Comments on: Creative Arts Center / Diller Scofidio + Renfro

By: Shota Fan

Shota Fan — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 18:18:50 +0000

错层范例 http://t.co/gE5Yywjp via @archdaily

By: Petr

Petr — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:17:22 +0000

Just a quick note, it might be interesting to consider the similarities of this particualr build with that of Ravensbourne, London, by FOA. They’re both “creative” centres, with an emphasises of overlooking each other with floors staggered, but executed very differently.

By: Karl L

Karl L — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 07:19:04 +0000

what i’m interested in is how/if the two sides can be cut off from one another…if this hasn’t been thought of i think it’s a mistake since there will be a lot of situations where being completely open to others seeing in or daylight etc will not be in the best interest of the individual uses..

also plans would be really nice..or even two longitudinal sections..

the main elevation is also less than impressive…i don’t mind an entrance being hidden, but it seems as though it should be treated with a little more importance…the whole building seems to be given the same broad brush.

also with the last ds+r buildings i’ve seen they seem to be moving in the direction of making a fancy skin and kind of leaving it at that…the envelope becomes more important than it’s contents…also the gesture of lifting the skin at the corner has now been repeated on at least three projects i’ve seen which starts to take on an air of either ‘signature’ or lack of origniality.

By: Dave R.

Dave R. — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:18:52 +0000

I may be showing my age but the LTL “style” is what we all learned when perspectives were done by hand.

The building has a very interesting street presence and stands in stark contrast to everything else in Providence. I’m interested to see the inside and if they were able to pull off the section shear concept and what it actually adds to the experience.

By: The Juilliard School / Diller Scofidio + Renfro Architects by Iwan Baan | ArchDaily

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:31:56 +0000

[...] collaboration with Field Operations), the competition for the Audio and Image Museum in Brazil, the Creative Arts Center at Brown, the Alice Tully Hall at the Lincoln Center in New [...]

By: Hugo

Hugo — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 03:04:50 +0000

The major strategie seems to be very similar to FAUUSP, a Villanova Artigas project. Using floors on this way promotes a lot of situations, it makes the space really fluid. You can’t know if you are in the 3rd or 4rd floor. You see the 5rd and 3rd being on the 4rd, and are visible to them to.
A lot of combinations is possible with this architecture feature.

Nice, but it could be better, with more variations.

By: habib

habib — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:30:52 +0000

i think the real meaning of place is lost because of using so much effect!i mean,i cant understand the architectural sense,where is the walls really?roof?or chairs?

By: SALVADORE

SALVADORE — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:49:07 +0000

THE BUILDING LOOKS FINE, PLANS WOULD SAY MUCH MORE ABOUT ARCHITECTURE. THE RENDERINGS ARE VERY BAD. I DONT UNDERSTAND WHY DOES IT HAVE TO LOOK SO CLORFUL AND POP BUT IN A BAD WAY. TO CHEESY.

By: Kahn7

Kahn7 — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:09:55 +0000

Forget the rendering. Nice building, but it looks like they subbed the project out to Neil Denari. I question wheteher this search has been as authentic for them as others have been.

By: Centro de Artes Creativas / Diller Scofidio + Renfro | Plataforma Arquitectura

Sun, 02 Aug 2009 17:16:49 +0000

[...] en ArchDaily Comparte este artículo: También te puede [...]

By: hj

hj — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 09:51:23 +0000

it seems the current state of architecture is perfectly reflected in the responses to this project(about image instead of content, anyhow most responses to any project are about how they resemble something already seen before instead of looking beyond)
the style of drawing/rendering by the way is more of a Cooper Union style, where Scofidio is a professor for decades and Diller too and where LTL have studied.

By: Finale Ext.

Finale Ext. — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 06:02:58 +0000

I totally agree.

By: INawe

INawe — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 01:51:51 +0000

Do you just like asking rhetorical questions??? Fine I will concede that it is an important part of what we do but when it starts overriding the entire thread instead of talking about the architecture then it starts becoming a problem.

By: CRISTIAN

CRISTIAN — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 22:32:46 +0000

SOLID STRATEGY
COOL!

By: David Basulto [tricky]

David Basulto [tricky] — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:30:27 +0000

Please lets focus on the architecture. As I see that many of you care about representation, I´m going to prepare an article so we can discuss/learn more about that on its own space.

By: josep

josep — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 03:07:14 +0000

actually Diller & Scofidio were doing this before Paul worked for them and when he left he kept doing the same type of drawings, nothing wrong with that!

By: Finale

Finale — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 01:13:02 +0000

it is my dream that this be the last post ever to be recorded on ArchDaily -

By: nitt125

nitt125 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 21:25:45 +0000

Acoustics could come into play when looking at the glass divider between the shifted levels. If it was open, like a conventional loft, there would be a lot of noise traveling into each floor.

As for the rendering style, yes, DSR has been around for a while and Paul Lewis seems to have taken that rendering style with him. Though this is true, dsr has changed their style slightly in recent years. I think now they use 3dmax with a combination of illustrator, photoshop, and hand drawn lines overlayed. LTL’s style is slightly–not as photorealistic when photoshopping.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:53:26 +0000

Whats the problem with asking about the rendering software? This is an architecture orientated website is it not? those images are renderes are they not? Part of are job is giving our projects a good presentation and knowledge about different rendering procedures is very important. If you don’t want to answer a very valid question then don’t, but there is no need to complain about it. At least come up with a good argument for the design if you don’t want to talk about the renders.

By: llama llama llama

llama llama llama — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:47:49 +0000

Are you trying to point out that before Paul Lewis was at D&S they never used this type of representation, and since he has departed, they have continued to use it?
It seems that this language has developed in an interesting faction under LTL’s exploration, where as D&S appear to be rehashing the same methods that has been for a while now?