What types of building information are best portrayed in 3D views?
- Which stakeholders require 2D views, and why?
- 3D views portray a realistic, wholistic image of what the building will look like once built. This is extremely helpful to convey building information like aesthetics, spatial connections, and shape/design of the building. From 3D views, a client can get a sense of what looking at the building and being inside of it may look and feel like. For example, they can gain an understanding of how big a room is, where the furniture is in relation to other elements, and how they would actually move through the building. They can also understand how the building would come together. From a 2D perspective, it may be hard to understand how layers connect, and what shape the walls and roofs take, but the 3D view assembles all the information into a digestible shape. For instance, how a wall curves, or how a roof slopes. 3D views are most appreciable to clients who want to understand what their investment will look like.
- Contractors and engineers require 2D views. The 2D views provide incredible statistical and diagrammatic information that helps them understand how to construct the building. It is almost like a set of instructions that they must follow. For example, 2D views can clearly illustrate dimensions, program layouts, electrical information, wall types/thicknesses, etc.
- Architects need 2D views to establish floor plans and sections which help define their design. Floor plans are essential in the design process. The program of a building is one of the key factors when thinking about initial design and how someone flows through and makes use of space, so being able to put these ideas into 2D floor plans is essential. Further, sections help architects design how the space feels from a wholistic approach. Seeing the design from a vertical cut can bring out ideas, whether it be a concept like carved space or stacked space or how the person moves up and down the different levels.
- Lastly, 2D views can be designed for client usage by breaking down the image to the bare necessities to make it accessible for them. Portraying the rooms with slight realistic coloring and shading can help them understand how their investment will come to fruition.
Give examples of how the building information for a specific location in the project needs to be filtered for different audiences and purposes?
The same view point can be duplicated to portray different information to different stakeholders. For example, the same floor plan can be duplicated to create one for contractors and one for clients. In the contractor floor plan, details like dimensions of outside walls and interior rooms can be added while furniture and other components added by the client would be removed. On the other hand, a floor plan created for a client would have all the dimensions and construction details stripped away while furniture and rendering details like shading can be added. On a similar level, sections can also feature varying levels of information for different audiences. Contractors, engineers and architects might be highly interested in the building envelope. Much detail can be hidden between the walls so from a designer standpoint, the architect may want to put specific details in how the windows or walls work which will then need to be relayed to the contractors who have to build it. However, to the client this may be irrelevant and so in their section view, these details would be removed, again replacing it with furniture and more relevant useful items to everyday use.
Should your design ideas always be conveyed through photorealistic renders?
- How does the level of detail in the rendering and its presentation affect the perception of stakeholders reviewing your design?
I think photorealistic renders have their advantages and disadvantages. In the developmental stages of a design, quick iterations of floor plans, sections, and 3D views can help get an idea across. In this stage it is almost unnecessary to create these sophisticated renderings. I think the renderings should be reserved for final presentations/pitches of the design. As a student studying architecture, I have my reservations about photorealistic renderings. The user can control so much of the environment that I think it can very easily be used to create false realities. One truly does not know how a building will function until it is built, it is so difficult to capture it perfectly in an online model, that with all the decisions, one can create a “picture perfect” image that will truly sell it to the client while at the same time hiding many potential negative scenarios. I do believe that it is a great tool for getting a sense of what the building can feel like but I am also a person who truly believes that one must be in the space to experience the it with all senses and then connect emotion to it.
Name some applications where viewing the building and model information in virtual reality or augmented reality would be most beneficial?
- Are there advantages to using a C.A.V.E as a virtual environment versus VR headsets?