Good Render Is Not A Guarantee Of Good Architecture By Kimani Mburu

Good Render is Not a Guarantee of Good Architecture

By Kimani Mburu

Atlantis cum piranesi render By Siron Global-2

The Building Information Modeling (BIM) has enabled designers to generate computer aided designs that are presented in photorealistic renders and high quality 3D simulations through motion render and virtual reality softwares. These perspectives have showcased unmatched presentation to the extent that many clients are going for them as a criterion for choosing a given design when they have several options to go with. This, in some cases, have been the biggest undoing of clients.

Exaggerated Elements Realities

Many are times that the perspectives and simulations have been refined and edited too much that the whole feasibility and viability of the design is compromised. This may be in exaggerated plot sizes and neighbourhood blending, lighting effect and material finishes. A client will buy the idea presented by how well it blends in its artificial setting, something that may greatly differ and become impractical to achieve in a realistic setting.

Unrealistic Elements

Sometimes the design as presented in and by presentation softwares would incooperated impossible perspective to realize with the local capacity and setting in real life. A client may be presented with a picture window for presentation but the develop ment lies in relatively not so much secure neighbourhood. The pres ence of children playing around such spaces may necessitate the need to take precautionary measure to ensure the window panes are safe to them. This may be in stiffening them or making them bulletproof for security purposes. A water foundation or lighting effect may be possible in displays but prove impossible in real-life particularly with considerations to climatic conditions, security and maintenance. A designer may go for high end finishes or materials that are extremely expensive to procure, install, and maintain. When the client considers these realities, the renders presented to them may hype their expectation only for a hard sad reality to hit them when they start to realize the project on site.

Insensitive to Budget Scope Clients want to be presented with high end visualizations of their prospective developments. In many cases, to achieve such demands, very fine details and utopia approach has to be incooperated. This may be good for the eye in presentation but sore to the budget in implementation. Complicated design elements may need to be imported or customized, and such require special order and request that comes at an extra cost. If the client was not prepared for the extra cost (which also has to be within the variation limit), realizing the desired design may not be possible. Worst still, they may get a design that has been overhauled completely to look and represent a unique outcome from what they had envisioned.

Missing Intricate Details

In some cases, the perspectives showcase complicated design concepts whose stability and detailing may require specialist engineering consultation to design and test the elements’ strengths to determine the spans and sizing. The clients, at presentation stage, may not be presented with the actual cost implications to hold the structure in form and place. Furthermore, the design engineer may alter the basic structural elements spans and sizes and this may have catastrophic implications to spaces qualities, which in turn changes the design from what the client had been presented and convinced on during presentation stage.

Building Regulation Limitations

Coming up with a unique design is one thing and taking it through the local authorities and regulations approval is a different thing. Sometimes designers have generated utopia designs that compromises space quality, lighting, ventilation, circulation, fire escape routes and solid and liquid waste management. A client may want a project to be realized in a specific approach that may impractically impossible to be regularized in approval stage. This quagmire creates a hiccup in the approval stage and to the implementation expectations.

FEATURES

Changing the whole design or modifying it to comply with the industry standards may demoralize the clients and their expectations lowered, and or changed –and worse, against what they had admired to realize.

Becoming Realistic

It is therefore recommended that the designer uses the softwares available for BIM to come up with realistic impressions that reflect realities on the ground, meets industry standards and approval requirements as well as be sensitive to the budget that the client has set aside for the same. Doing this reduces the possibilities of conflicts, dissatisfaction and disappointments when the project is in the post design stage. Furthermore, it creates more trust and reliability on the potential of the softwares in making better and more efficient designs.

BIM PRO crew schedule. image coirtesy of procrewschedule.com-2

AUTHOR BIO

Kimani Mburu is a Graduate Architect from the Technical University of Kenya and currently working with Kitale Municipality in the County Government of Trans-Nzoia. kimanimburu45@gmail.com