by anonymous on October 19, 1997 at 12:57:50:

In Reply to: Re: 4D Design posted by ss on May 22, 1997 at 14:06:12:

:
: : I am completely interested in this form of design.
: : But I am suspicious of how we try to name it and
: : suffocate it by making it a mere "thing" such as a
: : dimension.

: I also have a problem with labeling time as the fourth
: dimension in design. It reminds me of a lecture I heard
: by Marcus Novak(*) who claims
: to have discovered a fourth dimension(4d) in Architecture.
: He demonstrated this dimension by showing us a video tape
: of vrml worlds that transformed their shape with time
: according to algorithms he programmed.

: He attempted at making a clear progression from 2d-3d and
: his term for the 4th "d", transarchitecture,
: but his arguments didn't support his labels in any convincing
: manner.

: maybe some people just like to label things, and
: perhaps labels attract attention.
: i wonder...

What didn't you understand?

follow ups:

 

comments:

: : 
: : : I am completely interested in this form of design.
: : : But I am suspicious of how we try to name it and
: : : suffocate it by making it a mere "thing" such as a 
: : : dimension.  

: : I also have a problem with labeling time as the fourth
: : dimension in design. It reminds me of a lecture I heard
: : by Marcus Novak(<a href="http://www.ar.utexas.edu/centrifuge/marcos.html">*</a>) who claims
: : to have discovered a fourth dimension(4d) in Architecture.
: : He demonstrated this dimension by showing us a video tape 
: : of vrml worlds that transformed their shape with time
: : according to algorithms he programmed.

: : He attempted at making a clear progression from 2d-3d and
: : his term for the 4th "d", <i>transarchitecture</i>,
: : but his arguments didn't support his labels in any convincing
: : manner.

: : maybe some people just like to label things, and
: : perhaps labels attract attention.
: : i wonder...

: What didn't you understand?



 

[ follow ups ] [ Sawad Brooks ]