Christopher Tee
Key strength of the
scheme: the citing and the hidden
monument has a great monumental quality a huge surprise to enter into this
space.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: Both monuments appear overexposed in some of the
images, too much lights have been used on them. Look at using textures to more
depth to the surfaces
Dallen Chan
Key strength of the
scheme: A very dramatic and monumental sized monuments which would be very impressive
to visit.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: The landscape doesn’t quite justify the dramatic
quality the monuments have, the landscape also needs to be dramatic, the
horizon is good but I think more work is needed to design a better more mysterious
and dramatic landscape
Dylan Smith
Key strength of the
scheme: the axo’s are great and the chosen design is very good, especially the
carved out stair of the tower monument. They are well cited. Would have been a
great mark except for the weaknesses, see below
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: the images have a very poor resolution, and the
landscape design is also very unresolved, lacking detail and appears fuzzy in
the images. The images do not capture the best bits about the tower monument
Hao Ren
Key strength of the
scheme: great landscape and the chosen axo / design is well cited.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: The use of texture on the final model is poor, they are
too large and seem arbitrary in there placement. Look back at your axo, which
has one texture only on parallel surfaces, using that system would have been
better. Some people in the images
Key strength of the
scheme: the secluded bay with high cliff walls is a good landscape room for a
hidden secret fortress.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: the landscape lacks texture and development, the
resolution of the images is poor. The citing is curious, why in that position,
you need to think more about how you would place a monument in that landscape,
suggestions include raising it up off the sandy floor, moving towards one side so
when on the monument you can get a better view out. Part of refuge is to be
protected but also to be able to see out to know if anyone is coming.
Key strength of the
scheme: axonometrics
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: poor resolution of landscape. The landscape needs
textures, vegetation. The monuments are simplistic
Key strength of the
scheme: concept / effort
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: placement in landscape of the refuge monument is weak,
it is not really in a refuge, its placement is arbitrary.
Key strength of the
scheme: monuments well cited in the landscape and the form of the landscape
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: The landscape textures and vegetation is too
unrealistic
Key strength of the
scheme: image of looking up at the tower is dramatic
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: artificial landscape combined with a cartoon like
rendering of the monument makes the project look very unresolved, a sketch not
a design
Key strength of the
scheme: The overall effort
Roland Allam
Key strength of the
scheme: your effort, great improvement
Sammy Sudjono
Key strength of the
scheme: Landscape and citing
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: The architecture of the monument is very very basic,
how do you walk through it, is there a hierarchy of spaces, does it have any
enclosure? What are the framed views.
Key strength of the
scheme: beautifully cited, excellent image captures. The textures of the
monuments and the landscape harmonise extremely well.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: for the image captures please take off the programs
text that appears in the top right hand corner and the ‘energy’ sign.
Key strength of the
scheme: Great effort. Looks dramatic and the landscape is well conceived with
good textual representation.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: The monuments are not cited very well in the landscape.
Close but not right. Eg. The ramp sits awkwardly with the landscape , the monument could easily be shifted
and you would not think that it is worse or better. In other words the monument
has not found its proper resting place
Key strength of the
scheme: Great effort.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: Hard to see the landscape, not sure if it is good or if
it is poor. The image captures
don’t show the monuments as you would see them in the landscape, or as you
would if you were viewing out from them onto the surrounding landscape.
Key strength of the
scheme: the monuments have a great connection with the mountain and the stair
is excellent.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: Landscape is unrealistic, lacks texture and appropriate
vegetation
Yixun Wu
Key strength of the
scheme: dramatic citing of the monuments, the monuments are well textured.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: Lacks a concept. The landscape lacks texture and
definition.
Shibin Wang
Key strength of the
scheme: beautifully cited monuments, the landscape is well formed.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: Both the landscape textures and the building textures
lack materiality.
Benjamin Vella
Key strength of the
scheme: The landscape is well formed.
Most significant
weakness of the scheme: poor placement of the temple. Temples are placed on
higher ground to connect with the sky and long distant views. Your placement
fails to understand this fundamental principle. You should also question why
you have chosen a common Aztec / myan form, the process of the course is to
lead you to design your own forms not copy past architectures. There are no
images captures of what it is like to be in the monuments. The monuments are
not just experienced from the outside but from within, especially ones that are
aiming at views. The temple is open on all sides but the landscape is not. When
citing such a building that is open on all sides then it would be on the top of
a hill, look at Parthenon, and Villa Rotunda by Palladio.
The axonometrics are
ok but they lack precision, hierarchy and a presence of both subtraction and
addition.
