You guys bitch and moan about design and architecture in our modern age but haven't made any threads requesting to create your own board for it. It doesn't fit into Sup Forums and most other boards here so why can't we have our own Architecture and design board? We could be onto reviving a new guilded age of art and architecture with the research we could accomplish.
Also, post aesthetic architecture board ITT.
Other urls found in this thread:
skyscrapercity.com
twitter.com
Think of the return to European, or even better - regional architecture, that embraces classical ornament and aesthetics with the technology advancements of the modern age.
This is already ugly.
The ornaments are vanishing, the shapes are becoming abstract.
That's a phantastic view, though.
Do these still exist?
Last one yes.
OP is Chicago Expo, only temporary
And the last one, I'm unsure.
>the hood where the Chicago expo happened is 98% black now and soon will be home of the ugly-ass Obongo center
REEEEEEEEE
There's problems with this. Some of these pillars are fake and nothing but facades made to look like pillars. Either use real columns, or don't use any at all. Secondly, anything fake, simplified, or imitation is bad architecture like a miniature golf course castle.
Examples:
-Fake balconies that cannot be used.
-Fake pillars that are just pieces of the walls
-Castle-like features on a house that serve no real military purposes or strategies.
-Fake towers/minarets that cannot be climbed, such as extra steeples to a cathedral that have no interiors.
This is probably what it looked like 100 years later.
I can agree for the most part. We need to flesh out what is necessary for our needs but there is a perfectly good reason to keep ornamentation for cultural and story-telling purposes (status, history, and lineage).
Albeit the opposite of the buildings I'm posting are suburbs where nothing is permanent and you're better off destroying such a place
I agree completely. I'm all for extra decor such as statues, inlays, ornaments, wreaths, columns, etc. but they must be used wisely, otherwise they'll look like gaudy gypsy mansions in Romania.
Your example would be better if they didn't paint any of the stonework. Use natural stone colors instead, and if one were to have more than one color, they should merely use different materials.
On the same page. There should be a "three tier" system of acknowledging the intricacies of the building. 1, massing geometry, 2. The major thresholds and supporting elements, 3. Materiality and ornament. I think the later should be only visible from an intimate perspective, where the viewer can touch and engage visually with it. I do enjoy how the romans placed Corinthian columns at the top floors, with the less intricate orders below. The order means everything and i agree entirely that these ornaments need to be consistent with the monumental nature of the major cladding.
this Berlin looks so much better than Nazi Berlin or today's Berlin
this is not a joke I guess
Kek, based quote:
>Don't be startled, I don't want evil, but force the good, punishment is my hand but benevolence is my mood
this is gonna make you feel better