Finally, we made the last model of the year. For the final jury, I developed my previous jury’s model according to what instructors said. I completely surround the zone which has a long, distinct element by using folded planes. At the other side of the field, I finished the spreading with the help of the transparent glass. I direct the invasion through the glass and used its transparency to complete and close the spaces around it. For the center, I improved my planar relations which belong to cut-out part of the field.
Relief
Kılçık
At last versions of my field elements, I made few changes. Refief one has a big, square cut-out for central zone and has tiny slits to intersect the three field element: relief, kılçık, transparent glass.
Top View
Longitudinal Section
Axonometric
Diagram
Short Section
At my diagram, I tried to explain how invader reacts to the information of the field and why one zone has folded elements while other one doesn’t. Finally, we made a jury poster.
For the second prejury, we enlarged the models through our strategies. My strategy was spreading through the field also using the folded elements to surround. I struggled with them too much because working non-orthogonally is different than working orthogonally about relationships and connecting issues.
My field has two main zones that have different information. Therefore, I used the non-orthogonal elements just at the side which has a long, distinct field. Folded elements helped me to surround this distinct part. At the other zone, I only used orthogonal planes and a mass to determine a finishing point to the spreading. However, at the jury, I understand that it was not useful and necessary. Also, to combine the two zones with a center I made a cut-out at the relief field. It helped me to spread easily and in a combined way.
Top View and Section drawings
Sketches
Sketches and Diagram
At my diagram, I tried to show my center (with cut-out), the mass (ending point) and directions of the folded elements.
We initiated an invasion which was developed in reference to what we have discovered through studying the different zones and techniques at the instances.
We had to propose a strategy for the invasion which shows our learnings from the previous stages. At prejury model, we only had to use 10-15 planar elements to present our strategy and the way that we will follow through the end of the invasion model. We also present our analysis of the instances and how we will use the information that we learned from them.
I decided to make the invasion will start from the top center of the field and spread through the whole field by growing around itself and surrounding it with the help of the folded elements. At my jury model, I used my corridor shaped volumes to start and expand a center as in my first instance.
Considering the information provided by the field we produced three models which named as “instance”. We learned to produce volumes, defining volumetric relations, generating spatial diversities in 3D by the leadership of the field.
We made the first instance with orthogonal planes.
My first instance has a center and grows around it in a limited area which is defined by the field. It grows with narrow and long, corridor shaped volumes and reflects the changes in the field.
At the second instance, we concentrated on a different zone of the field. We used a major planer element which is 10x70cm in size. We folded the major plane for several times to study non-orthogonal volumetric relations. Other planes related themselves with the major one spacially and geometrically.
I discovered that folded element is so useful to produce volumes of itself while also surrounding the field. Therefore, I used it to surround a specific zone by also making corridor shaped volumes as in the first instance. Moreover, I combine orthogonal and non-orthogonal volumes.
At the third instance, we again concentrated on a different zone which including the sanded acetate. Also, we had to deal with a massive element. The masses should be treated differently than the planar elements.
I used the mass to separate the zone at two parts that one has the acetate which required different reflections than the normal field elements; the other one creates nested volumes by surrounding the mass to prevent that it looks like a distinct element. At acetate part, I did not do enclosure volumes to use the transparency of the acetate.
We produced a field by intersecting first, second and third cases’ models on an XYZ coordinate system where each model positioned on different axes (XY, YZ, XZ). The field should contain zones with different characteristics.
I produced four main zones by intersecting my models. Each zone has different potentials to initiate occurrence of different instances.
We have started the new semester by learning what is mapping. A map is a symbolic depiction of the things such as a visual representation of an entire area or a part of an area.
An aerial photo of the New York City was given and for case 1 – step 1 we were expected to produce an abstract representation of it by pixelating the image and changing the degree of transparency of each pixel according to the repeating and varying conditions inherent to this image.
original imagepixelated and abstracted image
The image is 25×60 and the pixels are 5×5. While abstracting and changing the transparency levels, our concern should not be related to our perception such as saying there are lakes, parks, roads and buildings. We should perceive the image as saying there are continuous lines; more dense, colored or textured parts etc.
I changed the transparency according to dominance, order and variations of texture. I thought that the middle part of the image, rectangular shaped lake, is the most dominant and ordered the part so I did not change its transparency. Then I increased the transparency levels with this strategy.
For step 2 we were expected to produce a relief out of the pixelated image. Variation and differentiation of conditions which are attained in 2D should be expressed 3D in the form of a relief. In order to introduce depth, we stick layers of cardboard.
I made the most transparent parts are the highest ones. The levels are decreasing when also the degree of transparency is decreasing.
Then we revised this model by using 2,5 x 2,5 pixels to introduce more complex relationships and to break strong grid appearance. I did not make big changes but at some parts, new proportion helped me to describe some parts more accurately.
Finally, we did our models with black cardboard. At my submission model, I did not make any changes. However, I bought a black cardboard which one is more difficult to cut than the other type of it. Therefore, after I finished my model I could not feel my fingers and my model became too heavy.
For the case 2 – step 1 we recomposed the pixelated image considering the transparency level of each pixel. Dimensions of the pixels are again 5×5 but the whole composition is 20×75. While recomposing the pixels, we should not consider the characteristics of the original image but only changes in the level of transparency and try to achieve different conditions of continuities and discontinuities.
We should answer these questions:
How can you define continuity and discontinuity?
How can you organize different colored pixels?
How can you define zones with readable guidelines and without strict and messy conditions? (Breaking certain shape with a rule, making regions with different definitions)
I kept some parts as of how it was at case 1. However, I thought that I could not achieve something promising because I could not define differentiable zones and readable guidelines of continuities which have caused a messy composition. So I did it again.
Again I kept the U shape because I think that it defines both continuity&discontinuity and regions at inside and outside of it. At the rest of the composition, I made some variations of it.
After recomposition for the second step, we were assigned to make a model of it by orthogonally folding some cut outs from a plane which is 20×75.
I have two strange shapes and two rectangle shapes in my model. I fold them through opposite directions to make some guidelines. Also in the manner of 3D, my U shape and big rectangle create a continuity between them while also defining a zone together. The half – U shape and the square is a variation of the other part and keeps the guidelines.
For case 3 we chose and cropped a 20x35cm zone from the pixelated image that we regenerated for the case two. We chose the zone according to the continuities and the discontinuities of the pixels. Then we deleted some pixels from the zone to define new continuities.
I chose the middle part of the image because this part has a U-shape and an L-shape like my main elements of the second case’s model. Then I erased the black part to define the sharper shapes and continuity.
Then we made this zone’s model by cutting out the deleted pixels from a thick, sanded acetate which is 20x35cm. At later stages, we will use it as a transparent glass.
more and more Architect 