Greg Lynn:
Animate Form表格换行快捷键
雪糕的制作方法Animation is a term that differs from, but is often confud with, motion. Where motion implies movement and action, animation suggests animalism, animism, evolution, growth, actuation, vitality and virtuality. The term virtual has recently been so debad that it often simply refers to the digital space of computer aided design. Virtuality is also a term ud to describe the posssion of force or power. Design becomes virtual when it begins to model form in association with force. As well as being defined by digital information, animation techniques model form within a virtual space of force and motion.
In the cinema industry there is prently a shift occurring from a paradigm of motion pictures to special effects through animation. The virtual space of cinema is inert where the virtual space of animation is vital. The primary difference between the cinema and animation paradigm is between an ideal virtuality of inertia and a vital virtuality of force. Design is animate, when movement and force are co-prent in the beginning rather than being added in order to simulate movement. Before discussing the animation model it is necessary to examine architecture's engagement with the paradigm of the motion picture. M
城市的喧嚣
otion pictures as well as cell animation simulate flow and continuity through the addition of motion. Architecture aligns itlf with the motion picture model bad on its role as the provider of frames through which motion is added.
Architecture's relationship to time is typically pod in terms菜干粥的做法
of the reprentation of motion. The reprentation of time and motion in architecture has been a persistent theme throughout its history. It was Siegfried Giedeon's Mechanization Takes Command and Space, Time, and Architecture that established the themes as the primary concern of Twentieth Century architectural theory and design. Yet, despite the experiments of the early Modernists, architecture remains as the last discipline dedicated to statics. There are two recent models for the modeling of movement in architecture; the first method involves procession and the cond involves superimposition.
路亚黑鱼
Both models begin by reprenting motion pictorially. Architecture has historically modeled time in terms of models of procession. The two approaches are both dependent on the cinema paradigm mentioned previously. Architectural form is typically conceived as a modulating frame through which a mobile eye moves. The nature and complexity of the modulating frame has been the primary factor in discussions of temporal procession. In processional models of time, architecture is the immobile frame through which motion pass. There are two recent alternatives to the processional model of the static frame; both of which formalize time. Where processional time depends on static frames, formal time indexes time through the multiplication and quencing of static frames.
The first is the idea that of Giedeon where time is built into form as memory. The cond model of formal time is associated with Colin Rowe and his disciples. In Rowe's text "Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal," that he co-authored with Robert Slutzky, the idea of a formal, or phenomenal, transparency is propod along with literal transparency. Phenomenal transparency is the tracing or imprinting of a deeper formal space on a surface. Examples of formal or phenomenal time include "shearing," "shifting" and "rotating" operations. Superimpod snap-shots of motion imply time as a phenomenal movement between frames or moments. For instance, Kenneth Frampton's description of Charles Gwathmey's early work as "rotational" is one such example of time being ud to describ
e the movement between superimpod formal moments. The motion picture models of time instance a quence into frames that are later reanimated with motion. They differ from the processional models of architecture as a static frame becau they introduce the idea of architecture as multiply framed and therefore dynamic. The model of multiple frames is similar to the processional model becau architecture is a frame to which motion and forces are added.
孙红雷电视剧Rather than understand animation techniques within the paradigm of cinema it is necessary to reconceive motion as force rather than as a quence of frames. In cinema, force is
added back to give form and shape the simulation of vitality. In computer animation, force is an initial condition. In cinema, the multiplication and quencing of static snap-shots simulates a linear indexing of time and motion. Animation is bad on non-linear, dynamic and kinematic motion techniques. In the systems motion is defined by interacting vectors that unfold in time perpetually and openly. Animation becomes the interaction and inflection of tho vectors in a creative field rather than in a regimented linear quence. Contemporary animation us interacting forces and vectors within an open temporal quence rather than a quences of key frames or cells. With the techniques entities are given vectorial properties and they are relead in a space of forces, collisions and boundaries where they move in a continuum. Many other disciplines have ud time a
nd motion structures to redefine themlves. In addition to the special effects and animation industry, any other discipline that models form in a space that is a medium of movement and force us such an animate approach to modelling forms in a field. The disciplines include aeronautical design, naval design and automobile design.朋友再干一杯
Animation, in its manifold implications, touches on many of architecture's most deeply embedded assumptions about its structure. What makes animate geometry so exciting and problematic to architecture is that it is perhaps the last discipline to incorporate an ethics of motion into its thinking. Architecture is frequently conceived as the study of the inert becau it is dedicated to models of permanence. More than even its cultural role of providing shelter, architecture's expectation is to provide culture with stasis. Statics is important to architecture as a paradigm of literal structure and as an ethic of discretion. Both terms "static" and "discrete" are mutually dependent on the paration of force from form. There is an intimate link between a desire for timelessness, a desire for formal purity and a desire for autonomy. An ethics of motion does not mandate that architecture must be literally moveable nor does it preclude actual motion. The difference between virtual movement and actual movement is critical, as the two imply very different conquences and both conceptual and methodological problems ari when the two concepts of time and force are casually exchanged.
Both the processional and the quential models of movement are instances of virtual rather than literal timing. Both of the examples cast architecture in the role of a static frame that indexes motion and time. The initial elimination of force and motion from form along with the reintroduction of motion to a quence of static frames is the basis of both the processional and the quential models.
An alternate model of time and motion would resist the paration of form from the forces that animate it. Form can be conceived in a space of virtual movement and force rather than within an ideal equilibrium space of stasis. For example, discrete fixed point coordinates define an object in ideal static space. The trajectory relative to other objects, forces, motion fields and flows defines an
object immerd in an active space of forces. The shift from a passive space of inert coordinates to an active space of interactions implies a move from autonomous purity to contextual specificity. The modeling of architecture in a field populated by forces and motion is dependent on the development from previous paradigms and technologies of stasis. Stasis is a concept which has been intimately linked with architecture in at least five important ways, including; procession, permanence, ufulness, typology and verticality. Many architects have vigorously critiqued static models, such as processional quencing. Statics does not hold an esntial grip on architectural thinking as much as it is a lazy habit or default that architects either choo to reinforce or contradict for lack of a better model. Architectural design has, throughout its history, systematically identified itlf with retrograde concepts of motion and time. Each of the assumptions can be transformed once the virtual space in which architecture is conceptualized is mobilized with both time and force. There are veral examples of how statics can be rethought through the u of both motion picture technology and dynamical animation systems. For example, the cultural expectation that buildings must be permanent infers that building's physical and symbolic form should persist. Rather than designing for permanence techniques for obsolescence, dismantling, ruination, recycling and abandonment through time can be studied. Another characteristic of static models is that of functional fixity. Buildings are often assumed to have a particular and fixed relationship to their programs, whether th
ey are intercted, combined or even flexibly programmed. Typological fixity, of the kind promoted by Colin Rowe for instance, depends on a clod static order to underlie a family of continuous variations. The concept of a discrete, ideal and fixed prototype can be subsumed by the model of the numerically controlled multitype Figure 1 that is flexible,
小时代经典语录
mutable and differential. By modeling the potential of multiple variables as what is often referred to as a "performance envelope" a ries of possibilities can be designed from which particular configurations are "instanced". Similarly, multiple independent interacting variables can be linked to influence one another through logical expressions. Expressions are statements that define the size, position, rotation, direction or speed of an object will by looking to other objects for their characteristics.
This concept of an envelope of potential from which instances, or even a quence or ries of instances can be taken is radically different than the idea of the fixed prototype which is varied. In the example of the performance envelope or multitype there is no privileged or fixed type but instead a ries of relationships or expressions between a range of potentials. The processional model of the subject as either the animating force or as the occupant of privileged points of view assumes that architecture is a static frame which intercts motion. Architecture provides mobile experience with a
ries of punctuations or static frames. Architecture can be modelled not as a frame but as a mobile participant in dynamical flows. By defining space as a medium populated by differential forces of attraction and movement one begins to understand the shaping and directional forces that can be built into form that directs space like a current. The idea of privileged points advances to the continuous model of spline paths that hang within differential gradients. Finally, static models underwrite the retrograde understanding of gravity as a simple, uniform, unchanging, vertical force. The example of gravity is a relevant ca study for this discussion of the static and animate models for motion. The concept of gravity as a system in equilibrium that can be predicted and modeled as a linear quence has shifted to a system of relative independent components who position in time can only be calculated procedurally. In the ca of reduction, time and force is eliminated so that positions can be calculated discretely. In the ca of complex relative attraction, time and force are constituent to position in space so that positions can only be calculated continuously. The shift from a discrete model of gravity to a continuous model involves the shift from a space of neutral timelessness to a space of temporal change.
Architecture remains as the last refuge for members of the flat earth society. Structure is related to a concept of force and gravity as any architect or structural engineer recognizes. The relationships are by definition multiple and inter-related.
Curiously, architects treat the issues as discrete and reducible to what is still held as a central truth, that buildings stand up vertically. In fact, there are multiple interacting structural pressures exerted on buildings from many directions including: lateral wind loads, uplift, shear, live loads and earthquakes to name a few of the non-vertical conditions, any
