The presence of AnimAtion in architecture is an inherent, in grained condition of the architectural built form. However, its PercePtion by a viewer, under designed experiential conditions, allows the full realization of its potential AnimAtion.
How does animate architecture work? Is it achievable? Do you have to make a building move, be KinetiC?, for it to be animate? Is animate architecture reliant on technology – the computer generated process? Consider the Baroque & Michelangelo. AnimAtion is not a new idea. How has the computer influenced the architect’s ability to conceive AnimAtion? The processes we can now design, can create incredible objects, but are they architecture? How does autopoiesis affect the process – when do you stop the process?
Architectural Animation is a complex, multi-dimensional objective. One that many architects have tried to tackle. I am interested in the different ways in which it can be approached, however, fundamentally there is no right or wrong way to animate. The only important thing is that the end result somehow invokes a sense of LiveNess.
stef : how's your essay coming along? just dropping in ...