis of quadrant one.
Thin vertical lines mark key boundaries of the composition as well as the center axis of the figure. Horizontal lines call out only the major, dominant cross-boundaries.
Figure 15: Slicing through any hollow figure exposes the section cut, as in the case of this pepper.
Figure 16: Three spaces that appear equal in plan view show important differences in section. Arrows mark direction and location of section cuts.
Diagram 18·1: Plan drawing of quadrant two shows alignments of added elements including enclosure, half-walls and fields.
Figure 18: Plan drawing of subject quadrant shows mea-suring lines and path as toned field (18·1).
West and south section drawings of the subject quadrant show key measuring lines (18·2&3).
Diagram 18·2: West section of quadrant two.
As an extension of our ongoing discussion of gestalt, it is appropriate to point out that studying and working from these drawings forms an appropri-ate object lesson in visual balance across the axis of the ground plane. As most sites are not flat planes, the visual proportions continue as implied propor-tions through the ground, and manipulapropor-tions of level using our field addipropor-tions allow us to bring this aspect into our design fiction.