Friday, January 12, 2007

Studio.02 - "Filling in the Blanks"

After producing the associated Plans and Sections, the question came up as to the process in creating an entire 3-d space from a simple perspective view. The question could be rephrased to ask, "can a perspective view communicate more about the space than just whats in the shot?" I would guess, yes, to an extent. You can gather things like architectural style and materials. You might also be able to speculate on size and placement due to things like elements in the foreground, or access to natural lighting.... for these drawings, I had an idea as to the layout of the room because I was inundated with other views of the same room while picking my screen shots. For this excercise, I mostly handled the variable elements "outside" of the shot as flexible and completely up to me... That being said, thinking about it in these terms, if I were to approach a similar problem with the goal of recreating the room with a certain degree of accuracy, I would start by looking at any reflective surfaces in the view.... but thats kind of cheating.... then there is furniture layout... I can be pretty certain that the head of a bed, for example, is against a wall... likewise for counters and dressers in the foreground which tell me something about the extents of the space. Circulation area may very well lead to doors or openings... details like wainscoting that exist on both walls in the view, probably continue throughout the room... shadows, preferably cast by objects outside of the shot, can fill in all kinds of missing information also..... so, I would argue that logic can be applied to help fill in the missing pieces

1 comment:

Ellie said...

Agreed. But at some point there will not be enough clues to complete the diagram. That is why you have been able to propose two distinct possibilities for the perspective. Both are "correct" and fulfill the terms of the assignment ... but are they equal? Which is better? Why?