View Full Version : Waterline
After looking quickly at The Pavilion I conjured some ideas to make a quick approach to another site in Gosford that has been waiting some attention for a while.
The Waterline is proposed as an eight unit development (8 x 2 bed) the six centre units are proposed as single level apartments and the two end units as two storey maisonette apartments.
This rough design has been done only for the reason of marketing by way of projecting a concept for the site. This is all the documentation that will be prepared for now to start the ball rolling.
Still more than happy to receive comment as most often these come back as projects or lead to others, The big sign factor!!!
very chic, King Dick :D :cheers:
Thanks Ryo
Here is another view from the front.
phhheeeeew, that's a steep street! Nice touch and graphics Monsieur Richard! :rock on:
I like particularly the white stripelines touch :D
beautiful on a dark background
the colour balance is nice!
The backdrop to this site is very steep and densly timbered and undergrowth, I tried to utilise an almost traditional Aussie pole home styling that is common to our local hillsides. With this project I've also again aimed to give better expression of the individual units.
I couldn't imagine before seeing that the black sky will come very nice, really good presentation.
The upper right-hand roofline seems to have a relationship with the pitch of the street. I think it might be interesting if the pitch of the roof on the far left side also interacts with the pitch of the street. If these two roof sections were pitched it would really concentrate the massing in the middle. I don't know if this is desirable or not. However it does feel like the start of something and then a stop with only this one roof pitched like it is. Just thoughts. Looks Great.
Erik
Mate I did try pitching the left hand roof on the same plane as the right but the roof is narrow left to right and when viewed from the street level from that end looks rather too light.
I actually planned the higher out of constant roof to address the ridge / crown in road that occurs directly too that end, stating the building to that end on approach.
Cheers, Richard
jparchitectus
11-10-2005, 04:29
You really know how to crank these f*ckers out!
Nice adaptation :cheers:
primocordara
11-10-2005, 11:31
Hey Ryo, were is the Excel version of this one? :wondering
I am working on an ascii version of it :D
Great presentation , would be great fun riding up that slope :D .
Hey Ryo, were is the Excel version of this one? :wondering
LOL :D
Actually, Richard, I'm wondering if your photorealistic trees are appropriate to your graphic style... :wondering
Maybe you could try a 'cut out' version (with the famous toshop filter) of the trees... unless they are 2D sketchup components, of course... but you could remake new components from cutout trees in PNG format...
primocordara
11-10-2005, 16:16
Actually, Richard, I'm wondering if your photorealistic trees are appropriate to your graphic style... :wondering
Maybe you could try a 'cut out' version (with the famous toshop filter) of the trees... unless they are 2D sketchup components, of course... but you could remake new components from cutout trees in PNG format...
Yep, trees and cars distract my attention here...
I realize they are usefull in providing scale, but being so realistic one wonders, how is the pavement? were is there grass? etc...
Thanks all for the feedback!
JP
Mate I find having soooo much experience in this scale of development I can create a massing and conceptual layout rather quickly, from receiving the survey to preparing the massing, layout and conceptual facade presentation normally takes about 8 - 16 hrs in total (8 units @ 1000 $/unit) works out good cash too. Just helps that I have such experience of knowing the unit sizes, access, privacy and parking issues that these can be done so fast. And IMHO just because they can be done fast doesn't at all mean that they have not been fully considered. Often I will run into a concept, create an immediate solution then consider many other solutions often to settle on the original as the best preformer.
Arv
Funny you mention that, when I raced MTB myself I used to organise a monthly race around the reserve that backs to this development. The uphills were BLOODY STEEP infact the steepest I had ever encounted in 5-6 yrs of racing, most were ridable by the A grade (Expert then) if you didn't encounter that little stick or rock that would lift the front wheel and send you off the back. The downhills well they were just BLOODY DANGEROUS! And well fun really.
Marcelo / Ryo
I know exactly what you mean about the cars and trees, and people for that matter. I'm not so sure the cars are that out of place, might drop the intensity of colour to them, the trees and peps are SU components but you are right might not be working so well. One day I hope I can work out the best way to incorporate these.
mikem oz
12-10-2005, 10:02
For me the real cars and people are better than the semi-transparent ones - they give it a sense of realism that the semi-transparent cars don't.
They also look more contextually correct. If it was a white semi-transparent rendering then the cars and people could be as well. The latest image post just looks wrong the way it is.
Given that the exercise has a purpose perhaps ask your 'clien't what he thinks and likes. It is easy for us to lose sight of the fact that others don't see things the way we do.
Postscript: The patchy view of the cars is particularly jarring - because it is not what you expect to see your eye is drawn to it rather than the building or overall composition.
Well... Richard.
Mikem's right on this one: test it with clients.
From my experience, clients like transparent trees if they obstruct the view of the buildings (unless it's a watercolour style drawing in which the trees purpose is actually to hide an ugly project :D ), and prefer opaque people to give more presence and human scale, especially in housings projects.
In the case of your style, white people are better, I think, because they're very graphical, and cars should be as abstract as them (white body, transparent glass)... :wondering
But you remain the master on this... :D
primocordara
12-10-2005, 11:41
Hey Richard, I don't mean eliminating cars or trees, they do give a sense of scale and therefore very important.
What I meant was that they were more realistic than the building, more outstanding. I like making the trees transparent, and lowering the colors of the cars, perhaps eliminating some detailing of them.
Here at the university we used to say "si su fachada no tiene solucion, pongale vegetacion!" - If your facade is not resolved , cover it with vegetation- (it is an old publicity rhyme in spanish..sort of "as seen on TV" phrase!)
So too much vegetation is always suspicious...;)
PS I think the trees are much nicer like this! However you could find more personal touch by drawing manually some abstract trees yourself instead of using 3d compos... I mean, trees in arch renders have always given a personal touch to drawings, and when I see FLW drawings for example, they are recognisable amongst thousands according to his trees drawingstyle...
Actually it was the first thing you learned when you got 'invited' to draw perspectives for him... I suppose. 'Master the trees and you'll find your own style' like motto... :wondering
primocordara
12-10-2005, 12:36
. 'Master the trees and you'll find your own style'
Sounds like Kung-Fu! :not worth Master Ryo...
Sounds like Kung-Fu! :not worth Master Ryo...
I only paraphrase Lao-Tseu... :D
primocordara
12-10-2005, 14:21
I only paraphrase Lao-Tseu... :D
Your quotes are more intellectual than mine!:D
I realize now that Richard made the "Tree factory"!
Your quotes are more intellectual than mine!:D
I realize now that Richard made the "Tree factory"!
Yep! In a sense, these trees create 'his' style already... :D
Ok, tried another.
Two images imported in to PS.
1. Background layer - SU (Lines on, Trees off, windows opaque).
2. Top layer, Filter > Noise, blend > Luminosity, 62 % opaque - SU (Lines on, Trees on, windows transparent 50 %).
wegofaster
12-10-2005, 18:38
Nice job.
Ok, tried another.
Two images imported in to PS.
1. Background layer - SU (Lines on, Trees off, windows opaque).
2. Top layer, Filter > Noise, blend > Luminosity, 62 % opaque - SU (Lines on, Trees on, windows transparent 50 %).
You should make a layer on top with just white trees (SU - lines off plain white on geometry) and play with transparency... no? :wondering
And... the people are too 'randor' (rb by TBD)... can you group them a little bit more? and I'm still convinced plain white people (a bit transparent) suit better your imagestyle than these you proposed here... KUTGW anyway mate! :cheers:
primocordara
12-10-2005, 21:49
Much better! What about adding some "entourage" (is it the same in English? Entorno in Spanish).
Just to place it in an urban setting, but leave this project to outstand over the rest. Dont you have to align to a certain height?
BTW: I see the car managed a few more meters uphill!
I agree with Ryo about the trees. The shadows look really dark but the trees themselves look transparent.
Other than that it still looks bl**dy awesome though mate!!
Ok here is a very last try on this project Ryo has had me spend way too long on this one already. Still it is worth the exercise!!!!
I've made the trees whitish and reduced opacity to better match the peeps.
Marcelo
Mate I'd love to put in more context but the beauty of these images is it just projects an idea for the site and not by way of suggestion that the design has been fully considered with respect to the site.
I've been geting more and more requests for this type of 'Projected Proposal' as the images are so clearly demonstrative of a concept for the site, we are not trying to sell the individual units but the site for development.
Some raised the comments earlier suggesting let the client decide, the beauty for me in nearly all the projects I do is the client rarely has any input on these or full application type projects leaving all decisions on concept, yield, styling and presentation up to me!
That is often why most of the projects I do have a rather common thread, the Richardesque thing Ryo noted. I like this adopted style to my projects as making them easily recognisable. Some might suggest why don't I then be a little adventurous, however things still need to sell to be successful and pretention on behalf of the Architect is often a negative to sales (depending much on the projects location and context).
I do like to create warm inviting concepts where I myself would be proud to live and still have the building attractive to even those with a more conservative view of styling. I wouldn't suggest that I think I'm spot on with my veiws to make success of every project but truely for a one man show this formula has been very successful in ensuring a lot of ongoing work.
Many given the same license on projects would most likely flaunt this opportunity, but if it can be avoided it can make for a most successful outcome given the clients belief that you are working wholey in their interest not your own.
I'd also add that in most of the project that I do I aim to individually express the units which for the end user adds a greater feeling of ownership of one and not part of the whole. This becomes more difficult obviously as the size of the project increases but for the most it provides possibly the best tool for marketing, it will add cost but this will be returned many times during marketing of any particular project.
better, richard!
the white on trees reduce their weight and the drawing is subtlely lighter :cheers:
KUTGW! :cheers:
primocordara
13-10-2005, 10:30
Same as Ryo, came out great for me too!
I agree with you totally, I just meant adding some sketchy lines of adjacent buildings, but you're right, this sometimes is better and sometimes not.
lavardera
13-10-2005, 15:04
I'd go for white or greyscale cars for that last one.
mikem oz
13-10-2005, 15:13
Don't tinker anymore - it looks just fine and if the client is happy...
Don't tinker anymore - it looks just fine and if the client is happy...
we're architects.
The specialty of an architect is: 'never enough. always go further. a work's never finished. there's always something to learn.' :D
No No No I'm not playing with it any further!!!! :bang head Not the image either!!! :wondering
Here is the window card done for the agent...
No No No I'm not playing with it any further!!!! :bang head Not the image either!!! :wondering
Here is the window card done for the agent...
superchic!!!! :cheers: :clap:
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.