dbarc

I whole-heartedly agree with this. While it was refreshing to have complete artistic freedom in some of the challenges, that does not necessarily test how good an arch vis artist is at their job.

I felt that some important skills which we have to use day to day were not tested. Something more obviously like a traditional brief - a particular building with defined programme and materiality, would be a good test of all the skills which we require as competent architectural visualisers - choosing the best composition, bringing out the character of particular materials, clear expression of the programme, lighting, atmosphere, lifestyle, particular marketing focus.. etc etc.. and more often than not on a 'challenging' building rather than the amazing architectural eyecandy we would wish for!

It would be fascinating to see how different people approach the communication of the same brief.

Tommy L

I think to have a basic set of architectural drawings to work from then a very brief brief, maybe 'isolation' or 'coherence' or some other evoccative sentiment would work for the rendering challenge. The contestant can choose what to model, where to view from etc. Then the skill is not in the design work, but in the artists ability to convey the design in the required way, which does test us how we are meant to be tested.
Just an idea.
Tom.

Tim Nelson

Agreed, less designing and more rendering! I spent probably 90-95% of my time in search of source material, inpiring images & designs, and trying my best to come up with something that I would be happy with. Then when you realize you just have one day left until the deadline, you are forced to go with something whether you like it or not.

__________________
Tim Nelson
timnelson3d.com

Ernest Burden

Unfortunately, I have to agree.

Forcing design on the entrants got us a dancing Paris street as just one example. The creativity presented by all the entrants blew my mind! I would hate to lose that. But it's true, it presents too many variables.


Jeff--thinking about the AVCs made me want to visit the AVC site to refresh my memory. From the CGA homepage, just how would one do that? That competition was really important and wildly successful, it should be promoted all year on the front page, even as a banner link.

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering

thomas+son

I liked the rules last year, and the rules this year look good too.
The idea of many renderings and not one is great! it is like the USA baseball series there is always a chance for the underdog to come back. Thomas+son

Timothy Saunders

You nailed it Simon. We're currently working on getting the monthly challenges back and rolling. Post your opinions about that on the current thread in the monthly challenges section. The AVC is a seperate challenge all together though and deserves more work and attention (as it has in the past) and this competition being an anual one.

Good comments about design concerns, because it is a valid cocern. The real challenge (if everyone agrees to work from the same design as mentioned) would be coming up with a design that would be universally accepted.

Brian Cassil

Funny, I was just talking with someone about some changes that I thought would be appropriate this next time around. You've hit almost all of the ones I had thought about. Especially reducing the number of challenges to 3.

I've listed some revisions here.

I'm not so sure about this one. It would make more sense to me to have the three challenges be exterior, interior, and animation. I would also allow equal time for all three challenges, or possibly a little more for the animation.

I've listed these together since it's really the same issue. It seems to me that you would have far fewer interested groups than you would individuals so how about changing it to 15 individuals and 5 groups?

Making it more about rendering and less about design, sounds good, but may not yield the best results in what get's submitted. I mean there are LOTS of challenges around the web for rendering fruit bowls, atriums, cathedrals, etc. that are all pre-determined. What made last years challenge so great was the unique and varied entries. I mean how could we forget Olivier Champagne's first challenge? Sure there was some wierd stuff too but I'm okay to take a little wierdness to open it up for some true creativity, even if it doesn't represent what we do 90% percent of the time. In fact I enjoyed the opportunity to do something different.

I think that's it. Like I said I like almost everything you've suggested. Great job Jeff!

Timothy Saunders

Good point(s) Brian. Even though a pre-determined design would eliminate a lot of the stress in figuring out what to do for your entries, that uniqueness is what set this challenge apart from all the others. I also like the number of entries you came up with. 10 seems too small, but 30 too big. I'm anxious to see what the final verdict is.

Brian Cassil

Maybe the rendering of pre-determined designs could be saved for the monthly challenges. It would be nice to see those running again, but I'd keep that separate from this.

Aksel

I see your point, but i disagree - being an arch illustrator requires in my experience a lot of 'filling-the-gaps' so it's not really too bad if you feel ok with designing, even if the main work is illustration.

Maybe it could be an idea to extend the formal categories (interior, exterion, still, animation, abstract) to freestyle and briefed design. i saw some of last years entrances and it would have been a big loss if they were cut down to all render barcelona pavillion as a rather technical competition.

just my 0.02, a.