Golden ratio

Have a look at the work and writhings of hostorical architects such are da vinci, vitruvius and le corbuiser

You forgot Palladio, Bren88- one of the most significant ‘historical architects’ (as you put it :)) to use phi.

The golden section/ratio/proportion is a central feature of classical architecture in its many guises through the centuries, from the Ancients to the present day, even the Modern Movement architects who embraced the proportions of classicism if not its decorative features. Georgian doors and windows – including the individual panes of the windows – are usually GS-based, for example.

In fact, many door opes are golden rectangles, whether intentional or not. It’s accepted by many as the ‘standard’ rectangle. When people talk of tall / squat / slender / wide rectangles, they are often (unconsciously) using the golden rectangle as their reference rectangle.

I do use phi in graphic design work, but not exclusively. If I were an architect, I dare say I’d use it there too.;)

ok…my mistake. 😮 I should have asked…is there anyone using the golden ratio in their “day by day” work?
I am just curious to see how does one integrates the magical 1.61……. in the quotidian reality. I personally find that after spending a lot of time in trying to modulate a façade, everything has collapsed under a Classic Window standard. Hmmm…not nice.:mad: I wonder if Vitruvius wrote something about this in his De Architectura.

Regards

May I ask: what do you mean by ‘a Classic Window standard’? I’d have thought that the GS was the classic window shape. Am I misunderstanding you?

Didn’t Xenakis use the GS in the Convent of St Marie de la Tourette?

As well as using it in my graphics work, I also know people who use it in their musical compositions, fwiw.

Well…Classic Windows is a window manufacturer. By standard I mean a window size they had on their production line. It was a bit frustrating to see my entire design ruined because they couldn’t provide the modulor I wanted ( or because was to expensive).
Yes..it has been used in music. Bella Bartok is a name that comes in my mind now.
Anyway. I just wanted to see how many architects are trying to use the phi as a tool in their design.

@Caesar wrote:

Well…Classic Windows is a window manufacturer.

Aah. My bad.
This is where I step off, I suppose, if it’s architects you’re after. Except to say that I find it odd that the standard Classic Window shape isn’t a golden rectangle.

More evidence that mass production can be the enemy of good design, it seems…

Best of luck.

@ctesiphon wrote:

As well as using it in my graphics work, I also know people who use it in their musical compositions, fwiw.

Aha! My memory may be playing tricks with me but I do believe that some years ago I read that Palladio used to use a formula to translate classical music of his day into calculations that tthen provided the basis for the proportions of the spaces created….Maybe this explains why his internal staircases were never of great merit 😀

Good thread BTW

I thought that Classic did one-offs but all their domestic windows were either white or the shite-coloured pvc?

The Georgian house by Erith and Terry at King Walden was built exclusively on Palladio’s measures, as far as I recall.
Interesting comment on the topic at http://www.city-journal.org/html/6_2_urbanities-a_new_order.html
Includes the comment <>
As for Bartok, well…………..KB2

@ctesiphon wrote:

In fact, many door opes are golden rectangles, whether intentional or not.

A standard 7′ high door conforming to phi would be 4’4″ wide. Chunky.

I vaguely remember studying architectural use of phi for a History & Theory of Architecture dissertation in 4th year. Prescriptive rules rarely produce good design.

helloinsane..you have a point there. This leads to another question.
Is phi a tool still able to help an architect of our days or it is outdated and unable to respond to a modern architectural language?
I keep asking about phi because I do strugle to find the “perfect shape” in my work and I did find that ,sometime, phi is not the answer ( or maybe I do not know how to apply it). What do you use when trying to compose a language for your work?

Phi isn’t a tool, it’s a rectangle.

There is no perfect shape. I would question the formalism implied by the identification of ‘shape’ as a criterion for design in the first place. Good design emerges from the careful analysis of spatial relationships, not graphic affectations.

Renaissance architects used the golden ratio mainly because it was the “thing” at the time – the trend for artists and architects to follow the mathematicians in copying how nature conformed to a mathematical theory.

Unfortunately the person who invented the concrete brick and block wasn’t a follower of such mathematical nuances. As a result window openings became a slave to the standards acheivable by multiples of bricks and blocks.

It is true that the better designs around today to follow the proportion of the golden ratio, if more by good luck than good guidance – it’s more of a case of having a straight eye in your head.

hutton-
Are you thinking of Wittkower’s great essay on Palladio’s use of harmonic relationships in his room proportions? His interiors were often divided ‘harmonically’, i.e. rooms 8m x 5m, etc. And where the rooms weren’t, he sometimes ‘corrected’ them in his Quattro Libri.
Also, his staircases might be considered poor because they weren’t meant for public use- most of his villas had their principal (public) rooms on the one floor. Though perhaps you’re right- maybe the over-strict application of a rule resulted in these staircases?

@helloinsane wrote:

Phi isn’t a tool, it’s a rectangle.

Why isn’t it a tool, as by tool I understand something which one uses to assist in, say, a design process? IMO, it’s more a tool than a rectangle, that’s for sure. But, more precisely, it’s a proportional relationship. From this relationship one can generate a rectangle, but there are countless shapes that display phi properties, such as the arrangement of seeds in the centre of a sunflower, etc., that have nothing to do with rectangles.

@wearnicehats wrote:

the trend for artists and architects to follow the mathematicians in copying how nature conformed to a mathematical theory.

Does nature conform to a mathematical theory, or does a mathematical theory evolve in response to observed conditions in nature? i.e. the centre of a sunflower (again) has no idea of the existence of a mathematical concept known as phi, but it does display the same properties. Instead of seeing any influence in their relationship, perhaps it would be better to say that they both display similar characteristics. I’ve always seen phi in nature as just, well, common sense- an economic spatial rule rather than a design one. (Otherwise, we start to get very close to the whole area of [ahem] Intelligent Design- an area which I’d give a very wide berth.)

As Pope put it in the 18th century – words which have never been improved on, for me –
“Those rules of old, discovered not devised,
Are nature still, but nature methodised.”

@helloinsane wrote:

Phi isn’t a tool, it’s a rectangle.

There is no perfect shape. I would question the formalism implied by the identification of ‘shape’ as a criterion for design in the first place. Good design emerges from the careful analysis of spatial relationships, not graphic affectations.

Of course it isn’t a physical tool…it’s a tool in a metaphorical way of talking. And if you allow me to correct you phi is a ratio defining the relationship that the sum of two quantities is to the larger quantity as the larger is to the smaller.

the sun flower is a good example ctesiphon. i would of went for the human body, contains examples of the golden ratio. See a program a while back that compared how the closer people were in scale to phi, the better looking they were.

Well some argue that the human body examples aren’t absolute – you even hint at it – whereas the sunflower one is indisputable afaik.

For those who are reading this thread and haven’t a clue what we’re on about, these two links should give you a good starting point and further leads:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio
http://www.mcs.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/R.Knott/Fibonacci/phi.html

@Caesar wrote:

And if you allow me to correct you phi is a ratio defining the relationship that the sum of two quantities is to the larger quantity as the larger is to the smaller.

Yes. I was being facetious.

Palladio worked in a very different world to ours. What makes sense in a deterministic renaissance setting is hardly appropriate to today. Unless, of course, you’re seeking the perfect disposition of the orders.