The brief's requirement for the 4th image was to show the 'main' interior space, showing "the active nature of the museum as a space for different audiences to experience, meet and come together." Its a little sad indeed that so many proposals focus on the lobby because the brief is relatively open at this stage of the competition, with a lot of potential for flexibility and overlapping different parts of the program, public and non-public, ticketed and free access areas, etc. Also, the pages that don't appear online are the floor plans, a section, specifically designated elevations and a circulation and logistics diagramme. So really, all the free reign to creatively communicate ideas in an unconstrained way is on the pages you can see. It would obviously be great to have the plans and section for reference against the images, but very much enjoying your engagement with what's available. Stirling work, sir
This is good information, thank you! I have taken this in to account in my latest episode and have tried to be less critical on the lack of sections and variety of interior images!
I read it as NOT requiring the interior image to show the lobby, but for each team to choose which space best illustrates the qualities of their project. I completely agree with you: showing the lobby in the interior image in so many cases is a bit of a let down. Yes, the lobby is important, the reward for finally finding how to get into the building. But there are so many other possible ways to articulate the 'main space' of the museum. An exhibition space that intersects with the restaurant and the logistics zone, just off the top of my head... An architecture and design museum seems like the perfect opportunity for the building to play an active role in the thing it is beyond a fancy facade and an instagramable lobby.
Again, well balanced commentary, I agree with 65 particularly. As we all know, perceived “bad” architecture draws a LOT of negative attention and engagement (looking at you, Dezeen comments section). While good architecture can get neglected and sometimes forgotten about - at least in the context of the internet and its discussions. This format allows for balanced, well reasoned commentary even if you dislike or disagree with the project. And more importantly doesn’t dismiss the good ones. Well done 👍
Thank you! Dezeen comments have never sat right with me.....there's something very mean spirited about design discourse in general, especially in online forums. While I dont love every project Im reviewing, I at least do my best to find something positive in each submission.......the format is still developing!
I'm pretty sure that exploded sphere project is by oyler wu collaborative, they taught a studio in my school were students had to turn their project into a puzzle, make a model, and then a building. Definitely a more theoretical application of that concept, but they do have some interesting built work. I think that museums are often buildings where architects do have a lot more freedom formally and don't need to follow a typology to where people know what it is by looking at it. But I agree with some of your reasoning of why you don't like it, and I think it definitely does not work in this context.
That's interesting! I will check out their work....My rant on starchitecture and ego centric design was not directed at them specifically but the nature of their project set me off.....interested to see more of their built work, thanks for pushing me in that direction even if its not their submission....it is anonymous afterall!
I'm guessing this whole harbour area is reclaimed from the sea, with the street being the beach line. And I'm guessing the buildings on the left were the limit of how heavy engineers were comfortable building. And it's been building after building whose third floor is at the height of the eighth floor across the street. At this point, you're just gambling there's zero developers or engineers or accountants in the judging panel. 61 doesn't make sense on any level, but imagine the clambering and parkour crowds you could gather. 62 The screen is nice, Play seems a random choice of message to hard code, the interior is a boutique bourgeois hotel. 63 I've seen Scandinavian projects where they essentially build a house inside a greenhouse with operable roofs, so this may be riffing off of that. Then again, I could overlay a Greek temple and align a lot of elements. If you derive your beauty from the thinness of columns and roofs, I instinctually doubt feasibility. You could notionally stick an auditorium in that sagging space, but I would expect a monster central column for structure and ventilation. With a lot of these all glass projects I wonder how durable to sunlight they expect exhibits to be. 64 The exterior is inoffensive, that is a nightmare staircase. Irregular steps, double height spots you need to look ahead for and the hand rail side is interrupted. I get that accessibility, fire safety and other regulatory requirements are largely responsible for the monotony of interiors, but I can see a lot of middle aged people being anxious on this one. 65 My first two reactions were "I can haz NURBS" and "This is Gehryatric". But then.. Most of the floor space is ground floor and the sculptural form above is relatively small, sectioned and unimposing on the street and its neighbours; assuming they want it to be a bit reflective it even kinda blends in? It has a public amphitheatre that I expect to be very popular in summer and also a cool space for groups to reform after exiting the museum (I expect street entrance, elevated exit). It does the unifying with the hill people keep talking about discreetly, by thinning the form and greening the exposed, correctly tilted floor space. I really like the harbour view. There's gaps where you can insert skylights towards the back of the ground floor, the obvious exhibit space is shuttered while what looks like workspace is sunny and there seems to be a few instances of briefly outside circulation, which ought to be refreshing and allow you to enjoy the view without dawdling. I guess it comes down to how you feel about buildings as landmarks, and buildings as statues. A sort of engineering blowup of a sphere seems appropriate far as sculptures go. It does feel like an egotistical building that demands money and time through every part of its lifecycle, but you can say that to some degree that always applies with fancy architecture. 66 So you were inspired to design a container by looking at a container. Gotcha. Honestly, I'm so done with echoing, shiny, twelve story atriums; I kind of like a soft, dampening looking entry space. But.. that's a pavillion and your building outside is thrice the size of neighbouring buildings. If it's this empty, it's going to feel like underground parking. I get that Finns are used to darkness, but this might challenge even them. 67. It's solid, though it did remind me of the 💩emoji. Maybe it's an angle thing. but pics suggest water is blue gray there. With a lot of these buildings, I wonder about the ticketing flow. 68. This will definitely annoy the neighbours. It looks positively great in renderings. Giving the entire building attic problems is a choice, I can imagine grime in all the sharp angles. Galleries like hanging things on their walls though, so I expect it would be infested with "movable, temporary" panels. 69: For good and bad, this an inoffensive design. 70: I think I've reached my breaking point with AD sign afterthoughts. Passerby won't get it, AD has terrible connotations, and fixed, exactly allocated sign space is a signifier of institutions. I think I can't really justify the form through use nor aesthetics. The light inside looks interesting, who knows whether it makes sense. I'm tempted to start a counter of stairwell amphitheaters. At least this interior looks like it welcomes people inside, which a lot of these buildings seem at best indifferent to.
Thanks again for the input! 65 could generate a series of videos on its own. Not to say that makes it a good project! 67 I really like it overall, especially the lobby interior!
The brief's requirement for the 4th image was to show the 'main' interior space, showing "the active nature of the museum as a space for different audiences to experience, meet and come together." Its a little sad indeed that so many proposals focus on the lobby because the brief is relatively open at this stage of the competition, with a lot of potential for flexibility and overlapping different parts of the program, public and non-public, ticketed and free access areas, etc.
Also, the pages that don't appear online are the floor plans, a section, specifically designated elevations and a circulation and logistics diagramme. So really, all the free reign to creatively communicate ideas in an unconstrained way is on the pages you can see. It would obviously be great to have the plans and section for reference against the images, but very much enjoying your engagement with what's available. Stirling work, sir
This is good information, thank you!
I have taken this in to account in my latest episode and have tried to be less critical on the lack of sections and variety of interior images!
I read it as NOT requiring the interior image to show the lobby, but for each team to choose which space best illustrates the qualities of their project. I completely agree with you: showing the lobby in the interior image in so many cases is a bit of a let down. Yes, the lobby is important, the reward for finally finding how to get into the building. But there are so many other possible ways to articulate the 'main space' of the museum. An exhibition space that intersects with the restaurant and the logistics zone, just off the top of my head... An architecture and design museum seems like the perfect opportunity for the building to play an active role in the thing it is beyond a fancy facade and an instagramable lobby.
Again, well balanced commentary, I agree with 65 particularly.
As we all know, perceived “bad” architecture draws a LOT of negative attention and engagement (looking at you, Dezeen comments section). While good architecture can get neglected and sometimes forgotten about - at least in the context of the internet and its discussions.
This format allows for balanced, well reasoned commentary even if you dislike or disagree with the project. And more importantly doesn’t dismiss the good ones. Well done 👍
Thank you!
Dezeen comments have never sat right with me.....there's something very mean spirited about design discourse in general, especially in online forums.
While I dont love every project Im reviewing, I at least do my best to find something positive in each submission.......the format is still developing!
Tier list format would be great for these videos
I think I will i do a top 5 projects per 100!
I'm pretty sure that exploded sphere project is by oyler wu collaborative, they taught a studio in my school were students had to turn their project into a puzzle, make a model, and then a building. Definitely a more theoretical application of that concept, but they do have some interesting built work. I think that museums are often buildings where architects do have a lot more freedom formally and don't need to follow a typology to where people know what it is by looking at it. But I agree with some of your reasoning of why you don't like it, and I think it definitely does not work in this context.
That's interesting!
I will check out their work....My rant on starchitecture and ego centric design was not directed at them specifically but the nature of their project set me off.....interested to see more of their built work, thanks for pushing me in that direction even if its not their submission....it is anonymous afterall!
Interesting architecture concepts
love the rants, sort of hoping you will get progressively harsh as you progress through this series
Yes
You dont think Im being harsh enough? Doing my best to see something positive in every entry but maybe I am letting a few things slide!?
I'm guessing this whole harbour area is reclaimed from the sea, with the street being the beach line. And I'm guessing the buildings on the left were the limit of how heavy engineers were comfortable building. And it's been building after building whose third floor is at the height of the eighth floor across the street. At this point, you're just gambling there's zero developers or engineers or accountants in the judging panel.
61 doesn't make sense on any level, but imagine the clambering and parkour crowds you could gather.
62 The screen is nice, Play seems a random choice of message to hard code, the interior is a boutique bourgeois hotel.
63 I've seen Scandinavian projects where they essentially build a house inside a greenhouse with operable roofs, so this may be riffing off of that. Then again, I could overlay a Greek temple and align a lot of elements. If you derive your beauty from the thinness of columns and roofs, I instinctually doubt feasibility. You could notionally stick an auditorium in that sagging space, but I would expect a monster central column for structure and ventilation.
With a lot of these all glass projects I wonder how durable to sunlight they expect exhibits to be.
64 The exterior is inoffensive, that is a nightmare staircase. Irregular steps, double height spots you need to look ahead for and the hand rail side is interrupted. I get that accessibility, fire safety and other regulatory requirements are largely responsible for the monotony of interiors, but I can see a lot of middle aged people being anxious on this one.
65 My first two reactions were "I can haz NURBS" and "This is Gehryatric". But then..
Most of the floor space is ground floor and the sculptural form above is relatively small, sectioned and unimposing on the street and its neighbours; assuming they want it to be a bit reflective it even kinda blends in? It has a public amphitheatre that I expect to be very popular in summer and also a cool space for groups to reform after exiting the museum (I expect street entrance, elevated exit). It does the unifying with the hill people keep talking about discreetly, by thinning the form and greening the exposed, correctly tilted floor space.
I really like the harbour view. There's gaps where you can insert skylights towards the back of the ground floor, the obvious exhibit space is shuttered while what looks like workspace is sunny and there seems to be a few instances of briefly outside circulation, which ought to be refreshing and allow you to enjoy the view without dawdling.
I guess it comes down to how you feel about buildings as landmarks, and buildings as statues. A sort of engineering blowup of a sphere seems appropriate far as sculptures go. It does feel like an egotistical building that demands money and time through every part of its lifecycle, but you can say that to some degree that always applies with fancy architecture.
66 So you were inspired to design a container by looking at a container. Gotcha. Honestly, I'm so done with echoing, shiny, twelve story atriums; I kind of like a soft, dampening looking entry space. But.. that's a pavillion and your building outside is thrice the size of neighbouring buildings. If it's this empty, it's going to feel like underground parking. I get that Finns are used to darkness, but this might challenge even them.
67. It's solid, though it did remind me of the 💩emoji. Maybe it's an angle thing. but pics suggest water is blue gray there. With a lot of these buildings, I wonder about the ticketing flow.
68. This will definitely annoy the neighbours. It looks positively great in renderings. Giving the entire building attic problems is a choice, I can imagine grime in all the sharp angles. Galleries like hanging things on their walls though, so I expect it would be infested with "movable, temporary" panels.
69: For good and bad, this an inoffensive design.
70: I think I've reached my breaking point with AD sign afterthoughts. Passerby won't get it, AD has terrible connotations, and fixed, exactly allocated sign space is a signifier of institutions. I think I can't really justify the form through use nor aesthetics. The light inside looks interesting, who knows whether it makes sense. I'm tempted to start a counter of stairwell amphitheaters. At least this interior looks like it welcomes people inside, which a lot of these buildings seem at best indifferent to.
Thanks again for the input!
65 could generate a series of videos on its own. Not to say that makes it a good project!
67 I really like it overall, especially the lobby interior!
Eteläranta has been that way forever, no sea reclamation in that part of town (or actually anywhere that I can think of).
The 60s weren't to great for me. If I had to pic one, 61 had potential for me. But failed to deliver
And please never put white text on yellow
@@briansieve The text was impossible to read!
#65 “Optimus prime” 💀
536π√