Agreed on the font. The design is very primitive and could have been refined with details and perspectives that attest to a pedestrian's view as opposed to random aerial perspectives. The drawings are very heavy and really do not speak to the design's potential lightness. It is odd that given the openness of the design, the student has put the work in a specific (and symmetrical) site, yet really does not harness or benefit from any contextual features. It seems like the project was just as much about the context as the structure itself.
Looks great but the serifed font... for shame!
ReplyDeleteAgreed on the font.
ReplyDeleteThe design is very primitive and could have been refined with details and perspectives that attest to a pedestrian's view as opposed to random aerial perspectives. The drawings are very heavy and really do not speak to the design's potential lightness.
It is odd that given the openness of the design, the student has put the work in a specific (and symmetrical) site, yet really does not harness or benefit from any contextual features. It seems like the project was just as much about the context as the structure itself.