@@simonhodgetts6530 Those cases are kind of sad because your typical bank robbers barely break even and most of the money goes into construction and materials of the tiny models.
My dad used to own a model shop. he's an architect dropout and had the shop for about 20 years. I used to work with him and his focus was on making hyper realistic models to sell apartments and condos. so the project was provided before everything was done (project wise) so people could visualize better what they were buying. the amount of materials involved is huge and it gives room to so much exploration, specially to those (like me) interested in design of all sorts. he closed the shop in 2016 and now lives on a sailing boat where he teaches sailing, which is his real passion.
In university our professors always say "we design something three dimensional, so use three dimensional tools" and I am actually now designing a lot just with modells, because like that you can test much easier, if the space works or not. My favorite modells are the ones that just show the volume, no materials, no doll house stuff, just the raw space. I always find these very powerful.
When I worked at a San Francisco firm I built a 10-block model of the city between Transamerica Pyramid and Coit Tower. Scale was 1/8" = foot, and the model showed the topographical grades. When it was done we walked the model on the sidewalk to its client 5 blocks away. Everyone we walked past was excited to see this thing. It clearly showed that even people outside the world of architecture love to see models.
Great one Stewart. Years ago I knew a guy who had worked in a professional model shop. I was always impressed with what he could do seemingly effortlessly. I have to admit, I figured architectural models like my friend use to make had gone the way of the proverbial dodo, having long since been replaced by realistic rendering or 3D printing. Finally, am I the only one who thinks the vertical village is really the stacks from Ready Player One.😉
I feel your videos should be standard viewing material for any high school student who wishes to study architecture in college. The concepts you convey and elaborate upon are basic to understanding the role of an architect, and moreover, that of any type of designer. The first mistake many people make is to think that architects design buildings. No, architects design concepts for structures, ways to construct structures, the order of construction of structures, documents to show others the way the structure should be created, and they utilize tools to express a design to clients and the community. The differences between putting together a model and putting together a building are monumental. Even a 1’:1’ model isn’t quite the same as a constructed building. Thanks again for the video.
I would suggest that one of the reasons a model works as a great tool early on is it introduces gravity. Its a limitation that only comes into the design through the experience of some architects or through drawing sets later on when reality of building it comes up. However you cannot make a model devoid of it. Renderings, computer models on the other hand..... Over the years I have also seen how models translate better to a broader collection of people than other current "mediums". From architects of all ages and experiences, to clients, to boards of directors, to politicians, to the public, models seem highly effective at conveying the 3 dimension look and feel of a design before it is built. It also engages all these groups very effectively in the conversation of the design going forward. It is by no means a silver bullet, but its is a very useful tool that I believe offers an invaluable element to the process, a fact that I have seen first hand.
I love models. I've actually had a few home owners (non architects) design their own houses and make models and bring them in. Blew my mind. Being able to make a model of the house really forces you to understand exactly what you are designing/drawing. Loved when they showed the models on the original Brady Bunch since Mike was an architect (Yes, I am old).
I have seen how film studios make detailed models of many of their main scenes, buildings, etc. Makes so much sense - if it looks wrong in a model, you don't want to waste all that time building the full thing.
I would suggest based on experience there needs to be a distinction between 2 types of architectural models. There are "working" or "in-house" models and "finished" or professional out-of- house ones. Although you are somewhat clear in defining which you are talking about I get the impression that people watching are not cognizant of the differences. There are a bunch of particular differences. The main one is "when" the model is made in the process of design. In house models start early, sometimes before there are even drawings to build from. They are designed to be changed so materials used are often easily to cut and edit. The model is not built to last, it is more important to make it quickly so decisions can be made. It can often be white or monochromatic as materials are a long way off being decided and mass/form is more important. These models can be cleaned up to present but that is not their main goal. The later are models farmed out to professional model making shop later in the design phases (Design Development or even Construction Documentation stages). A significant set of drawings is given to the out-of-house firm to make the model. Mock ups with detail level, technique and color decisions are made. The design is mostly set in stone and any changes that are asked for later will be an additional service. I think some people in this chat are confused as to which type you are discussing.
I like the idea of models being an object in their own right. There's one on my desk that is a 1:43 car dealership, with model cars. It doubles as a building design, AND a display case for the cars! Subsequently, the four cars inside it are the only model cars I have with no dust on them!
I am most enchanted with the model as a both a playground and reference tool which makes concrete (or wood, or metal, ha-ha) architecture's more elusive concepts. As an object, the model is there to be studied, reviewed, and admired, thereby inviting curiosities - even basic ones like mine. Models prime me to think about buildings in ways which are more familiar, as opposed to the Slow House plans so arcane by comparison.
As an interior design student, I always hate doing models, they are time consuming, always leave huge mess whenever I finish and they cost a fortune, the worst part is that the teacher rarely look at the model that I make However your video did give me some really interesting insight so thanks
I started making models with Lego very early...it sparked my curiosity about actual construction, modularity and design. After thirty years in the field, l still find that the model making process, a unique challenge and a valuable part of the resolution of good architecture.
When my family and I went to the Perot museum in Dallas, all my dad and I were talking about was the architecture on the interior. Some of those slabs of concrete are awe inspring in size.
I had a friend who did woodworking and made a small folding table. He showed a tiny model table he had made to be sure it would fold the way he wanted it to fold. He's gone now but his table endures. I had him build it as a gift to my wife. She uses it every day. The cabinets and drawers he made for my kitchen are used every day.
Your comment that, "designing a building can be overwhelming when anything is possible", rings true in writing as well. When facing a blank piece of paper, a writer can feel over whelmed. The best cure is to write anything even if you then cross it out. At least that breaks the ice and you're off to the races.
The disadvantage of using models is that you look at the building from above, and you do not get a feel how it looks from streetlevel. This result in a building that has an interesting shape when seen from the air or far away, but looks bland and boring from closer by.
How on earth do you only get to look at a three-dimensional model that has been made only from above I've never ever in my life made on single where you cannot look at a model from every single angle. Floorplans are one-dimensional, models have tops bottoms and sides and can even have interiors.
@@ricci8497 Of course you can look at a model from the side, but this is not quite the same as the actual perspective of users and passers by. You would need a miniature camera at exactly the right height and exactly the right optics to get an impression of how it woul look for users. Just look at the oma music Hall. An interesting shape from above and afar, but from close by the 'playful' angles of the walls, create unpleasant dead spaces and the endless glass panes makes it feel sterile and hostile. This is rather typical of modern architecture. A grand gesture is made regarding the shape of the building, and after that the architect thinks their work is done, whereas it should be starting.
@@harenterberge2632 then why state in your comment that you look at the building from above it isn't the case and you don't require miniature camera's either you need the model to be built at the right scale and with the right materials and placed under controlled lighting conditions that reflect the suns patterns which actually gets carried out in a lot of projects. As for bringing up the likes of the Oma Music Hall the building has inspired many architects into creating buildings of very similar style all over the world. You find the dead unpleasant dead spaces and endless panes of glass others find welcoming dead spaces as points of meditation and self-reflection while the glass panes provide plays of light and reflections that change and move in a dance just because it jars on your sense of aesthetic doesn't make it bad plenty of people love and travel from all over the world to see and be inspired by it.
@@ricci8497 You can nitpick my comment, but the point is that the perspective when looking at a model is quite different from the perspective of the people that will look at it in the real world. There will always be some people who will call ugly things beautiful just to make themselves look interesting, an extreme example is brutalism. The most anti humane building style ever, but yet it goes to some revival.
@@harenterberge2632 you make a good point about the importance of seeing at full scale, and the person nitpicking is very silly, but as far as your comment on brutalism, please try to see history "from above" in addition to in the moment, and realize that we are all products of our time. Brutalism is at just the right age to seem tired and oppressive in our current time, but in previous generations Victorian or other styles were equally despised, and torn down, and much great work was lost.
Enjoy your channel. But I am an Architect, graduated with a Bachelors (five year professional degree in 1969, I would like to see you discuss how an architect develops A Business, finds clients, creates an office. And makes profit , I am 76 and comfortable retired. This actually started with my education at college.
Models have a way of intriguing curiosity, must be the perfect combination of exploration/creativity, substance and control. Personally I always sound something fascinating about any sorts of models but was never able to point out what exactly. It truly is a great tool and toy!
I realy love physical models. They and the drawing desk was in my teenage dreams of become an architect. However, 25 years latter, I simply discovered that physical models are a waste of time for the purpose of present an anchitectural ideia to a real customer. In all my years as a designer, I never found one single costumer capable to fully understand the physical model and the matter of scale. In my experience, a precise and realistic 3D render is much more efective.
100% agree. If we could incorporate VR goggles or some form of AR into the existing 3D models, in my opinion, that would give us the best of both worlds. Especially considering every Revit project I have worked on has an almost 1:1 model compared to the end results. Almost every Architect I have done electrical design work for uses Revit. CAD is definitely still around, mainly for the super small projects, because it can save time. But it would be amazing to see some of the large hotels and stadium work I have done in VR.
I would have to disagree, but it would depend on who your "costumer"s were. I know of many clients who misinterpreted renderings all the time no matter how precise. I would also suggest that although you may not do this, many architects often use renderings to hide a lot from their clients. I do not know of a model that hid something, not that is could not be done.
@@Gursers14 Projects with the budget of a stadium do do VR experiences. We do models that are viewed in VR. In my experience however, what you are describing for the REVIT model is based on a different moment in time than when I make models. We use Revit all day long but when I am building the models of the design they barely have an exterior façade in place let alone electrical layouts. I guess I would classify there are 2 types of models. There are finished models, usually made out of house for presentation purposes and then there are working models that are built in house and are changing constantly. This video is about in house models.
oh okay, so all my passion towards model makings and scale model drove me to learn professional archiecture skills in college. first time i got attracted to make and craft models when i was 9years old. and then i fell in love with miniatures and every work of school stuff was filled of models. and so still my room is. so model making was very helpful for me to establish dreams beside thinking more well oriented and in details to renovate my grandparent owned buildings copying and pasting the world class design possibly in later periods.
a book like "The eyes of the skin", elaborate on the non oculocentric view on architecture. materiality and model making is an experience of its own, and should be a major part of architecture.
as a student i think it’s important to recognize a model as an extension of a sketch or like a bridge between the 2D(or imaginary) concept and the full scale 3D structure. Models and sketches both allow ideas that cannot exist to be shown and can even be use to diagram and, as a student, sometimes it’s easy to view modeling as just a separate action or a unique tool. the beauty of modeling is it’s simultaneous individuality and ability to extend the range of other processes
I'm an artist, but I am friends with architects, and one of them is a model builder who works for various architects. He's been at it for a while, and can build them in whatever scale they request. His models are sometimes extremely detailed,...and he replicates the drawings to a level of insane perfection, in the models. He's done this for 30 to 40 years,.....but his craft and skills are a dying art form, ever since the improvements in "virtual" architecture, have taken over. Less architects need physical models, to show their clients. Video presentations have replaced seeing a physical model. I have made some of my own videos of my friend building some of his past models. Just to build some models, he has to build complex molds or forms to replicate the shapes, if the client wants them to be built from wood. One model was to built from thin strips of hardwoods, and he had to steam the wood strips so he could make them take on complex sweeping curves. They had to be completely accurate to the blueprints and drawings he received from the architects. He rarely gets to make models that are generalized shapes,...many of his clients want accurate, exact models, in woods. He began his career as an artist, and that is when I first met him, while were both in art school. I became a full time artist, he went on to become model maker. We grew up before the invention of computers, that can now do the work of accurate cutting and shaping. He has had to adapt and uses more computer programed cutters and shapers. The models are quite expensive, but his clients are wealthy. He hasn't become wealthy, doing this work,....but it does pay pretty well. Sometimes, he gets to keep the models he has created for a client. One wealthy client wanted several versions of a building he was paying to have built. My friend got to keep the rejected versions.
Models are effective in conveying the proposed concept from the drawing to model & the physical building in its real world environment to the client proving a valuable exercise, experience.
To see how limits can set your designing free, just look at Japanese Kei Cars, they have strict size and power regulations but what designers do within those parameters is truly amazing.
Fascinating!! I believe it is building models at night that inspires some students to call their chosen profession architorture. However if one were to start a froward looking architecture practice today, would you still build real models or would this be just a quaint historical perspective? I’m wondering if I was a student today, if I would not rebel against architorture and use some cutting edge next gen 3D studio rendering as VR set to be explored using Oculus in real scale….? Just a thought. Wonder if someone already does that as a practice. Once all the kids who play VR games today graduate from universities, that’s likely to become expectation as well.
I feel models are most useful for realizing spatial relationships; between the building and it’s surroundings, between people and the space of the building, or how interior spaces flow in three dimensions. I have found that a lot of people, including architects, have a hard time imagining things in three dimensions; that they can not understand relationships from plans and elevations alone.
I used to work for the investor side of a big shopping center project. The models play very important roles in early design stages already. It helps Architects limit them self from going too far from reality. It’s because at the end, the building still have to be built from the bottom piece by piece. And materials still have to be shipped to site. So the limitations are very important for the design.
VR would be perfect. The major 3D modeling architecture programs should integrate VR support, such that architects can walk around the interiors of their iterations at virtual full scale.
There is a thing called the commercial to crap ratio. This ratio signifies that the more advertising and hype something has the more likely it is over priced over rated or utterly fake. So the bigger more impressive more highly finished an architectural model is for a massive expensive project the more likely it’s a scam and the model maker was probably chasing payments for the model.
The best thing about building physical models during the design process is they are realistic, you can change their scale constantly, and there is no danger of developing an emotional attachment to something that didn't work so well. After all, the process was so quick you can do another one in less than five minutes. Oh, I'm sorry, this is why I do 3D models. But of course, once you have the project figured out you get the model built so the realtors can show it at the office.
Surprised to see architects still use hand crafted buildings. You use to see that with autotmotives with clay small or grand. Same idea, things are made with hands and had a form of art and human touches to it. Though like automotives nowadays though most things are using technology to get designs made and done, but to see architecture to still embrace some form of human crafting is just a great preservation technique of what we use to do on a grander scale. Really find this topic neat! :)
I'm really fascinated by how differently sized models can do different things (ie. needs different levels of detail and are used at different points in the process). Do you have any recommendations for academic litterature that explains this further?
I love models, but now you can have a 3D models of the project at every scale, with VR you can even visit the model inside the scenery (street, countryside ...) it feel a bit expensive and "unnecessary" even if again, I love models and I'm still doing some but more for a creative POV, not for a project that I can buid in 3D in a few days.
It’s said that advertising agencies love a new client because it give them a chance to re-flog campaigns rejected by their old clients. So I am not surprised the Casa de Musica architects dusted off an old model gathering dust in a storage room. Also, there must be an incredible intellectual overlap between the film industry’s use of models for set design, and the architect’s use. Sometimes with film, the model is in fact the finished product.
Just a suggestion for your video edits: let the end of yourvideos run for several more seconds. The TH-cam apps for Roku, Android TV and other streaming devices return to the video grid so quickly viewers don't have enough time to click Like.
You might want to correct the scale subtitles in your video. It's 1/4"=1', not the reverse. And its not 1/4'=1'. Three countries in the world use feet and inches, Myanmar, Liberia and the US. I'm a pro modelmaker, and it's a rare thing that I come across architects who understand and note scale correctly. We're talking people who have graduated architecture school, and often also grad school. Amazing.
Have you or those you've worked with run into where materials have failed to scale with the project? i.e. you could build a small model but just were not able to match the model at the full size?
I'll use this as an excuse to push _The Goblin Emperor_, a fantasy novel where a model of a complex bridge helps it to get built. It's a very good novel, and refreshing because competence and good will are generally rewarded. It's the opposite of The Game of Thrones.
It’s interesting that I suspect architects making all glass exterior curtain walls never know anything about the various machine and hand made glasses that were and or are used to make leaded/“stained” glass windows starting over 140 years ago
I always get excited and start study models but unfortunately I do not finish them, it always feels time consuming to me. Can anyone share their experience and explain how models enhanced their design process?
The architecture firm I work at has a modelshop that I run. We use it as a tool in design. I of course greatly believe in its virtues, but as a firm, internally, it brings many groups of architectural designers and architects together over a single visual form that they can all absorb at their own pace and from whatever perspective they desire. Then we all discuss the design in front of each other and try things out as a group with physical elements on the model. It is time consuming, but I would say the whole process is, so making models is no different. Its all about your level of patience and what you are prepared to tolerate. We also test early build-ability in the model, because in most cases, if i cannot make it there is probably no way to get it built for real either. Its also a separate set of eyes looking at the design from a very different perspective. Then when we bring models to a client we get far more effective engagement with them when we show a model. Our clients are often business execs, politicians, government workers, etc. I have learned over time very few can visualize from drawings, many even struggle with some renderings. A model has often proved invaluable for those types of people. However no one is going to admit to being unable to visulise so you only learn it by using drawings one time and models the next and seeing the different reactions. There is more to it that this but those are a few tokens
the Derek Zoolander centre for kids who don't read good...... Zoolander, "what is this?? A center for ants???!!! How can we expect kids to learn how to read if they can't fit in the building?? " OOOOOh Stewart..... the center has to be at least 3 times bigger than this!!
Sigh...too bad the architecture firms where i come from don't do physical models because the firms only care about outputting as many projects as possible with crazy dead lines I miss doing physical models; 3D models just dont cut it
I’d say physical models will always prevail over 3D renders. I’m currently studying architecture and every tutor I had stressed the importance of exploring the design in a model, and it’s easy to see why - no matter how good a render is, a computer simulation will always be a flat image (unless you 3D print it).
augmented reality would like word with you. physical models will always be around because sometimes for workflow it's faster to pre make something physically then move it into the virtual. the things virtual does well is reproducible, if you only need a cheap basic metal folding chair to put in you virtual scene, you can use the same folding chair asset across lots of projects.
I disagree. As I studied Architecture, starting in 1986 and on into university, the role of a physical model was emphasized again and again as an integral part of the design process. What I discovered from my professors, was that they were using the process of making a physical model as a teaching tool and not as a design tool. This was to help filter out "unbuildable" or "awkward" designs coming from neophyte students but not really for the reasons that professionals use models. Using a physical model in the modern age is wasteful in the extreme and can be misleading, especially to those who can not visualize space or scale. I had a mentoring discussion with a recent architectural graduate about a model they used in their final project in school. When I asked them how thick the floor slab was on an extensive cantilever in their design they could not tell me in real world terms, only that it looked thick enough and that the model "worked", i.e. did not fall over. When I pointed out that, at that scale, the balsa wood slab representing the concrete floor was well over a meter thick they were surprised. The model lied to her. Computer tools today could have not only provided immediate real sizes for the elements, but could test them in ways that no physical model could. 3D computer models are a superior design tool for exploring, viewing, testing, and rendering a plan.
I was an Architectural Model Maker for many years. It was embarrassing for me to point out all manner of design flaws to clients, while all his junior Architects looked on. Wrong scale, were is the disability access? Breach of boundary, stairwell doors to voids, drainage running uphill. They hated me, but the clients loved me. Proof reading plans take a lot of time and effort. If you cant build it as a model - you cant build it.
This comment has nothing to do with this video, but I know you read the comments so I'm trying to plug an idea where your perspective could be warranted. What are your thoughts on the controversial "Munger Dorms" proposed at UC Santa Barbara? I had such a visceral negative reaction to the proposal, that I have an almost morbid determination to try and steel man the argument.
Just 3D print it, it would take 1 person a couple hours to make these models and press print. You can design it full scale, and scale as you like before printing. No need for a dedicated workshop.
In a world that is becoming more and more virtual we risk to loos every contact --most literal-- with the forms and spaces we live in and want or have to use. The computer is a great tool to make quick and even detailed studies of anything including buildings. The technique even allow us to experience the spaces in a way... but they never replace the real thing. You never have the tactile effects of material and form, there we need other tools. One of those tools is making models. Like you say the material(s) will backfeed impressions that influence the design in their own right. We humans are not that good to envision our thoughts, so we take a piece of paper and a pencil and start drawing. Where those two dimensions run out of options to explore we need that third dimension and models are a part of that. Other than being tools to develop real size things models have become something in their own right. Some people design models because of it being a model. To enjoy a little world without the restrictions of all day life. In the end the model is both a tool to develop things as well as a thing of art as the only function for a model designed as such is an autonomous creation of man. Happy little thought indeed...
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
I think an important detail you missed about models is how useful they are for as illustration tools for supervillians explaining their evil plans
Haha sounds like a good class topic to me
Don’t forget bank robbers, when planning a heist………complete with toy getaway cars and bullion vans!
@@simonhodgetts6530 Those cases are kind of sad because your typical bank robbers barely break even and most of the money goes into construction and materials of the tiny models.
If you're not a supervillain you can make a school for ants
Oh, we don't use models. Why else do you think we've invented the *shrink ray* ? Mwah ah ah ah ! :-D
My dad used to own a model shop. he's an architect dropout and had the shop for about 20 years. I used to work with him and his focus was on making hyper realistic models to sell apartments and condos. so the project was provided before everything was done (project wise) so people could visualize better what they were buying. the amount of materials involved is huge and it gives room to so much exploration, specially to those (like me) interested in design of all sorts. he closed the shop in 2016 and now lives on a sailing boat where he teaches sailing, which is his real passion.
never to late to chase your passion ♥
That is so inspiring.
@@dennynikaj not because he’s my dad, but yes, it is (:
That sounds like an awesome job
@@thiagobnla will you ever carry on your dad's shop? Or something you weren't really into?
I've been homeschooled as long as I can remember used to go to the Perot Museum multiple times a week nice to see people apricate the architecture
In university our professors always say "we design something three dimensional, so use three dimensional tools" and I am actually now designing a lot just with modells, because like that you can test much easier, if the space works or not. My favorite modells are the ones that just show the volume, no materials, no doll house stuff, just the raw space. I always find these very powerful.
When I worked at a San Francisco firm I built a 10-block model of the city between Transamerica Pyramid and Coit Tower. Scale was 1/8" = foot, and the model showed the topographical grades. When it was done we walked the model on the sidewalk to its client 5 blocks away. Everyone we walked past was excited to see this thing. It clearly showed that even people outside the world of architecture love to see models.
Great one Stewart. Years ago I knew a guy who had worked in a professional model shop. I was always impressed with what he could do seemingly effortlessly. I have to admit, I figured architectural models like my friend use to make had gone the way of the proverbial dodo, having long since been replaced by realistic rendering or 3D printing. Finally, am I the only one who thinks the vertical village is really the stacks from Ready Player One.😉
Haha! I'm editing the video about the pro model shop right now!
I feel your videos should be standard viewing material for any high school student who wishes to study architecture in college. The concepts you convey and elaborate upon are basic to understanding the role of an architect, and moreover, that of any type of designer. The first mistake many people make is to think that architects design buildings. No, architects design concepts for structures, ways to construct structures, the order of construction of structures, documents to show others the way the structure should be created, and they utilize tools to express a design to clients and the community. The differences between putting together a model and putting together a building are monumental. Even a 1’:1’ model isn’t quite the same as a constructed building. Thanks again for the video.
Thank you! I appreciate the thoughts.
I would suggest that one of the reasons a model works as a great tool early on is it introduces gravity. Its a limitation that only comes into the design through the experience of some architects or through drawing sets later on when reality of building it comes up. However you cannot make a model devoid of it. Renderings, computer models on the other hand.....
Over the years I have also seen how models translate better to a broader collection of people than other current "mediums". From architects of all ages and experiences, to clients, to boards of directors, to politicians, to the public, models seem highly effective at conveying the 3 dimension look and feel of a design before it is built. It also engages all these groups very effectively in the conversation of the design going forward. It is by no means a silver bullet, but its is a very useful tool that I believe offers an invaluable element to the process, a fact that I have seen first hand.
I love models. I've actually had a few home owners (non architects) design their own houses and make models and bring them in. Blew my mind. Being able to make a model of the house really forces you to understand exactly what you are designing/drawing. Loved when they showed the models on the original Brady Bunch since Mike was an architect (Yes, I am old).
I have seen how film studios make detailed models of many of their main scenes, buildings, etc. Makes so much sense - if it looks wrong in a model, you don't want to waste all that time building the full thing.
I would suggest based on experience there needs to be a distinction between 2 types of architectural models. There are "working" or "in-house" models and "finished" or professional out-of- house ones. Although you are somewhat clear in defining which you are talking about I get the impression that people watching are not cognizant of the differences. There are a bunch of particular differences. The main one is "when" the model is made in the process of design. In house models start early, sometimes before there are even drawings to build from. They are designed to be changed so materials used are often easily to cut and edit. The model is not built to last, it is more important to make it quickly so decisions can be made. It can often be white or monochromatic as materials are a long way off being decided and mass/form is more important. These models can be cleaned up to present but that is not their main goal. The later are models farmed out to professional model making shop later in the design phases (Design Development or even Construction Documentation stages). A significant set of drawings is given to the out-of-house firm to make the model. Mock ups with detail level, technique and color decisions are made. The design is mostly set in stone and any changes that are asked for later will be an additional service. I think some people in this chat are confused as to which type you are discussing.
What I have learnt that, this creative thinking of architecture is a iterative process and I don't have to be right at the first time. Thank you.
I like the idea of models being an object in their own right. There's one on my desk that is a 1:43 car dealership, with model cars. It doubles as a building design, AND a display case for the cars! Subsequently, the four cars inside it are the only model cars I have with no dust on them!
I would recommend seeking out Smiljan Radic and Flores & Pratts use of models for two great but very different approaches too.
Great suggestions! Thanks.
I am most enchanted with the model as a both a playground and reference tool which makes concrete (or wood, or metal, ha-ha) architecture's more elusive concepts. As an object, the model is there to be studied, reviewed, and admired, thereby inviting curiosities - even basic ones like mine. Models prime me to think about buildings in ways which are more familiar, as opposed to the Slow House plans so arcane by comparison.
As an interior design student, I always hate doing models, they are time consuming, always leave huge mess whenever I finish and they cost a fortune, the worst part is that the teacher rarely look at the model that I make
However your video did give me some really interesting insight so thanks
It's interesting how the process of designing a building is so similar to composing music, refering to tools for instance.
I started making models with Lego very early...it sparked my curiosity about actual construction, modularity and design. After thirty years in the field, l still find that the model making process, a unique challenge and a valuable part of the resolution of good architecture.
When my family and I went to the Perot museum in Dallas, all my dad and I were talking about was the architecture on the interior. Some of those slabs of concrete are awe inspring in size.
I had a friend who did woodworking and made a small folding table. He showed a tiny model table he had made to be sure it would fold the way he wanted it to fold. He's gone now but his table endures. I had him build it as a gift to my wife. She uses it every day. The cabinets and drawers he made for my kitchen are used every day.
I love making models. Not only architecture, cars and ships as well.
Your comment that, "designing a building can be overwhelming when anything is possible", rings true in writing as well. When facing a blank piece of paper, a writer can feel over whelmed. The best cure is to write anything even if you then cross it out. At least that breaks the ice and you're off to the races.
Models help us to understand design proportions, they are very useful and open doors to new solutions
Currently watching as I work on a model for my studio class
The disadvantage of using models is that you look at the building from above, and you do not get a feel how it looks from streetlevel. This result in a building that has an interesting shape when seen from the air or far away, but looks bland and boring from closer by.
How on earth do you only get to look at a three-dimensional model that has been made only from above I've never ever in my life made on single where you cannot look at a model from every single angle. Floorplans are one-dimensional, models have tops bottoms and sides and can even have interiors.
@@ricci8497 Of course you can look at a model from the side, but this is not quite the same as the actual perspective of users and passers by. You would need a miniature camera at exactly the right height and exactly the right optics to get an impression of how it woul look for users.
Just look at the oma music Hall. An interesting shape from above and afar, but from close by the 'playful' angles of the walls, create unpleasant dead spaces and the endless glass panes makes it feel sterile and hostile. This is rather typical of modern architecture. A grand gesture is made regarding the shape of the building, and after that the architect thinks their work is done, whereas it should be starting.
@@harenterberge2632 then why state in your comment that you look at the building from above it isn't the case and you don't require miniature camera's either you need the model to be built at the right scale and with the right materials and placed under controlled lighting conditions that reflect the suns patterns which actually gets carried out in a lot of projects. As for bringing up the likes of the Oma Music Hall the building has inspired many architects into creating buildings of very similar style all over the world. You find the dead unpleasant dead spaces and endless panes of glass others find welcoming dead spaces as points of meditation and self-reflection while the glass panes provide plays of light and reflections that change and move in a dance just because it jars on your sense of aesthetic doesn't make it bad plenty of people love and travel from all over the world to see and be inspired by it.
@@ricci8497 You can nitpick my comment, but the point is that the perspective when looking at a model is quite different from the perspective of the people that will look at it in the real world.
There will always be some people who will call ugly things beautiful just to make themselves look interesting, an extreme example is brutalism. The most anti humane building style ever, but yet it goes to some revival.
@@harenterberge2632 you make a good point about the importance of seeing at full scale, and the person nitpicking is very silly, but as far as your comment on brutalism, please try to see history "from above" in addition to in the moment, and realize that we are all products of our time. Brutalism is at just the right age to seem tired and oppressive in our current time, but in previous generations Victorian or other styles were equally despised, and torn down, and much great work was lost.
Enjoy your channel. But I am an Architect, graduated with a Bachelors (five year professional degree in 1969, I would like to see you discuss how an architect develops A
Business, finds clients, creates an office. And makes profit , I am 76 and comfortable retired. This actually started with my education at college.
This channel is of such a high content calibre. Thanks for your hard work.
Models have a way of intriguing curiosity, must be the perfect combination of exploration/creativity, substance and control.
Personally I always sound something fascinating about any sorts of models but was never able to point out what exactly. It truly is a great tool and toy!
*_Again, a video that is a treasure trove for Wargaming Terrain Builders_*
I realy love physical models. They and the drawing desk was in my teenage dreams of become an architect. However, 25 years latter, I simply discovered that physical models are a waste of time for the purpose of present an anchitectural ideia to a real customer. In all my years as a designer, I never found one single costumer capable to fully understand the physical model and the matter of scale. In my experience, a precise and realistic 3D render is much more efective.
100% agree. If we could incorporate VR goggles or some form of AR into the existing 3D models, in my opinion, that would give us the best of both worlds. Especially considering every Revit project I have worked on has an almost 1:1 model compared to the end results. Almost every Architect I have done electrical design work for uses Revit. CAD is definitely still around, mainly for the super small projects, because it can save time. But it would be amazing to see some of the large hotels and stadium work I have done in VR.
I would have to disagree, but it would depend on who your "costumer"s were. I know of many clients who misinterpreted renderings all the time no matter how precise. I would also suggest that although you may not do this, many architects often use renderings to hide a lot from their clients. I do not know of a model that hid something, not that is could not be done.
@@Gursers14 Projects with the budget of a stadium do do VR experiences. We do models that are viewed in VR. In my experience however, what you are describing for the REVIT model is based on a different moment in time than when I make models. We use Revit all day long but when I am building the models of the design they barely have an exterior façade in place let alone electrical layouts. I guess I would classify there are 2 types of models. There are finished models, usually made out of house for presentation purposes and then there are working models that are built in house and are changing constantly. This video is about in house models.
Thanks. Everyone loves a dollhouse. Don't forget about the world of scale mechanical models that actually run.
oh okay, so all my passion towards model makings and scale model drove me to learn professional archiecture skills in college. first time i got attracted to make and craft models when i was 9years old. and then i fell in love with miniatures and every work of school stuff was filled of models. and so still my room is. so model making was very helpful for me to establish dreams beside thinking more well oriented and in details to renovate my grandparent owned buildings copying and pasting the world class design possibly in later periods.
a book like "The eyes of the skin", elaborate on the non oculocentric view on architecture.
materiality and model making is an experience of its own, and should be a major part of architecture.
as a student i think it’s important to recognize a model as an extension of a sketch or like a bridge between the 2D(or imaginary) concept and the full scale 3D structure. Models and sketches both allow ideas that cannot exist to be shown and can even be use to diagram and, as a student, sometimes it’s easy to view modeling as just a separate action or a unique tool. the beauty of modeling is it’s simultaneous individuality and ability to extend the range of other processes
I'm an artist, but I am friends with architects, and one of them is a model builder who works for various architects. He's been at it for a while, and can build them in whatever scale they request. His models are sometimes extremely detailed,...and he replicates the drawings to a level of insane perfection, in the models. He's done this for 30 to 40 years,.....but his craft and skills are a dying art form, ever since the improvements in "virtual" architecture, have taken over. Less architects need physical models, to show their clients. Video presentations have replaced seeing a physical model. I have made some of my own videos of my friend building some of his past models. Just to build some models, he has to build complex molds or forms to replicate the shapes, if the client wants them to be built from wood. One model was to built from thin strips of hardwoods, and he had to steam the wood strips so he could make them take on complex sweeping curves. They had to be completely accurate to the blueprints and drawings he received from the architects. He rarely gets to make models that are generalized shapes,...many of his clients want accurate, exact models, in woods. He began his career as an artist, and that is when I first met him, while were both in art school. I became a full time artist, he went on to become model maker. We grew up before the invention of computers, that can now do the work of accurate cutting and shaping. He has had to adapt and uses more computer programed cutters and shapers. The models are quite expensive, but his clients are wealthy. He hasn't become wealthy, doing this work,....but it does pay pretty well. Sometimes, he gets to keep the models he has created for a client. One wealthy client wanted several versions of a building he was paying to have built. My friend got to keep the rejected versions.
Been to the Prada store in Tokyo a few times (not to actually buy anything). It's just a really nice building that's a joy to walk around in. =)
Models are effective in conveying the proposed concept from the drawing to model & the physical building in its real world environment to the client proving a valuable exercise, experience.
To see how limits can set your designing free, just look at Japanese Kei Cars, they have strict size and power regulations but what designers do within those parameters is truly amazing.
Fascinating!! I believe it is building models at night that inspires some students to call their chosen profession architorture. However if one were to start a froward looking architecture practice today, would you still build real models or would this be just a quaint historical perspective? I’m wondering if I was a student today, if I would not rebel against architorture and use some cutting edge next gen 3D studio rendering as VR set to be explored using Oculus in real scale….? Just a thought. Wonder if someone already does that as a practice. Once all the kids who play VR games today graduate from universities, that’s likely to become expectation as well.
I feel models are most useful for realizing spatial relationships; between the building and it’s surroundings, between people and the space of the building, or how interior spaces flow in three dimensions.
I have found that a lot of people, including architects, have a hard time imagining things in three dimensions; that they can not understand relationships from plans and elevations alone.
Damn! Macklemore a modern day Renaissance man; from thrift stores to architectural models! It's crazy!
I pass that dallas building alot, always trips me out
I love the Perot bldg. Drove by it yesterday.
Aweeeee, you showed my home town's building "Casa da Música".
Take a look at "Museu do Côa" as well, tell me what you think of it?
That was a genuinely good video. Thank you for sharing
Glad you liked it!
The building on the thumbnail is a science museum in Texas!
I don’t know if he went over that in the video, but I went there in middle-school!
THE PEROT MUSEUM!! everyone from Dallas knows that building !
I used to work for the investor side of a big shopping center project. The models play very important roles in early design stages already. It helps Architects limit them self from going too far from reality. It’s because at the end, the building still have to be built from the bottom piece by piece. And materials still have to be shipped to site. So the limitations are very important for the design.
VR would be perfect. The major 3D modeling architecture programs should integrate VR support, such that architects can walk around the interiors of their iterations at virtual full scale.
Could you do a video on architectural materials used in finishing external (walls, grounds etc) and internal (walls, floors etc)?
Hey! I’ve been to the thumbnail! It’s pretty cool
Great video, as always :) BTW, small units mistake @ 1:12, corrected @ 1:29
Eek!
There is a thing called the commercial to crap ratio. This ratio signifies that the more advertising and hype something has the more likely it is over priced over rated or utterly fake. So the bigger more impressive more highly finished an architectural model is for a massive expensive project the more likely it’s a scam and the model maker was probably chasing payments for the model.
The best thing about building physical models during the design process is they are realistic, you can change their scale constantly, and there is no danger of developing an emotional attachment to something that didn't work so well. After all, the process was so quick you can do another one in less than five minutes.
Oh, I'm sorry, this is why I do 3D models.
But of course, once you have the project figured out you get the model built so the realtors can show it at the office.
Surprised to see architects still use hand crafted buildings. You use to see that with autotmotives with clay small or grand. Same idea, things are made with hands and had a form of art and human touches to it. Though like automotives nowadays though most things are using technology to get designs made and done, but to see architecture to still embrace some form of human crafting is just a great preservation technique of what we use to do on a grander scale. Really find this topic neat! :)
Every car design is still done in clay because the computer designs are not full scale or touchable.
Watching after hand modeling in 1st year architecture studio
I'm really fascinated by how differently sized models can do different things (ie. needs different levels of detail and are used at different points in the process). Do you have any recommendations for academic litterature that explains this further?
I love models, but now you can have a 3D models of the project at every scale, with VR you can even visit the model inside the scenery (street, countryside ...) it feel a bit expensive and "unnecessary" even if again, I love models and I'm still doing some but more for a creative POV, not for a project that I can buid in 3D in a few days.
Oh look my local museum is on the video thumbnail
Thumbnail be like " i want a building that looks the same before and after an apocalypse"
I really love, and appreciate this content
I love and appreciate this comment
It’s said that advertising agencies love a new client because it give them a chance to re-flog campaigns rejected by their old clients. So I am not surprised the Casa de Musica architects dusted off an old model gathering dust in a storage room. Also, there must be an incredible intellectual overlap between the film industry’s use of models for set design, and the architect’s use. Sometimes with film, the model is in fact the finished product.
I’ve always thought there is no challenge in designing a building with a huge budget
Thanks Stewart
Shared.
Perot Museum is trippy.
There is just a section the juts out of the wall.
Metric system rules! Literally. Rules the world.
Just a suggestion for your video edits: let the end of yourvideos run for several more seconds. The TH-cam apps for Roku, Android TV and other streaming devices return to the video grid so quickly viewers don't have enough time to click Like.
Will do. Thanks for the advice.
You might want to correct the scale subtitles in your video. It's 1/4"=1', not the reverse. And its not 1/4'=1'. Three countries in the world use feet and inches, Myanmar, Liberia and the US. I'm a pro modelmaker, and it's a rare thing that I come across architects who understand and note scale correctly. We're talking people who have graduated architecture school, and often also grad school. Amazing.
I saw an architect's model of a building LOOKS EXACTLY like an old piece of CHEESE in my refrigerator. Pure genius on his part! 5 years of university😂
really cool video
Have you or those you've worked with run into where materials have failed to scale with the project? i.e. you could build a small model but just were not able to match the model at the full size?
Where can someone get old 1/48th used by architects? I would love to repurpose some for wargaming terrain?
Is the thumbnail the Dallas Museum of Art building?
For the scale comparison u say a quarter inch but show. 1/4' which is a quarter ft. I think you meant 1/4"
.. HAPPY NEW YEAR
I'll use this as an excuse to push _The Goblin Emperor_, a fantasy novel where a model of a complex bridge helps it to get built.
It's a very good novel, and refreshing because competence and good will are generally rewarded. It's the opposite of The Game of Thrones.
It’s interesting that I suspect architects making all glass exterior curtain walls never know anything about the various machine and hand made glasses that were and or are used to make leaded/“stained” glass windows starting over 140 years ago
Scale is the same for imperial and metric. That was a bogus line in my opinion. I will debate my point in a video if requested
Super Useful. Not just 'useful' or 'quite useful' but 'Super Useful'. Hard to take this video seriously after that opener. Clicking away.
I always get excited and start study models but unfortunately I do not finish them, it always feels time consuming to me. Can anyone share their experience and explain how models enhanced their design process?
The architecture firm I work at has a modelshop that I run. We use it as a tool in design. I of course greatly believe in its virtues, but as a firm, internally, it brings many groups of architectural designers and architects together over a single visual form that they can all absorb at their own pace and from whatever perspective they desire. Then we all discuss the design in front of each other and try things out as a group with physical elements on the model. It is time consuming, but I would say the whole process is, so making models is no different. Its all about your level of patience and what you are prepared to tolerate. We also test early build-ability in the model, because in most cases, if i cannot make it there is probably no way to get it built for real either. Its also a separate set of eyes looking at the design from a very different perspective. Then when we bring models to a client we get far more effective engagement with them when we show a model. Our clients are often business execs, politicians, government workers, etc. I have learned over time very few can visualize from drawings, many even struggle with some renderings. A model has often proved invaluable for those types of people. However no one is going to admit to being unable to visulise so you only learn it by using drawings one time and models the next and seeing the different reactions. There is more to it that this but those are a few tokens
@@atbattson Thank you for sharing your insightful experience 😊
3:38 forbidden ball pit
Now I understand everything Real Civil Engineer says about architects.
"And they only give off a minor amount of toxic smoke." 😆
Loved that one. :)
What is “spatial justice”?
nice
the Derek Zoolander centre for kids who don't read good...... Zoolander, "what is this?? A center for ants???!!! How can we expect kids to learn how to read if they can't fit in the building?? " OOOOOh Stewart..... the center has to be at least 3 times bigger than this!!
Sigh...too bad the architecture firms where i come from don't do physical models because the firms only care about outputting as many projects as possible with crazy dead lines
I miss doing physical models; 3D models just dont cut it
@3:27 very reassuring xD
And then there's me who makes models as a hobby
I just built my first model in architecture school and now I really wish we used metric😭
I’d say physical models will always prevail over 3D renders. I’m currently studying architecture and every tutor I had stressed the importance of exploring the design in a model, and it’s easy to see why - no matter how good a render is, a computer simulation will always be a flat image (unless you 3D print it).
augmented reality would like word with you. physical models will always be around because sometimes for workflow it's faster to pre make something physically then move it into the virtual. the things virtual does well is reproducible, if you only need a cheap basic metal folding chair to put in you virtual scene, you can use the same folding chair asset across lots of projects.
I disagree. As I studied Architecture, starting in 1986 and on into university, the role of a physical model was emphasized again and again as an integral part of the design process. What I discovered from my professors, was that they were using the process of making a physical model as a teaching tool and not as a design tool. This was to help filter out "unbuildable" or "awkward" designs coming from neophyte students but not really for the reasons that professionals use models. Using a physical model in the modern age is wasteful in the extreme and can be misleading, especially to those who can not visualize space or scale.
I had a mentoring discussion with a recent architectural graduate about a model they used in their final project in school. When I asked them how thick the floor slab was on an extensive cantilever in their design they could not tell me in real world terms, only that it looked thick enough and that the model "worked", i.e. did not fall over. When I pointed out that, at that scale, the balsa wood slab representing the concrete floor was well over a meter thick they were surprised. The model lied to her. Computer tools today could have not only provided immediate real sizes for the elements, but could test them in ways that no physical model could.
3D computer models are a superior design tool for exploring, viewing, testing, and rendering a plan.
I was an Architectural Model Maker for many years. It was embarrassing for me to point out all manner of design flaws to clients, while all his junior Architects looked on. Wrong scale, were is the disability access? Breach of boundary, stairwell doors to voids, drainage running uphill. They hated me, but the clients loved me. Proof reading plans take a lot of time and effort. If you cant build it as a model - you cant build it.
I miss the history of using models.
Because architects of the old days used models to instruct the builders.
This comment has nothing to do with this video, but I know you read the comments so I'm trying to plug an idea where your perspective could be warranted. What are your thoughts on the controversial "Munger Dorms" proposed at UC Santa Barbara? I had such a visceral negative reaction to the proposal, that I have an almost morbid determination to try and steel man the argument.
Yeah, maybe a short? It’s a scary situation.
I've been sayin 👏
Just 3D print it, it would take 1 person a couple hours to make these models and press print. You can design it full scale, and scale as you like before printing. No need for a dedicated workshop.
I always pronounce OMA as 'oma', which is Dutch for grandma. I suspect they did that on purpose.
i thought that the model in the thumbnail had fallen appart but no...it intentionally looks like that.
In a world that is becoming more and more virtual we risk to loos every contact --most literal-- with the forms and spaces we live in and want or have to use. The computer is a great tool to make quick and even detailed studies of anything including buildings. The technique even allow us to experience the spaces in a way... but they never replace the real thing. You never have the tactile effects of material and form, there we need other tools. One of those tools is making models.
Like you say the material(s) will backfeed impressions that influence the design in their own right. We humans are not that good to envision our thoughts, so we take a piece of paper and a pencil and start drawing. Where those two dimensions run out of options to explore we need that third dimension and models are a part of that.
Other than being tools to develop real size things models have become something in their own right. Some people design models because of it being a model. To enjoy a little world without the restrictions of all day life.
In the end the model is both a tool to develop things as well as a thing of art as the only function for a model designed as such is an autonomous creation of man.
Happy little thought indeed...