problems with large scale projects in Ireland
- This topic has 29 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 22 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi!
I’m new (but don’t hold that against me)
Just as a matter of interest, how much practical understanding of lighting is involved in becoming an architect?
Having been a lighting designer in the entertainment industry for twenty odd years I have recently (past couple of years) started doing more architectural lighting, hopefully bringing a bit of entertainment “pazazz” to projects. When trying to land new clients a response I’m faced with a lot of the time is “Oh, the architects look after all that” And on a couple of occasions they’ve made a right pigs ear of it, showing seemingly very little knowledge of different light sources, and the way they work.
(no offence)Beyond the Hall door were architects some of them and did manage to speak with a good deal of logic about lighting interiors. However that still doesn’t bring us any closer to lighting up our streets does it. But it is a good start.
Generally speaking in the architectural world, things relavant to design such as space, light, time and people are:
‘Known about by everyone, but never talked about’.
A lot like some other ‘no-go’ areas in everyday existence I suppose. I have thought a great deal about natural light in architecture myself. While space is often spoken about in relation to gravity, I certainly believe that most of what space means to us as human beings is related to how the eye responds to natural light and how ‘far’ the eye travels.
Louis Kahn, Unbuilt Master Works is based around experiments done at MIT using Discreet Lightscape software in the late 1990s. It is about the best place to ‘start’ to think about architects and light in modern day design. Couple of copies in Bolton Street library.
I don’t know about architects involvement either – but there’s no doubt that there’s been a huge improvement in recent years in the understanding of lighting in new buildings, it being used very effectively, especially in interiors – although certainly not in all cases.
I’ve been interested in lighting for years, both in the entertainment lighting you speak of Plug, and the more practical forms, ie, street lighting etc.
I cannot believe the state of the Custom House’s floodlighting, its a joke. Many of the floodlights bulbs have just been replaced after being being blown for months and months, but its the architecture of the lighting thats so bad.
Horrible urban orange light is used, the lights are positioned on the back of lamposts and so blast concentrated light on only certain areas of the facade, leaving other areas dimly lit. The portico is then ludicrously lit with white light beams that jarr with the orange light.
The drum and dome are also lit in different colours to the rest, and again are too dim.
And then throw in the amount of blown bulbs there are and you end up with a big cluttered incoherent mess.And as for the Four Courts – the OPW can’t even be bothered to replace the bulbs that light the dome in the same colour – hence one part is orange, another white etc.
And as for Christchurch, Trinity, the GPO, Leinster House, the Ntl Museum, Library, Gallery & Natural History…
Leinster House being the most recent job – I can honestly say I’ve never seen anything so ham-fisted and pathetic in my life. The OPW should be ashamed of themselves.
They have just redone Stormont recently, I was looking at it on the news and what is not a good building actually looks better lit at night
Point very well made regarding Dublins better buildings, plug where are you?
errm, so how much study of lighting is involved in becoming an architect. Internal, and external. Personally it amazes me that the level of street lighting can be so bad. It’s not that hard to get right, it’s a fairly basic calculation to get the correct lux levels, assuming you know what you’re doing/using.
Oops, sorry, bit of cross posting there.
Most buildings, in my opinion, should look better at night, unfortunately it’s very easy to get sloppy, replacing bulbs of one colour temperature with those of another, and generally not paying any attention to the lighting design, if any exists.
Banging up a clatter of sodium floods is the easy way out, and generally will look like it, as well as contributing greatly to increased levels of light pollution. Sorry if it seems like a rant, it’s just everywhere I go seems to to be doing it better than here, which, frankly, saddens me, and annoys me in equal proportions. Especially when you think of how good some of these builings could look.
Currently I live in Kilcullen, and enjoy very dark skies!Sodium lights should be banned form this country! White light is so much better, especially lighting Portland Stone buildings. It’s used right across Europe – sadly very little here, presumably it’s more expensive.
Stormont is a very ugly building alright.
Still, its got a Central Bank-type brutish charm to it also! And those imperialist 30s lamposts leading up it’s avenue and around the building are fantastic. Don’t like the uplighters on the columns though – they’ve got a yellowish tinge to them.I was watching a prog on Sunday about Spain, and the streets of Madrid at night were like daytime – its pavements flooded with white light, and I just compared it with dingy grotty orangey Dublin. There’s no contest.
And poor old College Geen, the CC are literally reling on the deflected light from the Bank of Ireland to illuminate the space!
don’t go there Plug, just don’t go there please.
I mean Bolton Street college prides itself on ‘Technology’ at the expense of visual aesthetics. Learning about technology while ‘becoming’ an architect.
And how technology and design are related. As you begin to learn anything about architecture you will understand how much of a problem this is with architecture.
where to start/end talking technology and aesthetics.
I feel you have to make a really good stab at both individually, and basically worry about how they integrate ‘on-the-fly’ or in the application of what you know.
This approach of integrating things like technology, eg. lighting technology, with design, serves only one not-so-useful purpose. Basically to dilute and confuse design even more.
Beyond the hall door was a nice programme on TV, because you were talking about design, but happened to deal with the lighting as part of the design at the same time.
Zaha Hadid in her renderings has dealt with the issue of ‘the building in the nightime’. It is very easy to pick out new buildings were lighting at night works externally. They are very few.
So in terms of lighting, think about space. Does the lighting come from the floor, the upper or lower wall, a ceiling unit, a sunken ceiling unit or some kind of standing unit. Understand how spatially this choice and/or combination of lighting treatments works.
In short, I feel that computer visualisation rendering and free-hand studies for your lightscape or MAX rendering is a useful area of study.
is one web site you should have in your favs.
I’m not entirely sure you get where I’m coming from.
I’m not trying to learn about architecture, I’m just trying to use my imagination and expertise to make it look better, and am wondering why architects I have come accross seem to feel that,tho’ they patently have no idea about how different light sources effect the internal and external appearance of a building, insist on designing the lighting themselves.
As far as 3Ds Max goes, it has little or no relation to the practicalities of lighting design, other than giving an artists impression. I’m not that up on it, but as far as I’m aware it cannot calculate the lux levels, isolines or glare factors that are an integral part of a succesful lighting design.
I’m on your side, I just want to make what you do look better!Right then, switch quickly onto this thread to discuss it further:
https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?threadid=2579
The problem is, that as soon as your ‘announce’ yourself as an architect as knowing very much too detailed about anything, you leave yourself entirely open to assault – that you are not really behaving as an architect anymore, but as some other kind of technician or expert in a small field.
You see what I mean?
You will see what I have written on that other thread.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
