Sensual Hegemony - An Undergraduate Dissertation in Architectural Studies

SENSUAL HEGEMONY A DISSERTATION IN ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES

Jack Peter Lewandowski

20 16

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the BA Architecture Honours degree, Newcastle University, 2016.

Copyright Š Jack Peter Lewandowski, 2016. All rights reserved.

SENSUAL HEGEMONY How current methods of architectural representation and future technology such as Virtual Reality, have and can be integrated into the industry and affect ocular-centric design practice.

OCULAR-CENTRISM

“A perceptual bias ranking vision over the other senses”

i

1

abstract

Architectural visualisation has taken many turns throughout history. However, there is often speculation that these representational techniques follow an ocular-centric bias in their practice.

Architects are forever being accused of putting forward an augmented view of their work in the design stages of many projects. Artists have always used the sense of vision to transport viewers into their works and architects are no different; renderings appeal to the eye’s naivety.

But how have advances in architectural representation aided, or discouraged this idea of ocular-centrism? This paper will explore the different technology that has become available to architects and how it has been beneficial, or in some cases detrimental, to architectural design practice.

The main recurring literary review in this dissertation will be Juhani Pallasmaa’s The Eyes of the Skin. Pallasmaa believes that architecture shows this visual bias in its representational techniques.

As we move to a more digital world, we loose our sense of presence in the images we produce.

Architecture loses its sense of aura. The industry is continuously producing highly exaggerated, or hyper-realistic, images and they begin to loose their rootedness.

This writing will also look to the future of architectural representation - Virtual Reality.

Virtual Reality, or VR, is one of the world’s fastest growing technological industries and is slowly being adopted by the architectural industry. This paper will explore the types of Virtual Reality available to architects, industry opinions on its integration into architectural studios and whether or not it will lead us to a more, or less, ocularcentric design practice.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I’d like to thank my dissertation tutor Matthew Ozga-Lawn for all his guidance on my chosen topic and help with the writing of this paper.

I’d also like to thank the following for kindly taking the time to answer my questionnaire. Their answers were highly informative and of great use: Ken Shuttleworth, founding partner of Make Architects Graham Morrison, founding partner of Allies & Morrison Bob Allies, founding partner of Allies & Morrison Michel Mossessian, founding partner of Mossessian Architecture Kieran Ashton, head of visualisation at Allies & Morrison Greg Willis and Sanaa Shaikh, architects at Make Architects Alejandro Jiménez Brasa and Tania Marques, architects at Mossessian Architecture iii

table of contents

Part One

Chapter One - Introduction

Part Two

2

Chapter Two - Ocular-centric Design Practice

10

Chapter Three - Computer Aided Dominance

14 14 14 15

Chapter Four - Visualisation in Architecture

24 24 25 29 30

i. Introduction ii.

A Brief History of Computer Modelling iii.

CAD - Help or Hindrance?

i. ii. iii. iv.

A Brief History of Visualisation Present Day Visualisation Increased Ocular-centric Practice?

Deceitful Architectural Design

Part Three

Chapter Five - Virtual Reality - The Future?

i. ii. iii. iv.

Virtual Reality - A Brief Introduction Current Virtual Reality Implementation Architectural Adaptation - An Industry Study More, or Less, Ocular-centric Practice?

Part Four

Chapter Six - Conclusion

Part Five

i.

List of Illustrations ii. Bibliography iii.

Appendices A-J iv

40 40 41 43 45 56 61 63 69

PART ONE

Figure 1 Perspective of The House of the Director, Claude-Nicholas Ledeux

Figure 2 OASIS, Collage by Archigram

Introduction

1

01

INTRODUCTION

“I want to see things, that’s all I really trust. I want to see, and that’s why I draw. I can see an image only if I draw it.” Carlo Scarpa 2

Mankind has always produced imagery to portray ideology. From cave paintings found in Indonesia, dating back as far as 40,000 years ago3, to our world today, one which is more image conscious than ever before.

Architecture has followed this trend. Juhani Pallasmaa states the over fabrication of images is leading to the demise of their effectiveness in modern tarchitecture. Representation has taken several turns throughout history, such as the naturalised perspective of Claude-Nicolas Ledoux’s drawings (Figure 1) in L’Architecture written in 18064, the avant-garde and Utopian collage of Peter Cook and Archigram in the 1960’s (Figure 2) and the hyper-realistic computer generated renderings that exist in the architectural world today.

‘Various mediums and drawing types can, in themselves, impart emotional characteristics particular to their use.’5 Architects have developed particular styles allowing them to best showcase their conceptual thoughts and processes behind a design. Architecture has the ability to stimulate the mind, allowing us to ‘engage fully in the mental dimensions of dream, imagination and desire’.6 Designers are no longer restricted to the use of ink, paper and physical modelling techniques to represent and sell ideas to clients and the public.

However, what implications have these changes in representation had on our perceptions of space and architecture? Part Two of this dissertation will explore the theory of ocular-centric bias in architectural design practice.

Architectural representation throughout history has shown hegemony to the sense of vision. This part will look back to the roots of ocular-centrism and the theorem behind its involvement in modern design practice.

Introduction

2

In an age of cutting-edge technologies and software, it has never been easier to achieve images as realistic and atmospheric as the ones we see today.

Rendering software such as V-Ray and Maxwell allow the user to emulate the behaviour of physical particles creating photo-realistic results. Additional post processing software like Adobe Photoshop can create dramatic, evocative images in a matter of minutes. But can these images replace the honesty of traditional freehand techniques and hand modelling? Peter Zumthor famously does not render, but rather builds models by hand. In an article in CLOG: Rendering, author Kevin Frank writes ‘[Zumthor] believes pencil is more persuasive than pixels’ and that ‘ray tracing has not been necessary to demonstrate the quality of light in his buildings’.7 Part Two will also look at these advances of representational techniques.

There is frequent speculation about the power of renderings and their misrepresentation of architecture. Because of this photorealism, architects are being accused of putting forward an augmented reality that falsely depicts a building, resulting ultimately in disappointment. Magazines and online blogs are forever being flooded with ‘dream-like’ renderings and this is descending down to architecture students in schools worldwide, where more focus is placed on creating stunning visuals for graduation shows than designing buildings that work. An architect is no longer only the artist but the salesperson also.

Several tools are used in these images to achieve a persuasive narrative.

Modern day digital artists include dramatic weather, a plethora of entourage and unrealistic lighting to increase the theatrical effect of their work in an attempt to evoke emotion from their audience.

In The Eyes of the Skin, Pallasmaa discusses that computers have been ‘seen as a solely beneficial invention’ for fantasy and efficiency of design, but goes on to state that computer-based images ‘flatten our magnificent, multisensory, simultaneous and synchronic capacities of imagination’.8 Through the exploration of published text and the opinions of people in the field, this paper aims to discover whether advances in these techniques have had a positive or detrimental impact on architecture for both the architect and the general public.

Introduction

3

Part Three look towards the future of visualisation, Virtual Reality. Virtual Reality (VR) is one of the world’s fastest growing industries. VR systems such as Oculus Rift allow us to be in a fully immersive virtual world within the physical. By removing the constrictions of two-dimensional images, the potential of VR for the presentation of architectural ideas is immense.

These technologies aim towards ultimately creating virtual scenarios that can not be told apart from the real world; a place that can be physically explored. Architecture is not mono-sensory. To fully interact it requires the senses of smell, hearing and touch. With these additions, Virtual Reality has the capability to give the user a mesmeric experience of an unbuilt project, allowing client interaction like never before and allowing the architect to test the spatial qualities of their design in a multitude of scenarios. Could this be the future of architectural representation, and change the way we perceive space forever?

Introduction

4

notes

1 Chandler, D. and Munday, R. (2011) A Dictionary of Media and Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (p301) 2 Schank-Smith, K. (2005) Architect’s Drawings A Selection Of Sketches By World Famous Architects Through History. Oxford: Architectural Press (UK). (p4) 3 Ghosh, P. (2014) Cave paintings change ideas about the origin of art. Available at: http:// www.bbc.co.uk/news/scienceenvironment-29415716 (Accessed: 2nd October 2015).

4 Gómez, A. P. and Pelletier, L. (1997) Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (p79)

5 Porter, T. (2004) Selling Architectural Ideas. 1st edn. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. (p10) 6 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p13) 7 Frank, K. (2012) KEVIN FRANK | Writings | Peter Zumthor Does Not Render. Available at: http://www. archilepsymagazine.com/kevinfrank/ clog (Accessed: 2 October 2015).

8 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p13-14)

Introduction

5

Introduction

6

PART TWO

Ocular-centric Design Practice

9

02

OCULAR-CENTRIC DESIGN PRACTICE “The eyes are the organic prototype of philosophy.” Peter Sloterdijk 9 In The Eyes of the Skin, Pallasmaa argues that there is a clear imbalance of the five senses, as sight appears to take preference in modern architectural drawing. He defines architecture as an art that ‘[…] expresses and relates man’s being in the world.’ However, Pallasmaa then goes on to argue: ‘The art of the eye [might have] produced imposing and thought-provoking structures, but it has not facilitated human rootedness in the world’.10 He believes that prioritising the eye over the other senses leaves us unable to connect with architecture and its surrounding context.

Ocular-centric design dates back to Plato (c.428-347 B.C.)11 and Aristotle’s (c.384-322 B.C.)12 belief that primacy was given to sight, associating it with reason. Sight has always been given prevalence in architecture. ‘[…] as if there is a window into the heart of architects, it is assumed drawings can be the direct transcription of inner ideas’. Paul Emmons quote explains how architectural drawing and representational techniques have been believed to be the key factor in accessing the information from within an architect’s mind. His chapter in Bertolini’s book, Architecture Post Mortem, explores the early world of the architectural section, explaining its power to help us pass from a two-dimensional image, through a ‘rupture or cut’, to visually enter the interior and be mentally immersed within space.13 To be engrossed in this state of augmented reality pre-build, the architect must work with scale, a feature commonly believed to show bias towards the sense of sight.

However, Nicholas Malebranche saw the introduction of scale into architectural drawings in a different manner. He stated ‘it is clear that we Ocular-centric Design Practice

10

must not rely on the testimony of our eyes to make judgements about size [...] it would be better to listen to reason.’ Malebranche believed that no two men saw the same object in exactly the same way and we must look to our other senses in order to make judgements through drawing. He stresses the idea of using the full Ayatana, the Buddhist sense-sphere containing six senses, adding mind as a sixth sense.14 Through our sensory engagement, we begin to create preconceptions on size and scale. This belief moves away from the purely ocular-centric view of architectural representation.

Architect Daniel Libeskind strongly believes architecture has its roots as a multi-sensory experience; it cannot simply be interpreted through sight alone.

Architecture must be felt, walked through and used to generate memories based on a multitude of factors. Architecture is tactile. Architecture is emotion. Through the hegemony of sight, we jeopardise this sense of growing through our architectural experiences. By looking to the built environment as simply a visual, artistic experience, be it whilst in its representational form or the finished physical product, we potentially remove ourselves from the other sensory delights that it can produce.15 In agreement with Libeskind’s beliefs, Pallasmaa writes that the ‘world becomes a hedonistic but meaningless visual journey’ as the art of architecture becomes a more ocular-centric design practice.16 Architecture has always shown a certain visual bias. The works of Florentine architects such as Gozzoli were often painted rich with entourage and colour.

The avante-garde era of the 1960’s regularly depicted largely exaggerated scenarios to portray their utopian ideology. As representation has moved on through the ages, the balance appears to have remained ocular-centric.

Modern representation plays on the observer’s fantasy through the direction of their eyes. Visuals often show what the artist believes the spectator wants to see. Spaces can be rendered to a hyper-realistic level of perfection, allowing the user to see what they believe to be architectural supremacy in the design upon viewing. They also have a tendency to be crowded with people in improbable situations. The viewer sees a delusional precedent of how the design will perform once realised, playing on this sixth sense with a ‘dream-like’ scenario.

Ocular-centric Design Practice

11

notes

9 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p18)

16 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p25)

10 Ibid. (p22-23) 11 Plato - Ancient History (2009) Available at: http://www.history. com/topics/ancient-history/plato (Accessed: 6 October 2015).

12 Aristotle Biography (no date) Available at: http://www. biography.com/people/aristotle9188415#synopsis (Accessed: 6 October 2015).

13 Bertolini, C. D. (2013) Architecture post Mortem: The Diastolic architecture of decline, dystopia, and death. Edited by Donald Kunze, David Bertolini, and Simone Brott.

1st edn. United Kingdom: Ashgate Publishing. (p153-161) 14 Emmons, P (2005) Size Matters: virtual scale and bodily imagination in architectural drawings.

Architectural Research Quarterly.

9 (p227-235) dos: 10.1017/ S135913550500028X 15 Libeskind, D. and CNN (2015) We mustn’t forget the deep emotional impact of the buildings around us.

Available at: http://edition.cnn. com/2015/06/30/architecture/daniellibeskind-architecture-emotions/ (Accessed: 15 November 2015).

Ocular-centric Design Practice

12

Computer Aided Dominance

13

03

COMPUTER AIDED DOMINANCE

Introduction Architecture has never relied upon the use of computer technology more.

Today, a building can be designed without the need for the architect to ever put pen to paper. Technical drawings are completed using CAD (Computer Aided Design) software such as Autodesk’s AutoCAD, allowing the user to draw at a 1:1 scale on a borderless canvass. This creates an inability to put the drawing into a perceivable relation to that of their body. A scale is only required when printing the drawings onto a restricted paper size. Emmons believes that ‘CAD’s myth of full-scale drawing is, in fact, the absence of scale’. This absence of scale often means that the designer will look at the image as an object, rather than ‘projecting oneself into the image through an imaginative inhabitation’. This begins to contradict Malebranche’s belief that we must go past purely the eye to judge scale, where the judgement of distance cannot be viewed as ocular-centric, but that the idea of distance is only known through the combination of touch and vision.17 A Brief History of Computer Modelling Computer Aided Design is thought to have been originally conceived by Adams Associates in Bedford, Massachusetts in 1959.18 Pierre Bezier was the first person to advance computer systems to be able to draw curved lines based upon mathematical equations, known as Bezier Curves. These curves revolutionised the designer’s ability to draw complex shapes in three dimensions and have remained largely unchanged from their initial introduction to the industry.19

Computer Aided Dominance

14

Originally Computer Aided Design was used in the aeronautical and automotive industries but was inaccessible to architects due to the expense.

It was not until these systems became more cost effective that they began to replace the traditional use of drawing boards. In 1982, John Walker founded Autodesk, the flagship company that made CAD accessible to millions worldwide in a multitude of drafting practices, including architecture. Since the initial release Autodesk has continued to revolutionise the industry with further software such as Revit and 3Ds Max, both of which are dominant in architectural design practice.20 The next leap in architectural drafting was the introduction of widespread userfriendly applications such as Google SketchUp. SketchUp was first pioneered in August of the year 2000 by Brad Schell and Joe Esch of Last Software with the tag line ‘3D for everyone’.21 It allows users to draw the edges of the desired model, following which the software fills in the shape to form simple planes.

These can be built up to form complex three-dimensional models.

Three-dimensional modelling is seen as the next step on from perspective. It often manages to avoid criticism due to the lack of understanding around the subject for many clients and the older generation of architects. The use of a three-dimensional model gives the artist the ability to quickly and efficiently view the overall appearance and spatial qualities of a building long before its construction, allowing design decisions to be made at regular intervals along a project’s lifespan.

CAD - Help or Hindrance?

The widespread introduction and adaptation of Computer Aided Design has a multitude of advantages for both the user and the client. However, it has resulted in drawbacks in the ocular-centric design practice of architecture.

Modelling using computer software has rapidly decreased the time taken to draft both two and three-dimensional drawings and has significantly improved accuracy in architectural design in comparison to hand drawing and physical modelling.

Computer Aided Dominance

15

However, three-dimensional computer modelling, similar to two-dimensional CAD, has an absence of recognisable scale. Buildings that are modelled can be infinitely big or small and the lack of a physical human interaction refrains the architect from being fully engaged on a multi-sensory level. You cannot touch a digital model.

“The sense of ‘aura’, the authority of presence…has been lost.” 22 This quote from Pallasmaa explores how the lack of a human physical presence from the design process looses the projects ‘aura’, the sense of an atmosphere emulating from the work that has gone into the final product from the artist. As time is taken away from the design process, the presented work can appear lifeless and although three-dimensional computer models can be used to showcase a building’s spatial qualities, the lack of a physical presence removes the user from the design.

Another common criticism of three-dimensional computer modelling is the potential restriction of creativity to the user. Designs can be limited by the technological capabilities of the draftsman, preventing them from exploring more adventurous design ideas. Burelli writes in his book, Architectural Renderings, that the ‘computer came to the architect as a tool for absolute accuracy in his work’ resulting in a loss of ‘uncertainty and procrastination’ in the design practice.23 In architectural education and practice, designs are often constricted by these issues as the designer needs to meet regular deadlines.

Apple’s head designer, Jonathan Ive, quoted he struggles to hire new students as staff because of their reliance on computer technology and their lack of understanding of how to physically make products. Ive said: ‘So many of the designers [interviewed] don’t know how to make stuff because workshops in design schools are expensive and computers are cheaper.’24 Peter Zumthor is well known for his use of physical hand made models in his architectural practice. His design process often makes extensive use of large-scale inhabitable models (Figure 3), allowing himself and his clients to fully immerse themselves into the project to verify particular atmospheric and Computer Aided Dominance

16

material qualities of his design before it is built, something that using digital modelling software, such as SketchUp, alone can not achieve.25 However, computer modelling has many benefits as it can also be used to create architecture that drawing or mental exploration alone can not.

Parametric design is a tool used by designers using algorithms to explore the possibility of form. It allows multiple possibilities to be achieved by changing

Figure 3 1:1 Detail Model, Peter Zumthor Computer Aided Dominance

17

the information in the data set. ‘For example, think of an elevation with windows, each window must have an area equal to 1/8 of room’s floor area.

It’s simple, but when next day you’ll decide 1/7 will do better, and there are 1000 windows?’26 The time and expense required to model and draw these structures by hand would not be suitably effective.

A well-known proponent of parametric design in architecture is Zaha Hadid.

Many of Hadid’s buildings are generated from parametrics, such as her Galaxy Soho building in Beijing (Figures 4 and 5). Forms can be experimented with and created quickly by changing the input data, from which specifications for construction can be formulated to create the ability to design and construct architecture that would not have previously been possible. Patrik Schumacher, one of Hadid’s practice directors, states in a piece written for the Architect’s Journal: ‘parametricism is the great new style after post-modernism’. He believes ‘parametricism demarcates and further galvanises a maturing avant-garde movement’ in architecture and is the driving force as a further development and research tool.27 However, the use of parametric design, particularly Schumacher’s use, is also heavily criticised. Daniel Davis, a columnist in ARCHITECT Magazine, quotes in direct retaliation to Schumacher’s piece in the previously cited Architect’s Journal: ‘Patrik Schumacher is the biggest villain in parametric design’. He writes about how the use of parametric design by Hadid and Schumacher is free from ‘parameters of site […] parameters of culture […] parameters of tectonics […] parameters of environment’.28 Albeit, this writing is purely based upon the opinion of Davis and not upon fact. Often buildings that have been developed using this design method lack a harmony with their locational context and do not seem to have been born from detailed analysis, but rather mathematical experimentation. They are often purely aesthetic and thus ocular-centric in their nature.

But how different is the use of a computer to draw and model, to the use of pencil and card to do the same? An excerpt from ‘The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice’ states: ‘Too often architects who embrace computer Computer Aided Dominance

18

design technology abandon manual design processes that are still effective, from a belief that new technology must be leveraged to maximum advantage.

Effective use of computer modelling should compliment, rather than replace, physical three-dimensional models.’29 This quote suggests rather than simply dismissing the introduction of computer-based modelling, its implementation into design practice can help us become more harmonious designers and can increase the level of connectivity the artist has with the work that is being produced.

Computer Aided Dominance

19

Figure 4 Galaxy Soho, Zaha Hadid

Figure 6 Galaxy Soho, Zaha Hadid

Computer Aided Dominance

20

notes

17 Emmons, P (2005) Size Matters: virtual scale and bodily imagination in architectural drawings.

Architectural Research Quarterly. 9 (p227-235) dos: 10.1017/S135913550500028X

24 Winston, A. (2014) Design education is ‘tragic’, says Jonathan Ive. Available at: http://www.dezeen. com/2014/11/13/design-educationtragic-says-jonathan-ive-apple/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

18 Peddie, J. (2013). The history of visual magic in computers. London: Springer (p102)

25 Astbury, J. (2014) Architects do it with models: The history of architecture in 16 models. Available at: http://www.architectural-review. com/rethink/architects-do-it-withmodels-the-history-of-architecturein-16-models/8658964.fullarticle (Accessed: 19 December 2015).

19 Engineer, Pierre Bezier, inventor of the Bezier curves, (no date) Available at: http://www.engology. com/eng5bezier.htm (Accessed: 18 December 2015).

20 Kennedy, L. (no date) A brief history of AutoCAD. Available at: http:// www.scan2cad.com/autocad-briefhistory/ (Accessed: 18 December 2015).

21 Bacus, J. (2014) A new home for SketchUp. Available at: http://sketchupdate.blogspot. co.uk/2012/04/new-home-forsketchup.html (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

22 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p33) 23 Schillaci, F., Burelli, A. R. and Avella, F. (2010) Architectural renderings: Construction and design manual: [history and theory, studios and practices]. 1st edn. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons. (p74)

26 Ceborski, J. (no date) Introduction: Parametric design. Available at: http://www.rethinking-architecture. com/introduction-parametricdesign,354/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

27 Schumacher, P. (2010) ‘The Parametricist Epoch: Let the Style Wars Begin’, Architect’s Journal, 231(16), (p14) doi: 10.1002/ad.912.

28 Davis, D. (2015) Patrik Schumacher Parametricism – Daniel Davis.

Available at: http://www.danieldavis. com/patrik-schumacherparametricism/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

29 Demkin, J. A. and The American Institute of Architects (2001) The architect’s handbook of professional practice. 13th edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Computer Aided Dominance

21

Computer Aided Dominance

22

Visualisation in Architecture

23

04

VISUALISATION IN ARCHITECTURE History of Visualisation A tool every architect possesses is the use of architectural representation.

Architectural drawings as old as 1500BC30 have been discovered, in which floor plans were carved in clay tablets, a technique also duplicated in marble in 2AD.31 In the Medieval age, architects began to introduce the section and elevation to portray the aesthetic qualities of a building outside its layout.32 The invention of perspectival representation was perhaps the greatest advance in visualisation, making the eye the centre point of imagery and thus increasing the hegemony of vision.33 The art and representational techniques we know today are a relatively recent discovery; no attempts were made to represent a scene using perspective before the 14th Century. The art of the Byzantine, Medieval and Gothic periods did not look at the illusion of depth and space.

The Italian masters Giotto (c. 1267-1337) and Duccio (c. 1260 - 1319) were the first artists to introduce a sense of depth into their work using shadows.

However, the first known image to make use of modern linear perspective was painted in 1415 by the Florentine architect Filippo Brunelleschi. It depicted a Baptistery in Florence, using vanishing points that converged at eye level to create the illusion of depth. Following this first example, architects and painters throughout the Renaissance and Baroque periods continued to develop this idea of perspective into what we recognise today.34 The image remains the central tool in shaping people’s minds, helping to accentuate the predominately ocular-centric nature of architectural design practice.35 Since these initial examples of architectural perspectives, representational techniques have advanced. In the 1960’s and 1970’s, the avant-garde architects of the era explored new representational mediums, Visualisation in Architecture

24

such as collage, where Utopian ideas were presented with an urgency to be understood. Artists such as Peter Cook, founder of student body Archigram, used collage to portray these ideas in an augmented way, creating visually complex and evocative imagery to explain his ideology of design and the future of architecture. Archigram were pioneers of this method of architectural visualisation and revolutionised it for a future generation of architects.

Present Day Visualisation “Time and again, the projects seemed intent on fleeing the real world of people and places, scale and context; retreating instead into fantasy realms of convoluted forms with no seeming purpose.” Oliver Wainwright 36 The two dominant techniques of present-day architectural visualisation are romanticised and hyper-realistic rendering. Romanticised images are often overly evocative scenarios produced by architects such as Schmidt Hammer Lassen (Figure 6) and Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) (Figure 7). These renderings rely heavily on post processing software, such as Adobe Photoshop, to enhance their images. Oliver Wainwright’s quote above refers to this over idealisation of architectural images, where projects are being sold to a client as not only a building, but a fantastical narrative. Artists who use these rendering types use various techniques to help create the scene they want to portray. They use renderings to tell stories.

A commonly used feature in ‘dream-like’ rendering is people. Many renderings today showcase an entourage of people inhabiting the building or the surrounding space. It is becoming ever more common for these people to be presented in overtly jubilant activities - taking photographs, playing sports or holding balloons (Figure 6). People have always been used to sell architectural drawings, often in an unnaturally posed, highly stylised way. Today this largely has not changed, as entourage websites such as Skallgubbar, set up by a Swedish architecture student, have large collections of what journalist Alissa Walker calls ‘hipster scalies’. In her online article ‘The Secret Lives of the Tiny People In Architectural Renderings’, she discusses the use of these ‘scalies’ in Visualisation in Architecture

25

both past and present architectural visuals. Walker makes the point: “There’s a reason for these bizarre, nonsensical additions—ooooh, balloons!—to these future landscapes. Architecture is becoming less about a single walled-off phallus on the horizon and more about parks and public spaces which engage with the city. As these types of projects evolve, they’re not as much about bombastic design as they are about community-focused improvements, so the people and how they’re actually using the space become even more important.” 37

Figure 6 Emmen Theatre, Henning Larsen Architects

Visualisation in Architecture

Figure 7 The HUD, BIG Architects

26

This forms a basis of understanding to why architects saturate their drawings with these ‘scalies’. They are trying to sell the greater social context of the design to the client, not necessarily just the building itself. Digital artists also use other techniques from their rendering arsenal, such as the atmospheric conditions used in many images. It is frequent to see renderings that are snowcapped (Figure 7), or thick with mist to create a strongly evocative image Likewise, many artists depict autumn scenes, with leaves blowing in the air and exaggerated orange colours in the image to create the feeling of warmth.

Another common technique is night renderings with streaks of light seeping through the structure and light-trails from cars littering the image. All these techniques can supplement the architect’s vision, but in some instances appear to take the attention away from the architecture and concentrate it on the areas surrounding the building. One example of this is SHoP Architects’ representation of the Barclay’s Center Arena. The renderings for the new arena in New York depict streaks of light on the road from fast paced traffic, despite the plans to shut down Fifth Avenue to vehicles following construction.

Images for this project show the arena lit up whilst the rest of New York appears to be dark. These images appear to be depicting scenarios that are simply impossible, selling the client a scenario that could not be replicated in real life.38 (Figure 8) One alternative technique seen in modern digital art, particularly in interior architecture, is the use of the hyper-realistic render (Figure 9). Unlike the previous scenario where artists portray an exaggerated entourage in their work, these images are often indistinguishable from photographs. Richard Benson of digital imagery studio Pikcells, claims rendering software can make ‘wonderfully realistic images as good as photography, and in some cases better.’ He adds: ‘most kitchen, bedroom and bathroom companies now use CGI to create their marketing material and no-one has realised.’39 CGI artist Peter Guthrie claims he tries to ‘make atmospheric, memorable images without using too many post-production tricks’.40 It is true many people cannot see where the lines of a photograph and rendered image cross. One major difference between these images and those heavily post processed is Visualisation in Architecture

27

Figure 8 Barclays Center, SHoP

Figure 9 Hyper-Realistic Rendering, HendeeBorg House, Peter Guthrie

Visualisation in Architecture

28

the absence of entourage. It is not possible to accurately recreate the lighting effects used on the render with a person, so ‘scalies’ are very seldom used in hyper-realistic renderings. Because of this, these hyper-realistic renderings are usually confined to clients who are building private residences, be it for themselves or for resale. These clients are not interested in the external atmosphere of space, but rather in the exact finishes they will be receiving upon the building’s completion.

Increased Ocular-centric Practice?

Both these types of images rely on the persuasion of the eye in the sale of architectural imagery, therefore, fundamentally increase the ocular-centric design practice designers use today. Although being the predominant feature, the eye can be a deceitful one, often taken advantage of by these beautifully realistic, or overly atmospheric images. Guthrie believes this advance in the ability to produce images to this specification has helped make architecture more accessible. He says people can ‘read architectural renderings more readily than line drawings or sketches’.41 The more people begin to understand and admire the built environment, the further it can advance. Exploiting the hegemony of sight through renderings certainly helps comprehension.

The romanticised images of BIG are most apparent when renderings are shown to the public in order to sell an ideology, a ‘life-style’. In an article written about Bjarke Ingels by Chaos Group who produce V-Ray, one of the world’s most widely used rendering software, they quote: “Architects are visionaries. They need to dream something into reality, and to do that they must render their projects. At BIG, they rely on technology […] to bring their designs to life; or even a little bit better than life.” 42 BIG pride themselves on allowing the client and the public to feel the atmosphere, spirit and mood of a design purely through their sense of sight.

Bjarke Ingels is an example of the architect playing the role of the salesperson.

The images produced help convey the message with the greatest possible Visualisation in Architecture

29

impact, in the least amount of time. Images arrest, hold and persuade people of an idea with as little effort required of the observer, ultimately selling the architects vision due to an ocular-centric way of design.43 The hegemony of vision has been reinforced in our time by technological advances and the endless production and manipulation of images.44 Deceitful Architectural Design Despite the apparent positive impact an increased ocular-centric design practice has on aiding the layman’s understanding of the built environment and the architect’s ability to market architecture, Pallasmaa believes the ‘world [has become] a hedonistic, but meaningless visual journey’ due to the ‘current mass production of visual imagery’. He believes ‘imagery tends to alienate vision from emotional involvement and identification’.45 What Pallasmaa is making reference to here is the excessive production of architectural visualisations at a top level, in which they begin to become uninspiring and loose any sense of ‘emotional involvement’ with a project. It is often the case, that clients expect the architect to produce visually beautiful renderings from early stages of a project. This results in a limited design process, as there is a decline in initial rough experimentation that takes place in a more conceptual manner.

By moving towards this more visually hegemonic world in architecture, Pallasmaa believes it has ‘adopted the psychological strategy of advertising; buildings have turned into image products, detached from existential depth and sincerity.’46 The architect is no longer just the creative mind behind the concept and design of a building, they are now the salesperson who has the role of promoting their work. Architects should be able to understand, evaluate and decide how the desired forms are suitable for the required needs of a building.

In order to do this, a designer must be able to work freely, encompassing many activities such as logical thinking and both rough and specific experimentation.47 However, architects often turn to digital visualisations Visualisation in Architecture

30

early in the design process. This is increasingly apparent in architectural schools worldwide. As Vanessa Quirk explains in her article on ArchDaily: ’it is symptomatic of architecture’s obsession with the vision of architecture, an image completely detached from reality.’48 Renderings are often used as a way to conceal features of the building they do not want the users to see, whilst highlighting the evocative qualities the architect wants to showcase.

Architectural students use their visualisation techniques to make their final critiqued project appear more resolved than perhaps it is. Jonathan Ives of Apple said students were able to ‘make a dreadful design look really palatable’ thanks to their ability of computer rendering software.49 Tom Porter in his book Selling Architectural Ideas, discusses his theory that architects have ‘taught themselves as visual prophets’, rather than traditionally ‘construction technicians’.50 Students often spend time on perfecting visuals, rather than on the design of a structure itself. CLOG writer, Joel Wenzel, writes: “the image exists independent of the concept, to be evaluated as a graphic. Architecture by graphic design”.51 The underlying thoughts and concepts behind architecture are being replaced by its visuals.

A common criticism in architectural media is the case of ‘Render vs. Reality’, where a building does not meet the expectations set from pre-build imagery.

Belmont Freeman, in his article ‘Digital Deception’, writes: ‘I fear that the proliferation of such [images] leads clients and the public at large to expect from architecture and architects a degree of quality — perfection — that is impossible to deliver in the real world.’52 This is a common case. Digital artists can create a visually flawless scene. Unfortunately, often down to budget, these results are impossible to achieve during construction. An example of this is the Mark’s House Pavillion in Michigan. The renderings of the project portrayed it to be a seamlessly floating structure (Figure 10). In reality, the finish was considerably below what was sold to the client and the public by studio Two Islands. The mirrored panels do not create the effect that was represented in the visuals and some residents called it ‘a mess’.53 This result has become too frequent in architecture. (Figure 11)

Visualisation in Architecture

31

Figure 10 Marks House Rendering, Two Islands

Figure 11 Marks House Reality Visualisation in Architecture

32

However, some projects which have big enough budgets to accommodate for the architect’s vision can look as good and occasionally better as the renderings once completed. For example, MAD architects’ Harbin Cultural Centre shows renderings (Figure 12) that are less impressive than the finished building. (Figure 13) Ken Shuttleworth, founding partner of Make Architects, when asked about issues surrounding current visualisation techniques, mentioned the issue with computer imaging is that ‘project images are now so realistic that the final building often evolves through the process but the renderings are left unchanged. This [leads] to confusion with clients expecting to see the original image realised.’54 Ken states here that during the design stage, teams of visual artists produce rendered images that come from digital models. However, once the building has achieved the relevant necessities and begins its constructional phase, the project continues to evolve. During this stage no new visuals are produced, meaning the direct comparison between the final project and prebuild visuals is based upon images that may have been produced years before completion, leading to a disparity in what was originally presented and what has been delivered.

Graham Morrison, co-founding partner of Allies & Morrison, when asked similar questions stated ‘often the imagery is manipulated for a particular purpose and the less one tends to tell the truth […] the more [often] disappointment will be the outcome’. Often architects use their power to visualise to show certain aspects of the project, giving the ability to hide elements of design and ultimately deceive clients. He said ‘if the imagery is manipulated or the views are carefully chosen, then the viewer may not see everything.’55 This approach in architectural visualisation ultimately leads to disappointment in the final product.

Visualisation in Architecture

33

Figure 12 Harbin Opera House Rendering, MAD Architecture

Figure 13 Harbin Opera House Reality, MAD Architecture Visualisation in Architecture

34

notes

30 Payne, D. (2015) Evolution of Architectural Visualization. Available at: http://www.pechakucha.org/ channels/pechakucha/blogs/ evolution-of-architecturalvisualization (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

38 Rafferty, T. G. (2015) The deceptive nature of architectural renderings.

Available at: http://sites.psu.edu/ arch311ws15/2015/05/03/thedeceptive-nature-of-architecturalrenderings-2/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

31 Ibid.

39 Etherington, R. (2013) ‘No-one has realised’ that most catalogue images are renderings. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/11/27/ cgi-renderings-for-catalogueimages/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

32 Ibid.

33 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p18) 34 Op art history part I: A history of perspective in art (no date) Available at: http://www.opart.co.uk/history/perspective/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

35 Porter, T. (2004) Selling Architectural Ideas. 1st edn. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. (p2) 36 Wainwright, O. (2014) Towering folly: Why architectural education in Britain is in need of repair. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/ artanddesign/architecture-designblog/2013/may/30/architecturaleducation-professional-courses (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

37 Walker, A. (2015) The secret lives of the tiny people in architectural renderings. Available at: http:// gizmodo.com/the-secret-lives-ofthe-tiny-people-in-architecturalre-1660746735 (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

40 Bryant, R. (2013) Interview with Peter Guthrie on hyper-realistic visualisations. Available at: http:// www.dezeen.com/2013/10/20/ peter-guthrie-on-hyper-realisticvisualisations/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

41 Bryant, R. (2013) Interview with Peter Guthrie on hyper-realistic visualisations. Available at: http:// www.dezeen.com/2013/10/20/ peter-guthrie-on-hyper-realisticvisualisations/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

42 BIG creativity comes from saying Yes. Bjarke Ingels group Redefines architectural rendering (no date) Available at: http://stories. chaosgroup.com/BIG/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

43 Porter, T. (2004) Selling Architectural Ideas. 1st edn. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. (p7)

Visualisation in Architecture

35

44 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p24) 45 Ibid. (p25) 46 Ibid. (p33) 47 Abdelhameed, W (2005) DigitalMedia Impact on the DecisionMaking Capability of Architects vol.

1. (p478) 48 Quirk, V. (2013) Are renderings bad for architecture?. Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/383325/ are-renderings-bad-for-architecture (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

53 Xie, J. (2013) Is the Internet’s appetite for sexy renderings hurting architecture?. Available at: http:// www.citylab.com/design/2013/09/ internets-appetite-sexy-renderingshurting-architecture/6734/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

54 Shuttleworth, K (2016) Questionnaire on Architectural Visualisation 3rd January 2016 Selfconducted questionnaire (found in Appendix B) 55 Morrison, G (2016) Questionnaire on Architectural Visualisation 3rd January 2016 - Self-conducted questionnaire (found in Appendix C)

49 Winston, A. (2014) Design education is ‘tragic’, says Jonathan Ive. Available at: http://www.dezeen. com/2014/11/13/design-educationtragic-says-jonathan-ive-apple/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

50 Porter, T. (2004) Selling Architectural Ideas. 1st edn. New York: Taylor & Francis Group (p6) 51 Quirk, V. (2013) Are renderings bad for architecture?. Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/383325/ are-renderings-bad-for-architecture (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

51 Freeman, B. (2013) Belmont Freeman. Available at: https:// placesjournal.org/article/digitaldeception/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Visualisation in Architecture

36

PART THREE

Figure 14 The Original Philco Headsight HMD

Figure 15 Example of view from Oculus Rift

Virtual Reality - The Future?

39

05

VIRTUAL REALITY - THE FUTURE?

Virtual Reality - A Brief Introduction “In a few years from now, you will be able to walk into a room and move your hand and have a plane or surface appear before you in light. You will be able to build a building in light so that you can walk around it and change it.” Herzberg (1968) 56 The concept behind Virtual Reality came about in 1838 when Charles Wheatstone’s research on vision discovered the brain could generate a threedimensional illusion when processing two slightly different two-dimensional images from each eye. It gives the user a sense of depth and immersion, and is the basis behind modern three-dimensional imaging. In 1960, the first VR Head Mounted Display (HMD) was invented by Morton Heilig. It featured a three-dimensional video screen and stereo sound. Following this, in 1961, two Philco Corporation engineers developed the ‘Headsight’, a HMD featuring motion tracking, to make the headset an interactive display (Figure 14). This laid the foundations for the Virtual Reality technology we know today.57 Perhaps the most well-known example of today’s Virtual Reality hardware is Oculus Rift. At the age of 15, inventor Palmer Luckey began to explore the world of Virtual Reality and aged 16, Luckey began creating headsets of his own. Luckey found himself talking to John Carmack, the co-founder of id Software, who himself had been looking into the idea of making VR goggles and decided to join Palmer Luckey. Oculus was born. In 2014, Facebook acquired the company for $2 Billion58. Mark Zuckerberg stated: ‘Oculus has the potential to be the most social platform ever’.59 Currently, it is the most widely explored VR platform in the architectural industry. (Figure 15) Virtual Reality - The Future?

40

Current Virtual Reality Implementation The architectural industry is only just beginning its transition into Virtual Reality. The technology exists to allow architects to use VR as a pre-visualisation tool, to add a more immersive element to their presentations. It has the ability to give the user a visual walk through a building or space and experience its qualities at a 1:1 human scale. Users can see the height of a window ledge, or can notice mistakes and inconsistencies with the design.60 However, after researching, it appears very few architectural firms have implemented this technology into their daily practice so far. None the less, there are several visualisation agencies who are beginning to specialise in these VR technologies in anticipation for it to become a worldwide phenomenon over the next few years. Soon the observer will be able to see every detail of the project.61 Oliver Demangel, a 3D graphic artist working for IVR Nation in London, believes soon every architect will be using VR goggles. It will become as ‘convincing as real life in 5 years time.’ Demangel recreated a model of Ty Hedfan, a house designed by Welsh architecture firm Featherstone Young and made it VR ready. In the model, the user is able to turn light switches on and off, open doors and change textures and lighting conditions instantaneously.

He claimed when showing off this model to fellow designers, they felt the ‘brain [had been] completely tricked’. Demangel predicts in the near future every architecture office will have ‘an empty room with position tracking dedicated to VR’. The only thing missing is the ability to produce photorealistic designs in real-time, using both textures and accurate global lighting interfaces that recreate realistic, natural lighting conditions within digital spaces.62 Demangel believes that soon architects will be able to use Virtual Reality to ‘change the world like a god.’63 Another example of how architects will be able to implement Virtual Reality into their daily design practice, albeit less polished, is the introduction of Google Cardboard. For as little as [£10], and with very little technical knowledge, a digital artist can turn any render into an immersive threedimensional environment for a user to experience.64 It gives the user the ability Virtual Reality - The Future?

41

to choose where to look and where to linger. By looking up, the user is able to view the ceiling details and materials and likewise looking down, see the floor (Figure 16). Google Cardboard makes ‘you the scale’. The effect is done using a split Photo Sphere, an image that is distorted to the human eye, but when viewed through a Google Cardboard headset (containing two Biconvex lenses) and app, transports you into a fully engaging three-dimensional world that one can interact with through motion trackers in the phone.65 [See Appendix A for personal exploration of Google Cardboard] Lastly, architects have been increasingly looking into the Microsoft HoloLens.

This technology offers a mixed-reality, unlike Oculus Rift or Google Cardboard, where a virtual world is overlaid onto the physical one we see around us. HoloLens conjures high-definition digital holograms in existing spaces as if they are physically there.66 Using HoloLens, a three-dimensional model can be placed onto a table without its physical presence. It allows the architect to take their model anywhere, without any transportation cost or logistics and show a client their work. Using HoloLens models can be changed in real time to show a variety of options. The architect can move a beam using their finger, or lower the height of ceilings simply using gestures.67

Figure 16 Still from video of Architects testing Google Cardboard Virtual Reality - The Future?

42

Architectural Adaptation - An Industry Study These technologies are beginning to become acknowledged by the architectural industry. Ken Shuttleworth of Make Architects mentions his practice has already experimented with the Oculus Rift glasses and despite it making them feel ‘a bit queasy’ whilst walking around the virtual space, he believes it will become the ‘natural choice to show a client a space very soon.’ The one problem Ken currently sees with the implementation of Virtual Reality in architectural design practice is the cost and time constraints associated with these technologies. He stated: ‘the film industry has a fantastic amount of time to produce great images whereas in architecture we don’t have the time or budget to get them perfect and we still rely on an artistic licence’. In the future it appears VR will be implemented into Make, however, before this happens, the software will have to become more accessible.68 Greg Willis, an architect who works alongside Ken at Make Architects, similarly believes Virtual Reality will become more commonplace in the field.

However, from his own personal experience Greg stated although the software ‘promises a lot, the experience for a client viewing a proposed design is quite limited and irritating’. He explained: ‘[it is] too easy for the person wearing the headset to get lost. The advantage of static images is that they can be used to support a narrative or direct an argument’. Another point made by Greg about the introduction of Virtual Reality into their client meetings is that it can be deemed a ‘little embarrassing for client’s to wear the goggles in meetings’ and said it turns a meeting into ‘more of a performance where usually clients prefer to absorb the information calmly, assess and then react.’

Although Virtual Reality being more of a performance is not necessarily always a bad thing, Greg’s answers have made it clear these relatively new technologies are going to take time to adapt before they will become fully incorporated into design practice. They ‘will not replace but simply support the explanation of a building in a similar way 3D renders have not replaced sketches, or 3D printing has not replaced sketchy cardboard models.’.69

Virtual Reality - The Future?

43

Graham Morrison of Allies & Morrison stated although he does not know much about these technologies, from what he understands he would ‘encourage the younger generation within the practice to use whatever technology is available to them’. However similarly to Greg Willis’ answers above, he also does not believe ‘such images will entirely replace more direct forms of communication […] Virtual Reality won’t better explain an idea than a diagram or a sketch. I think these forms tend to complement rather than compete.’70 It is apparent practicing architects do not see the future of architectural representation being solely in the virtual world, but rather aiding the tools that already coexist in the industry. Designers and clients trust physical models and drawings, and these are still often the best method of exhibiting ideas.

Kieran Ashton, head of Allies & Morrison’s 3D Visualisation Team, stated he has experimented personally with Virtual Reality in the office. Kieran ‘produced a real-time model of a site using a piece of software called Twin Motion […] It enabled the client to give the model away to prospective buyers that were interested in investing in the site, they could walk around the site and change the time of day altering the shadows’. Kieran has also experimented with other mediums of Virtual Reality, such as augmented reality, where ‘a 3D model of a site pops up on a screen using a QR code’. From his experience of these technologies, Kieran stated ‘VR will definitely become a lot bigger within the architectural world’ and he could see ‘VR being used in design [presentations] with clients to allow them to fully experience a [space]’.71 As this information comes from someone who has direct involvement in the advance of the firms representational techniques, it shows there is a clear demand for the inclusion of Virtual Reality in architectural practices and it is something that is currently being explored by people more directly situated in the visualisation realm of architecture.

In Kieran’s opinion ‘using VR will definitely help decrease the number of bad projects […] You can hide a lot with a still image [by highlighting] the best areas and by picking a camera angle that is flattering to the project, using VR would mean users see the entire site not just certain areas’. This is a clear Virtual Reality - The Future?

44

advantage of the introduction of Virtual Reality in architecture, removing the grey area that surrounds current perspective renderings where digital artists have the ability to hide issues in their design through camera trickery.

However, Kieran also stated although he sees Virtual Reality becoming more commonplace, there are issues from a digital artist’s point of view. ‘[The artist] will never be able to achieve the photo-realistic results you can get from 2D images’. He made the point: ‘the graphics weren’t as good as [expected], it was a bit like experiencing a PlayStation 2 game, not a PlayStation 4 game’.72 From all these industry opinions it can be concluded that the architectural industry is certainly interested in the incorporation of these technologies into their design practice, but until certain areas, such as graphic capabilities, are improved, they will not replace two-dimensional images.

More, or Less, Ocular-centric Design Practice?

“Much of our trouble in the past has come because the public does not understand that it takes an architect’s eye, or, at least, an experienced eye, to read an architectural drawing rightly [...] Even that picture which is called a perspective cannot easily be understood; and a plan, a section, an elevation, are not pictures at all, but signs and symbols, which the novice often misconceives most entirely just when he thinks he has unraveled every knot.’” Mariana Griswold Van Rensselaer (1890) 73 The above statement by Mariana Griswold Van Rensselaer sums up the current downfall of ocular-centrism in architectural design practice. Our current modes of representation, although fundamentally visual, cannot be read by the public. Section and plan, and to some extent perspective renderings, confuse laymen. But can Virtual Reality lead us to a more or less ocularcentric design practice? A building should be approached, encountered and related to one’s body in order to fully understand the design.74 Virtual Reality works by tricking the eye, making the user feel immersed into a Virtual Reality - The Future?

45

virtual world. In principle, it is an ocular-centric tool for designers and digital artists to use in order to sell their ideas. Ken Hillis, a Professor of Media and Technology Studies at the University of North Carolina, states: ‘suggestions that VR’s main promise is a corroboration between the senses fails to consider the disjunction between subordination and corroboration. Subordination to the visual points to the coordination (and dominance) by the visual of our other bodily facilities and senses. VR privileges sight and the other senses play a subordinate role to it’.75 Hillis relates to the ocular-centrism of Western Culture. Although Virtual Reality promises a multi-sensory experience, it is false and we are lead into a more visually dominant society through our desperation to achieve a virtual existence. Mark Grimshaw believes there is a definitive ‘ocular-centric bias’ in the development of Virtual Reality. He states: ‘non-sighted people surely perceive a form of reality.’76 There is a tendency of ‘3D virtual environment designers [...] to privilege spatial relations of visual representations over the other senses.’ Steve Bryson, a virtual environment designer, believes ‘visual fidelity is not necessary to have spatial presence’. However, his examples of virtual worlds only relate to the visual medium. Bryson argues by definition ‘it would be impossible for a non-sighted person to feel a sense of presence in any virtual environment’77, a statement directly contradictory to Grimshaw’s belief that sight is not necessary for the perception of reality. It is clear Virtual Reality lends itself to a more ocular-centric design practice, further emphasising the trend that has been set through current representational techniques. Architects can use the eye alone to ‘transverse a landscape within a virtual space’, which often eliminates the use of physical actions.78 This is especially evident in more basic forms of VR such as Google Cardboard.

However, despite this, some areas of Virtual Reality can reject the stigma of visual primacy, and introduce a more multi-sensory experience for the user.

Virtual Reality has the potential to use all five senses. However, currently, just sight and hearing have been the most thoroughly explored. Even by introducing sound to Virtual Reality, the ability to make it a more engaging technology is advanced greatly, by reducing the user’s awareness of sounds Virtual Reality - The Future?

46

Figure 17 Gareth Pugh Selfridges Instillation

Figure 18 Gloveone Kickstarter Campaign Virtual Reality - The Future?

47

emitted from the world they are physically present in. Fashion designer Gareth Pugh introduced this element of Virtual Reality in an installation he created for London’s Selfridges. Visitors enter a soundproofed booth and their entire head is covered by a helmet designed by Pugh, which incorporates an Oculus Rift headset (Figure 17). The booth features 360-degree surround sound and together with the virtual visuals produced by the helmet, transport the user into a ‘totally immersive’ and ‘multi-sensory’ experience79. This additional sense could become useful for architectural representations. By using carefully rendered sound-scapes, that act directionally and locationally, a designer could produce a virtual scene that mimics the sounds that would be heard if the space were real.

A lesser explored avenue in Virtual Reality is movement and touch. Movement trackers connect the users body to the virtual world and through physical movement, the participant is linked to the computer generated scenario they are viewing, allowing them to virtually walk through the scene. Recent research projects have also focused on the tactile. Wired gloves are a way of allowing a user to interact with a virtual world using hand gestures. The hand and its movements are mimicked in the virtual world using sensors, that are shown in real-time computer generated images.80 These gloves allow the user to potentially touch virtual objects and interact with them; in architecture, this could be light switches, door handles or items of furniture. Kinesthetic feedback is the internal bodily reaction of touch or movement and is what give us the perception of touch and weight in the physical world. The introduction of these principles in Virtual Reality could allow us to physically feel virtual objects.81 Spanish company NeuroDigital Technologies has developed a kinesthetic glove known as the ‘Gloveone’ (Figure 18). These gloves allow the user to feel ‘heat’, ‘the shapes and weight of an object’ and even the ‘flitting of a butterfly’s wings’ through several inbuilt sensors that react on the fingers and palm of the hand. ‘These vibrate individually and at varied intensities and frequencies’ the result being accurate touch sensations. The company stated on their Kickstarter campaign: ‘Gloveone enables users to feel and touch any Virtual Reality - The Future?

48

virtual object that they can see on the screen or in their VR headsets. If a virtual apple is shown on the screen, with Gloveone, you will be able to feel its shape or weight, sense all of its physical features, and even smash it’.82 If these technologies are used in conjunction with an Oculus Rift headset, the user will be able to fully interact with a virtual space, walking around and touching objects as if it were the physical world. This is hugely beneficial to architects who want a client to be able to become fully immersed in their design by using a multi-sensory experience.

Virtual Reality - The Future?

49

Virtual Reality - The Future?

50

notes 56 Paranandi, M. and Sarawgi, T. (2001) ‘Virtual Reality in Architecture: Enabling Possibilities’, Virtual Reality in Architecture: Enabling Possibilities, (p310) 57 Clarke, A. (2015) A brief history of virtual reality. Available at: http:// lowdown.carphonewarehouse. com/smart-tech/a-brief-history-ofvirtual-reality/29235/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

58 Kumparak, G. (2014) A brief history of Oculus. Available at: http:// techcrunch.com/2014/03/26/a-briefhistory-of-oculus/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

59 Virtual reality: The 1990s technology set to change the design world (2014) Available at: http:// www.dezeen.com/2014/03/30/ oculus-rift-virtual-reality-newdimension-design/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

60 How virtual reality can impact key players in architecture, real estate + development (2015) Available at: http://lngstudios.com/virtual-realityarchitecture-realestate/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

61 Shaw, M. (2014) What you see is what you will get: Oculus rift’s virtual reality architecture App. Available at: http://architizer.com/blog/whatyou-see-is-what-you-will-get-oculusrifts-architecture-app/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

62 Fairs, M. (2015) Virtual reality architecture will be ‘more powerful than cocaine’. Available at: http:// www.dezeen.com/2015/04/27/ virtual-reality-architecture-morepowerful-cocaine-oculus-rift-tyhedfan-olivier-demangel-ivr-nation/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

63 Virtual reality will allow architects to ‘change the world like a god’ (2015) Available at: http://www. dezeen.com/2015/07/21/movievirtual-reality-oculus-rift-allowarchitects-change-world-like-godolivier-demangel/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

64 Architecture’s new virtual reality Google cardboard (2015) Available at: https://picomeanslittle.com/ blog/2015/04/09/architectures-newvirtual-reality-google-cardboard/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

65 Pabst, J. (2015) Virtual reality: Coming to an architecture office near you. Available at: http://www. archdaily.com/616251/virtual-realitycoming-to-an-architecture-officenear-you (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

66 Microsoft HoloLens headset displays high-definition holograms (2015) Available at: http:// www.dezeen.com/2015/01/22/ microsoft-hololens-headset-highdefinition-holograms-augmentedreality-windows-10/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Virtual Reality - The Future?

51

67 Roopinder, T. (2015) Architects could love the Microsoft HoloLens.

Available at: http://www.engineering. com/BIM/ArticleID/10271/ArchitectsCould-Love-the-Microsoft-HoloLens. aspx (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

76 Grimshaw, M. (2014) The Oxford handbook of Virtuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press (p271-272)

68 Shuttleworth, K (2016) Questionnaire on Architectural Visualisation 3rd January 2016 Selfconducted questionnaire (found in Appendix B)

78 Tress, G. and Tress, B. (2005) From landscape research to landscape planning: Aspects of integration, education and application (Wageningen Ur Frontis series).

Edited by Gunther Tres, Gary Fry, and Paul Opdam. Dordrecht: Springer-Verlag New York (p97)

69 Morrison, G (2016) Questionnaire on Architectural Visualisation 3rd January 2016 Self-conducted questionnaire (found in Appendix C) 70 Willis, G (2016) Questionnaire on Architectural Visualisation 3rd January 2016 Self-conducted questionnaire (found in Appendix G) 71 Ashton, K (2016) Questionnaire on Architectural Visualisation 3rd January 2016 Self-conducted questionnaire (found in Appendix F) 72 Ibid.

73 Pabst, J. (2015) Virtual reality: Coming to an architecture office near you. Available at: http://www. archdaily.com/616251/virtual-realitycoming-to-an-architecture-officenear-you (Accessed: 4 January 2016).

74 Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn. United States: Wiley, John & Sons. (p67) 75 Hansetn, M. B. N. (2012) Bodies in code: Interfaces with digital media.

United Kingdom: Routledge (p114)

77 Champion, E. (2011) Playing with the past. London: Springer London. (p20-21)

79 Howarth, D. (2014) ‘Immersive virtual world’ by Gareth pugh and Inition at Selfridges. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2014/01/11/ immersive-virtual-world-by-garethpugh-and-inition-installed-atselfridges/ (Accessed: 6 January 2016).

80 Bertol, D. and Foell, D. (1996) Designing digital space: An architect’s guide to virtual reality.

New York: John Wiley & Sons (p100-104) 81 Carr, K. and England, R. (1995) Simulated and virtual realities: Elements of perception. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis (p165) 82 Passary, A. (2015) Gloveone smart gloves will let you feel virtual reality.

Available at: http://www.techtimes. com/articles/59002/20150609/ smart-gloves-by-gloveone-willlet-you-feel-virtual-reality.htm (Accessed: 6 January 2016).

Virtual Reality - The Future?

52

PART FOUR

Conclusion

55

06

CONCLUSION

Mediums of architectural representation have always been used to stimulate the mind in order to allow a project to be understood before its construction.

Computer technology has made this more accessible and persuasive than ever. These techniques are fundamentally ocular-centric in many areas of design practice. It is evident that the production of visual images has become commonplace in the industry; they have reinforced the cultural dominance of sight as our primary sense.

Chapter Two explored the theories behind ocular-centric bias in architecture.

It is clear that ocular-centrism is not a new found idea, dating to Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle. Despite many architects, such as Libeskind, stating that architecture should be a multi-sensory experience, architecture has kept this visual prejudice in its representation throughout history. The Eyes of the Skin explores this hypothesis, as Pallasmaa believes that ocularcentrism in architecture turns it into a hedonistic journey, absent of meaning.

From Chapter Three, it is palpable the introduction and advance of Computer Aided Design in architecture has had its benefits. The undisputed efficiency and accuracy that can be achieved using CAD technology has revolutionised the productivity of architects. Clients are able to glimpse at what the design will be like incredibly early on in the design process. However, it is clear by looking at the opinions of theorists such as Pallasmaa, that the loss of physical presence from representation has resulted in a loss of atmosphere.

Computer Aided Design can also restrict the creativity of architects as they become limited by their own technical ability with the software. Traditional manual techniques should not be abandoned, but rather used harmoniously with new technologies. These methods of drawing rely solely upon the eye. It Conclusion

56

has become apparent there has been an increase in the hegemony of the eye in architectural design practice through Computer Aided Design.

Chapter Four has shown the rendered image is the main tool for the mental conception of space. The ability to create romanticised images that exploit the primacy of vision allow architects to convince clients of their design ideas early on in a project. From the opinion of people in the industry, it is obvious renderings can be used as a misleading tool. They are used to hide certain truths and to delineate other aspects using camera trickery and post processing techniques. Other advances in rendering techniques such as hyper-realism appear to have lead to both positive and negative results. Spaces that have been depicted using this technique have the potential to reduce disappointment in comparison to other dream-scape images. Design flaws are not masked by an entourage. However, this level of what is perceived to be architectural perfection can lead to disappointment. Often budgetary setbacks reduce the constructional finish. The rendered perspective has become a largely ocular-centric design tool leading to the prioritisation of vision in modern design practice.

Finally, from Chapter Five, it is clear the architectural industry is at the beginning of its Virtual Reality journey. Online speculation states it will be a very powerful tool in showing designs and is the future of architectural representation. However, it is apparent that until these technologies have been fully integrated into design practice that most of the information is just ‘hype’. Feedback received from industry questionnaires show architects are interested and excited about the prospect of introducing VR into their studios, but the common consensus is that these technologies will not replace, but rather complement current two-dimensional representational techniques.

From the questionnaires received nobody believed Virtual Reality will replace a sketch or a model.

Undoubtedly in its principle idea, Virtual Reality is an ocular-centric design tool for architects to use in their design practice. It works by tricking the sense of vision into showing the viewer a believable virtual environment and Conclusion

57

its introduction into the industry could increase current visual hegemony.

Most architectural examples of VR feature 360-degree photo-spheric views, allowing the user to observe a space from all angles. However, the quality of these spaces does not seem to have caught up with the graphical abilities of regular perspective renderings. It feeds on our ocular-centric interpretation of space. However, it is evident that Virtual Reality can change the way architects work and design. It possesses the ability to include the other senses, through the use of the technology such as Gloveone, which allows the user to touch, pick up or move objects in the virtual world with physical sensory feedback.

Virtual Reality has the ability to create a multi-sensory design platform that architects can use to show prospective clients an immersive preview of a space.

Overall, this paper has shown the use of Virtual Reality in architecture is imminent. The ability to showcase the immersive environment of a building at the design stage is clearly an attractive prospect to both architects and their clients. In the next few years as these technologies advance and catch up in their graphical capabilities, VR will undoubtedly become commonplace in architecture firms worldwide. In regards to ocular-centric design practice, Virtual Reality has the ability to both increase and decrease its dominance in the industry. All current forms of representation are unarguably visually hegemonic, but the ability to create a more multi-sensory representation technique could reduce the ocular-centric nature of architectural design.

Virtual Reality can become the tool that gives architects the scope to improve all aspects of their work. The future contains a vast potential for a multisensory architectural design practice.

Conclusion

58

PART FIVE

list of illustrations

Figure 1

Perspective of The House of the Director, Claude-Nicholas Ledeux (http://expositions.bnf.fr/utopie/feuill/grand/ledoux/08hh.html)

Figure 2

Oasis, Collage by Archigram © (http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6790/1870/1600/archigram0034.jpg)

Figure 3

1:1 Detail Model by Peter Zumthor (http://cdn.iconeye.com/plugins/system/contentoptimizer/ e551e996e53098026af6ab6b3dec5e6b5a65192f_400x570_Q95. jpeg?1449678630)

Figure 4

Galaxy Soho building, Rendering © Zaha Hadid (http://images.adsttc.com/media/images/50a6/42b1/b3fc/4b46/eb00/004d/large_ jpg/ZH_Galaxy_Soho_082.jpg?1375809570)

Figure 5

Galaxy Soho building, Rendering © Zaha Hadid (https://vincentloy.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/dezeen_galaxy-soho-by-zahahadid_ss_c.jpg)

Figure 6

The Hud, BIG Architects © (http://big.dk/press/hud_224)

Figure 7

Emmen Theatre, Henning Larsen Architects © https://vincentloy.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/dezeen_galaxy-soho-by-zahahadid_ss_c.jpg)

Figure 8

Barclays Center New York, SHoP Architecture © (http://www.barclayscenter.com/assets/img/bc_main_5.jpg)

Figure 9

Hyper-Realistic Rendering, HendeeBorg House, Peter Guthrie © (http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2013/10/HendeeBorg-House-Peter-Guthrie-14_ dezeen.jpg) List of Illustrations

61

Figure 10

Marks House Rendering, Two Islands © (http://blog.archpaper.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Marks-House-02-big.jpg)

Figure 11

Marks House Reality (https://jeffreyjackson.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/public-art-marks-house.jpg)

Figure 12

Harbin Opera House Rendering, MAD Architecture © (http://www.archdaily.com/430314/harbin-cultural-center-mad-architects/5238c5a 2e8e44e24570001df-harbin-cultural-center-mad-architects-photo)

Figure 13

Harbin Opera House Reality, MAD Architecture. Photo © Hufton+Crow (http://cdn.iconeye.com/plugins/system/contentoptimizer/ e551e996e53098026af6ab6b3dec5e6b5a65192f_400x570_Q95. jpeg?1449678630)

Figure 14

Original Philco Headsight HMD (https://vimeo.com/123227431)

Figure 15

Example of view from Oculus Rift (http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=ojld3o&s=8#.Vpzj77zSxFI)

Figure 16

Still from video of Architects testing Google Cardboard (https://glassdevelopment.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/hmd-history-andobjectives-of-inventions/)

Figure 17

Gareth Pugh Selfridges Instillation (http://www.fastcodesign.com/3025530/this-weird-foam-hat-turns-you-into-tron)

Figure 18

Gloveone’s Kickstarter Campaign (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gloveone/gloveone-feel-virtual-reality)

List of Illustrations

62

bibliography

Periodicals Schumacher, P. (2010) ‘The Parametricist Epoch: Let the Style Wars Begin’, Architect’s Journal, 231(16), pp. 14–23. doi: 10.1002/ad.912.

Non Periodicals Bertol, D. and Foell, D. (1996) Designing digital space: An architect’s guide to virtual reality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Bertolini, C. D. (2013) Architecture post Mortem: The Diastolic architecture of decline, dystopia, and death. Edited by Donald Kunze, David Bertolini, and Simone Brott. 1st edn. United Kingdom: Ashgate Publishing.

Carr, K. and England, R. (1995) Simulated and virtual realities: Elements of perception. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.

Champion, E. (2011) Playing with the past. London: Springer London.

Chandler, D. and Munday, R. (2011) A dictionary of media and communication. 1st edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Demkin, J. A. and The American Institute of Architects (2001) The architect’s handbook of professional practice. 13th edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Eissen, K. and Eissen, K. (1990) Presenting architectural designs: threedimensional visualization techniques. London: Architecture Design and Technology Press.

Gómez, A. P., Perez-Gomez, A. and Pelletier, L. (1997) Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Grimshaw, M. (2014) The Oxford handbook of Virtuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hansen, M. B. N. (2012) Bodies in code: Interfaces with digital media. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Pallasmaa, J. (2012) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. 3rd edn.

United States: Wiley, John & Sons.

Bibliography

63

Paranandi, M. and Sarawgi, T. (2001) ‘Virtual Reality in Architecture: Enabling Possibilities’, Virtual Reality in Architecture: Enabling Possibilities, 1.

Peddie, J. (2014) The history of visual magic in computers: How beautiful images are made in CAD, 3D, VR and AR. 1st edn. London: Springer-Verlag London.

Porter, T. (1979) How architects visualize. 1st edn. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Porter, T. (1997) The Architect’s Eye. 1st edn. New York: Taylor & Francis.

Porter, T. (2004) Selling Architectural Ideas. 1st edn. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

Schank-Smith, K. (2005) Architect’s Drawings A Selection Of Sketches By World Famous Architects Through History. OXFORD: ARCHITECTURAL PRESS (UK).

Schillaci, F., Burelli, A. R. and Avella, F. (2010) Architectural renderings: Construction and design manual: [history and theory, studios and practices]. 1st edn. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.

Shields, J. A. E. (2013) Collage and Architecture. 1st edn. United Kingdom: Routledge.

Website and E-Sources Architecture’s new virtual reality - Google cardboard (2015) Available at: https:// picomeanslittle.com/blog/2015/04/09/architectures-new-virtual-reality-googlecardboard/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Aristotle Biography (no date) Available at: http://www.biography.com/people/ aristotle-9188415#synopsis (Accessed: 6 October 2015).

Astbury, J. (2014) Architects do it with models: The history of architecture in 16 models. Available at: http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/architects-do-itwith-models-the-history-of-architecture-in-16-models/8658964.fullarticle (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

BIG creativity comes from saying Yes Bjarke Ingels group Redefines architectural rendering (no date) Available at: http://stories.chaosgroup.com/BIG/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

Bibliography

64

Bacus, J. (2014) A new home for SketchUp. Available at: http://sketchupdate. blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/new-home-for-sketchup.html (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Bryant, R. (2013) Interview with Peter Guthrie on hyper-realistic visualisations.

Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/10/20/peter-guthrie-on-hyper-realisticvisualisations/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

Ceborski, J. (no date) Introduction: Parametric design. Available at: http://www. rethinking-architecture.com/introduction-parametric-design,354/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Clarke, A. (2015) A brief history of virtual reality. Available at: http://lowdown. carphonewarehouse.com/smart-tech/a-brief-history-of-virtual-reality/29235/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Davis, D. (2015) Patrik Schumacher – Parametricism – Daniel Davis. Available at: http://www.danieldavis.com/patrik-schumacher-parametricism/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Engineer, Pierre Bezier, inventor of the Bezier curves, (no date) Available at: http:// www.engology.com/eng5bezier.htm (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Etherington, R. (2013) ‘No-one has realised’ that most catalogue images are renderings. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/11/27/cgi-renderings-forcatalogue-images/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

Fairs, M. (2015) Virtual reality architecture will be ‘more powerful than cocaine’.

Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2015/04/27/virtual-reality-architecture-morepowerful-cocaine-oculus-rift-ty-hedfan-olivier-demangel-ivr-nation/ (Accessed: 2 October 2015).

Frank, K. (2012) KEVIN FRANK | Writings | Peter Zumthor Does Not Render.

Available at: http://www.archilepsymagazine.com/kevinfrank/clog (Accessed: 2 October 2015).

Freeman, B. (2013) Belmont Freeman. Available at: https://placesjournal.org/ article/digital-deception/ (Accessed: 2 October 2015).

Ghosh, P. (2014) Cave paintings change ideas about the origin of art. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29415716 (Accessed: 9 January 2016).

History of SketchUp (2013) Available at: http://www.sketchup-ur-space.com/july11/ history-of-sketchup.htm (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

History of virtual reality - virtual reality society (no date) Available at: http://www.vrs. org.uk/virtual-reality/history.html (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Howarth, D. (2014) ‘Immersive virtual world’ by Gareth pugh and Inition at Bibliography

65

Selfridges. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2014/01/11/immersive-virtualworld-by-gareth-pugh-and-inition-installed-at-selfridges/ (Accessed: 6 January 2016).

How virtual reality can impact key players in architecture, real estate + development (2015) Available at: http://lngstudios.com/virtual-reality-architecturerealestate/ (Accessed: 28 December 2015).

Kennedy, L. (no date) A brief history of AutoCAD. Available at: http://www. scan2cad.com/autocad-brief-history/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Kumparak, G. (2014) A brief history of Oculus. Available at: http://techcrunch. com/2014/03/26/a-brief-history-of-oculus/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Libeskind, D. and CNN (2015) We mustn’t forget the deep emotional impact of the buildings around us. Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/30/architecture/ daniel-libeskind-architecture-emotions/ (Accessed: 30 November 2015).

Microsoft HoloLens headset displays high-definition holograms (2015) Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2015/01/22/microsoft-hololens-headset-high-definitionholograms-augmented-reality-windows-10/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Op art history part I: A history of perspective in art (no date) Available at: http:// www.op-art.co.uk/history/perspective/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Pabst, J. (2015) Virtual reality: Coming to an architecture office near you. Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/616251/virtual-reality-coming-to-an-architecture-officenear-you (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Pascucci, A. (2014) 4 benefits of 3D modeling for architects and engineers.

Available at: http://www.smartgeometrics.com/blog/engineering/4-benefits-of-3dmodeling-for-architects-and-engineers/ (Accessed: 21 December 2015).

Passary, A. (2015) Gloveone smart gloves will let you feel virtual reality. Available at: http://www.techtimes.com/articles/59002/20150609/smart-gloves-by-gloveonewill-let-you-feel-virtual-reality.htm (Accessed: 6 January 2016).

Payne, D. (2015) Evolution of Architectural Visualization. Available at: http://www. pechakucha.org/channels/pechakucha/blogs/evolution-of-architectural-visualization (Accessed: 22 December 2015).

Plato - Ancient History (2009) Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/ancienthistory/plato (Accessed: 6 October 2015).

Quirk, V. (2013) Are Renderings Bad for Architecture?. Available at: http://www. archdaily.com/383325/are-renderings-bad-for-architecture (Accessed: 2 October 2015).

Rafferty, T. G. (2015) The deceptive nature of architectural renderings. Available at: http://sites.psu.edu/arch311ws15/2015/05/03/the-deceptive-nature-of-architecturalrenderings-2/ (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

Bibliography

66

Roopinder, T. (2015) Architects could love the Microsoft HoloLens. Available at: http://www.engineering.com/BIM/ArticleID/10271/Architects-Could-Love-theMicrosoft-HoloLens.aspx (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Shaw, M. (2014) What you see is what you will get: Oculus rift’s virtual reality architecture Available at: http://architizer.com/blog/what-you-see-is-what-you-willget-oculus-rifts-architecture-app/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Virtual reality: The 1990s technology set to change the design world (2014) Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2014/03/30/oculus-rift-virtual-reality-newdimension-design/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Virtual reality will allow architects to ‘change the world like a god’ (2015) Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2015/07/21/movie-virtual-reality-oculus-rift-allowarchitects-change-world-like-god-olivier-demangel/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Walker, A. (2015) The secret lives of the tiny people in architectural renderings.

Available at: http://gizmodo.com/the-secret-lives-of-the-tiny-people-in-architecturalre-1660746735 (Accessed: 23 December 2015).

Winston, A. (2014) Design education is ‘tragic’, says Jonathan Ive. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2014/11/13/design-education-tragic-says-jonathan-iveapple/ (Accessed: 24 December 2015).

Xie, J. (2013) Is the Internet’s Appetite for Sexy Renderings Hurting Architecture?.

Available at: http://www.citylab.com/design/2013/09/internets-appetite-sexyrenderings-hurting-architecture/6734/ (Accessed: 2 October 2015).

Bibliography

67

Bibliography

68

appendix a Personal Exploration of Google Cardboard technology

As part of the research for this paper, I explored an element of virtual reality Google Cardboard. Google Cardboard is the most affordable option in the VR realm, therefore making it the most accessible to both members of the public and the architectural field. The model I used was produced by a company called J&M, who specialise in these ‘do it yourself’ virtual reality headsets.

Upon first receiving the headset, it was quick and simple to assemble from a flat-pack package that needs to be folded and eventually stuck together, following that all that needed to be added was a smartphone.

Initially, I explored the official Google Cardboard application and having no previous experience of virtual reality I had no idea what to expect. Once the headset had been put on, all view of the ‘real world’ disappears and all I could see in front of my was the screen on my phone. The phone is placed at the optimal distance from two 40mm focal BiConvex lenses in the goggles, which creates a three-dimensional experience. The Google Cardboard app firstly transported me to three virtual worlds; a rain forest, an underwater scene and a warehouse. By moving my head around, I was able to view a 360-degree view of these spaces, which were videos rather than static images.

I was initially enthralled by the new experience, which although not perfect, was almost believable.

Following the initial introduction, I explored the vast quantity of applications that can be downloaded and used with the headset. Most of these are games, such as roller coasters and I briefly tested these to observe the experience. I found the gamification of the device less impressive visually as they did not have the same realism of the videos I had previously viewed. However, despite this, they certainly gave me a sense of place and in some instances, I was almost momentarily convinced that what I was observing was real. Finally, I explored the architectural implementations of the software. Autodesk provides rendering previews on their website using the same theory behind the 360-degree videos and photo spheres that I had previously explored, to create photosphere architectural renderings.

These renderings worked in the same way as the photographs, by using the Google Cardboard I was able to look at the angle of a space in 360 degrees, simply by moving my head around as if it were real life. The results were admirable, Autodesk’s renderings were of a high enough quality for the result Appendix A

69

to be credible, and it gave me my first insight to the potential that virtual reality has in architectural design practice. If the renderings were hyperrealistic I would have been almost convinced.

However, I did encounter certain shortcomings during my experience of the Google Cardboard goggles. The first issue is down to the quality of the product. Due to its rigid card form the headset was quite uncomfortable, therefore, I was always physically aware that I had it on taking away from the full immersion of the world that my eyes could see. Secondly, one feature that I was desperate to be able to experience was the introduction of physical movement further than just the sight tracking that allowed me to look around. I wanted to be able to walk through the space by physically moving, but as Google Cardboard currently only works using photo spheres it cannot be achieved as yet.

My overall experience using Google Cardboard was positive, and I believe it is a suitable technology that could be incorporated into the architectural design field. Its low cost and ease of use give it the ability to show a client a very quick virtual experience of a project, and despite the limitations, it is something I would recommend people in the industry explore as another option to help explore and present an idea. However because of the drawbacks mentioned I can not see it becoming an overtly used technology and I believe the realm of virtual reality in architecture will aid itself more towards more advanced options such as Oculus.

Experience Google Cardboard Scan the QR code or visit cardboard.autodesk.com on a smartphone to experience 360 degree Google Cardboard renderings.

Simply select render and enter phone into Google Cardboard Headset and view.

J&M Google Cardboard Headset available at: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Virtual-Reality-Length-Google-Cardboard/dp/B00XPM3XZO Appendix A

70

appendix b Questionnaire from Ken Shuttleworth, founding partner of Make Architects

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

K.S - Yes we are looking into this very seriously. I think it will become the

natural choice to show a client a space very soon.

Question 2

J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

K.S - Yes all the renders come from a 3D model but at the moment its

quicker and cheaper to render directly on the final selected image in 2D. Question 3 J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

K.S - We used the occulus on the Leadenhall project ‌ made us feel a bit

queasy when walking about. Don’t know if anyone else is using it.

Question 4

J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

K.S - The problem is that project images are now so realistic that the

final building often evolves through the process but the renders are left unchanged. This has lead to confusion with clients expecting to see the original image realized.

Appendix B

71

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

K.S - I think architecture has always been presented visually … its just easier

to get wonderfully seductive images than it used to be.

Question 6

J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reali-

ty in your design work in the future?

K.S - Yes its inevitable. I think that the issue is that the film industry has a

fantastic amount of time to produce great images whereas in architecture we don’t have the time or budget to get them perfect and we still rely on ‘artistic licence’ to create our images. So, we probably need to evolve the software to allow for this.

Appendix B

72

appendix c Questionnaire from Graham Morrison, founding partner of Allies & Morrison

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

G.M - Jack – I don’t know what an oculus rift is! But if it’s what I think it is

then yes, I think it will become more commonplace. I am sure as such imagery becomes easy to do and affordable, it will add to the numerous methods of communicating currently available.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

G.M - I don’t think such images will entirely replace more direct forms of

communication. The ‘eye-brain-paper route can be so very simple. Virtual reality won’t better explain an idea than a diagram or a sketch. I think these forms tend to complement rather than compete.

Question 3 J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

G.M - I am not.

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

G.M - A very good question. It depends if the medium is used to sell or

explain. If it is used to sell, then the outcome will usually be a disappointment. If it is used to explain, the reverse may be true. So often, the imagery is manipulated for a particular purpose and the less one tends to tell the truth, the more one tends to deceive and the more disappointment will Appendix C

73

be the outcome. If the imagery is manipulated or the views are carefully chosen, then the viewer may not see everything. If unedited access to a three dimensional model is available, then the story might be different.

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

G.M - That depends of the quality of the designer. It would be a pity if –

just because of the dominance of the medium – sight was prioritized over tactile, acoustic, sustainability or any other more sensory agendas. On the basis that people are lazy and tend to look at what is in front of them, then this is certainly a danger.

Question 6 J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reali-

ty in your design work in the future?

G.M - I would not but that is because I am reaching the end of my career.

I would certainly encourage the younger generation within the practice to use whatever technology is available to them. It would be wonderful, as the question suggests, that such technology was applied to design in the holistic sense rather than to the presentational aspects of it.

Appendix C

74

appendix d Questionnaire from Bob Allies, Founding Partner at Allies & Morrison

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

B.A - Yes, but not in the immediate future.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

B.A - No, unless the clumsiness and exclusiveness of the technology is over-

come: it is a very difficult medium to talk around.

Question 3

J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

B.A - Not aware of architects using them. I have tried Oculus Rift which

was intriguing, but also vague.

Question 4

J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

B.A - Neither.

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

B.A - No. But it does tend to overvalue the significance of the visual image.

Appendix D

75

Question 6 J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reali-

ty in your design work in the future?

B.A - Not immediately because it will be too time consuming and too

clumsy.

Appendix D

76

appendix e Questionnaire from Michel Mossessian, founding partner of Mossessian Architecture

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

M.M - It will naturally happen, as technology is always on the push mode to

consumer to adopt part as gimmick, part as the next thing to have, and part as useful. Who would be calling for and for what purpose? Not Architects, possibly client (new clients, like new money fortune with no qualification as the professional developers we know) those that like consumerism and show off. Bling.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

M.M - Yes, and again, they are both done for those that cannot read a plan,

section and elevation. In other words to those that cannot see three-dimensionally. Renderings give an eye to the blinds, is VR going to give the impression to get 2 eyes? Still blinds without it!

Question 3

J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

M.M - I experienced it as art project and in art installation, as well as pro-

motional experiments for products. Didn’t come across in the architectural world yet. Does video games count?

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

Appendix E

77

M.M - I think it will increase the disappointment by allowing those that do

not understand architecture to take decision themselves rather then listening those that know better, the architects.

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye; do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritize the power of sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

M.M - It gives eyes to the blinds. Still blind. It is about creating an illusion

of reality. But not necessarily activating your brain to think about it.

Question 6

J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reali-

ty in your design work in the future?

M.M - Perhaps on a special project, and only to be used by those who can

see without crutches‌

Appendix E

78

appendix f Questionnaire from Kieran Ashton, Head of Visualisation at Allies & Morrison

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

K.A - I believe that VR will definitely become a lot bigger within the archi-

tectural world. 2016 is the year when things are really going to take off, lots of new VR devices are coming to the market. I can see VR being used in design meetings/presentations with clients to allow them to fully experience a building/space Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

K.A - I don’t believe it will replace rendered perspectives. VR is good but I

don’t think you will ever be able to achieve the photorealistic results you can get from 2D images but it will be used along with still images.

Question 3

J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

K.A - I have produced a realtime model of a site using a piece of software

called twin motion, it’s very similar to Lumion. It enabled the client to give the model away to prospective buyers that were interested in investing in the site, they could walk around the site and change the time of day altering the shadows etc. Recently I have started to produce 3D panoramas for the iPad that allows the user to look around the site by holding the iPad in there hands and moving it up down left right and the image reacting accordingly, these have been very well received within the office to the people I’ve showed them to. Augmented reality is another area I’ve started to have a play around with, again with the iPhone/iPad, having a 3D model of a site pop up on screen using a QR code. I think that all these areas of VR are becoming more and more common within architecture.

Appendix F

79

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

K.A - Using VR will definitely help decrease the number of bad projects in

my opinion. You can hide a lot with a still image, just showing areas that highlight the best areas and by picking a camera angle that is flattering to the project, using VR would mean users see the entire site not just certain areas.

Question 5

J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reality

in your design work in the future?

K.A - I would love personally to use Oculas Rift for a project within the

office. I have experienced using one and I loved it, but I did think that the graphics weren’t as good as I was expecting, it was bit like experiencing a PlayStation 2 game not a PlayStation 4 game, but having said that I was totally immersed in the experience and definitely could see the power of the technology. As it gets more and more accessible I can see it becoming an essential tool within most practices for design and client presentations/ meetings

Appendix F

80

appendix g Questionnaire from Greg Willis, Architect at Make Architects

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

G.W - I do think it will be more common place, and indeed, we are invest-

ing and experimenting in the use of virtual reality. However, my personal experience is that whilst it promises a lot, the experience for a client viewing a proposed design is quite limited and irritating for the following reasons: - It is too easy for the person wearing the headset to ‘get lost’. The advantage of static images is that they can be used to support a narrative or direct an argument.

- The experience is more like a video game in terms of how you experience a building, i.e. flying / hovering through rather than walking.

- It is a little embarrassing for client’s to wear the goggles in meetings. It makes it into more of a performance where usually clients prefer to absorb the information calmly, assess and then react.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

G.W - No for the above reasons. Like all advancements in technology, it

should simply be viewed as another tool at the designer’s disposal to best tell a story. It will not replace but simply support the explanation of a building in a similar way that 3D renders have not replaced sketches or 3D printing has not replaced sketchy cardboard models.

Question 3 J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

Appendix G

81

G.W - Yes we have – see response to Q1. Personally I found the experience

too disorientating and wonder if it would be more useful as an in-house design tool to solve / visualize complex three dimensional scenarios, rather than as a purely client facing device.

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

G.W - Not sure. I think generally we are much more visually intelligent with

regard to the sophistication of renderings. Ultimately, nothing replaces the experience of the actual three dimensional space. A good recent example is of a client of ours who found they were only in a position to make important decisions about a space until they could actually walk it. Despite models and renders, this was simply achieved by marking out the actual space with masking tape and mocking up walls with bedsheets. The imagination can be more powerful than a computer and we forget that we use our whole body to experience a space (walking, sitting, lying down) not just our eyes.

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

G.W - See above. Yes this is a real danger. One can add sound too as an

important factor to a space’s characteristics.

Question 6

J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reality

in your design work in the future?

G.W - See above.

Appendix G

82

appendix h Questionnaire from Sanaa Shaikh, Architect at Make Architects

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

S.S - Yes.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

S.S - I don’t think it will replace, but it will become an addition.

Question 3 J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

S.S - We have done walk-throughs.

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

S.S - I don’t think it will have that great an effect on whether projects are

deemed a disappointment – everyone knows you can never replicate the feeling of being in a space and touching real materials.

Question 5

J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

Appendix H

83

S.S - Possibly, because it is harder to communicate other feelings, but this

has always been the case and architects will have to continue to develop ways to communicate their ambitions in a variety of ways.

Question 6

J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reality

in your design work in the future?

S.S - Yes.

Appendix H

84

appendix i Questionnaire from Alejandro Jiménez Brasa, Architect at Mossessian Architecture

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

A.J.B - Architecture is a discipline that, historically, takes a long time to in-

corporate technological changes. In my opinion some of the front running offices in commercial architecture will be keen on incorporating such tools in a near future (some are already doing it). But the vast amount of smaller office won’t have it as a common tool. Overspecialization of architecture offices will also determine which will require those tools. The residential sector will probably be more favorable for its development.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

A.J.B - I don’t think it will fully replace two dimensional renderings, as

they serve similar but still different purposes. They will be supplementary when used. As stated above, some sector will find more use for it, and probably high profile competitions will start requiring it soon, to gain even more public exposure.

Question 3 J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

A.J.B - I´m not aware of any office in particular that is currently using it.

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

Appendix I

85

A.J.B - I don’t think it will make a difference in comparison, since it´s just another mean to achieve the same end: an idealized view of an unbuilt project.

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

A.J.B - Two dimensional renderings and 3d animations have already been

detrimental to the profession in that same way. Clients are looking for an image, which leads to countless cases of costs overruns, in order to try to match an image that wasn’t grounded on the physical reality of the building but on a visual (virtual) one from the first stages of the project.

Question 6 J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reali-

ty in your design work in the future?

A.J.B - I´d like to use it, in order to have a better perspective on its possi-

bilities. However I hope it doesn’t replace any of the current tools but adds to them.

Appendix I

86

appendix j Questionnaire from Tania Marques, Architect at Mossessian Architecture

Question 1 J.L - Do you think that virtual reality such as oculus rift, which allow you

to become fully immersed in and walk through a virtual world, will become common practice in architectural offices in the future?

T.M - Nowadays, I don’t think it could be commonly used in every

architectural project, because of the costs and time that are required to have a good virtual reality product. In the future I can’t tell; in my consideration it depends again on the economic factor and the time that takes to make a virtual reality product in comparison to the time that is given to an office to present the project.

Question 2 J.L - Do you think there is the scope for virtual reality to eventually replace

two dimensional rendered perspectives that are most commonly used today for presenting to clients?

T.M - In my opinion virtual reality, when well developed, it could come

to complement the renders in presentations, but I don’t believe the two dimensional images will disappear.

Question 3

J.L - Are you currently aware of any architects using these technologies, and

have you tried any of yourself? If yes what did you think of the experience?

T.M - I haven’t tried it yet.

Question 4 J.L - Do you think that the use of virtual reality will increase or decrease the

amount of projects that are deemed a disappointment once completed in comparison to the visuals presented in the design stage?

T.M - I think it won’t make a big difference in that sense. The relation

between the design stage and the final result of the project once completed, in my opinion, depends only on economic factors, a good selection of the materials to be used, a well execution by the contractors, and a right Appendix J

87

monitoring by the architects during the construction period.

Question 5 J.L - Virtual reality works by tricking the eye, do you feel that this leads

architects to prioritise the power sight even more over the other senses when designing buildings?

T.M - It could prioritise the visual impact factor in the project when it is

to be presented to clients, but it shouldn’t affect the design process, once architecture shouldn’t be thought only to be seen, but to be properly built, used and lived. The virtual reality work should only be a result of an architectural design and a tool in service on that process, but not a determining factor.

Question 6 J.L - Can you see yourself personally and/or your office using virtual reality

in your design work in the future?

T.M - Architecture should answer the needs of the society, and in a more

and more visual and technological world, architecture should walk along those new technological developments and used them as tools, but never forget the architectural principles.

Appendix J

88