daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy (aug.2, 2013) | DMCA policy | flipboard magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Architecture > Classic Architecture

Classic Architecture Discussions on heritage buildings, monuments and landmarks.



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 1st, 2013, 11:04 PM   #1261
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New French Manor - Chicago, USA




Source: http://www.houzz.com/projects/200744...-Park--Chicago
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old April 1st, 2013, 11:10 PM   #1262
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Tuscan Villa - Chicago, USA








Source: http://bgdchomes.com/portfolio/tuscanvilla/#
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2013, 11:12 PM   #1263
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New French Townhome - Chicago, USA








Source: http://bgdchomes.com/portfolio/frenchtownhome/#
__________________

Zn Steinbach, r0cc0, Highcliff liked this post
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2013, 11:15 PM   #1264
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Venetian Palazzo - Chicago, USA









Source: http://bgdchomes.com/portfolio/venitianplazzo/#
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2013, 11:19 PM   #1265
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

Newly Built Georgian Residence - Chicago, USA







Source: http://www.houzz.com/photos/users/bgdchomes
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 1st, 2013, 11:46 PM   #1266
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

The Parisian Quarter - Astana, Kazakhstan










Source: http://www.pkv.kz/
__________________

Neungz, Highcliff liked this post
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 01:08 AM   #1267
Bauchef
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 377
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by erbse View Post
Totally agreed. In Germany, we have the great Stadtbild association for this purpose: http://www.stadtbild-deutschland.org/

But I agree, we need a broader approach towards our architectural roots, esp. in Universities.
Not well visited, your funny stadtbildforum.

But I agree - especially Germany needs some reconstructions. Their cities are just horrible.

In France, Switzerland and Italy f.e., there is no need for this kind of architecture. The inner cities are all well preserved (except the surrounding banlieues of course).
Bauchef no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 02:46 AM   #1268
MRouchell
MRouchell
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 89
Likes (Received): 93

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hed_Kandi View Post
This thread is quickly becoming derailed and is turning in to a menagerie of really poor pastiche examples - therefore I feel that should restate the thread rules posted on the first page.


Thread Rules:

This thread shall only feature examples of recently constructed buildings which adhere to historic architecture styles, with fidelity in design, materials, and/or construction methods.

This thread is NOT for recently constructed buildings which feature pseudo historic references with faux craftmanship.
I agree, however, I think the problem may be that many who post on this thread have a difficult time distinguishing from the well done traditional work from the poorly done pastiche work. What is unfortunate is that architecture schools have abandoned the teaching of classical architecture for so long that the only way is for the architect to teach themselves, and unfortunately, there is no instructor to guide them in the right direction and to provide good critiques of their work.

There are a few obvious things that can make an amateur attempt at classical architecture stand out from the rest.

1. A Classical building should be a simple composition. A simple classical building may be a rectangular box with a simple hipped roof, a continuous cornice, perhaps a rusticated ground floor, an entrance that is appropriately articulated; it doesn't need much more than this, but you see so many buildings that are overly complicated with roof forms that are too complicated, with cornices that are off set at different elevations and not continuous, etc.

2. The amateur work has no since of hierarchy when come to ornamentation and cornices. The cornice at the top of the building, which crowns the entire building should be bolder than all the other cornices at all floors below, which perhaps don't need cornices. (See recent posts from Kazakhstan for example.) Also, the mouldings surrounding every single window opening is as bold as what could be expected around the entrance. Perhaps the entrance should have the boldest treatment (surround, pilasters, arches, etc.), then the ground level openings should have some slightly less bold, and the other openings treated more simply.

3. The architrave (the support beam's external face) should be flush with the pilasters or columns below. It should also be flush on the sides or returns as well. If the pilasters are pulled away from a building's corner, the architrave should not extend to the corner; it should also recess back to the wall plane beyond. Columns, when supported on pedestals, should have their pedestal widths equal to the column's plinth (base). Not more and not less.

4. A cornice is not a bunch of moulding profiles stacked upon each other. A simple cornice consists of a square projecting soffit that has a vertical face called the corona and an underside called the soffit. Along the wall is a bed moulding that acts as a corbeled support for the cornice above, and at the top is a crowning trim called the cymatium, which originally acted as a gutter. There are other components that can be added below the soffit such as modillions, a band of dentils or both, but most classical cornices have at least these four components: bed moulding, soffit, corona, and cymatium.

5. An arched opening cannot be located near the corner of a building. Arches require some amount of dead load mass to resist the horizontal thrust that is exerted. The exception is that arches can be located close together and share the same support, in which case the horizontal thrust of one equals, and counters the thrust of the other. This does not work on corners, therefore arches must be located away from the corner. How far away? Whatever looks comfortable to the eye.

What is great about this thread is that it shows that there is a growing demand for good traditional work. The architecture schools need to follow through. So far there is Notre Dame and a few others, but the traditional to non-traditional ratio for architecture schools is like 1 per 100, if even that much.
__________________

belisario, DarkLite, Highcliff liked this post
MRouchell no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 03:11 AM   #1269
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

Quote:
Originally Posted by MRouchell View Post
I agree, however, I think the problem may be that many who post on this thread have a difficult time distinguishing from the well done traditional work from the poorly done pastiche work. What is unfortunate is that architecture schools have abandoned the teaching of classical architecture for so long that the only way is for the architect to teach themselves, and unfortunately, there is no instructor to guide them in the right direction and to provide good critiques of their work.

There are a few obvious things that can make an amateur attempt at classical architecture stand out from the rest.

1. A Classical building should be a simple composition. A simple classical building may be a rectangular box with a simple hipped roof, a continuous cornice, perhaps a rusticated ground floor, an entrance that is appropriately articulated; it doesn't need much more than this, but you see so many buildings that are overly complicated with roof forms that are too complicated, with cornices that are off set at different elevations and not continuous, etc.

2. The amateur work has no since of hierarchy when come to ornamentation and cornices. The cornice at the top of the building, which crowns the entire building should be bolder than all the other cornices at all floors below, which perhaps don't need cornices. (See recent posts from Kazakhstan for example.) Also, the mouldings surrounding every single window opening is as bold as what could be expected around the entrance. Perhaps the entrance should have the boldest treatment (surround, pilasters, arches, etc.), then the ground level openings should have some slightly less bold, and the other openings treated more simply.

3. The architrave (the support beam's external face) should be flush with the pilasters or columns below. It should also be flush on the sides or returns as well. If the pilasters are pulled away from a building's corner, the architrave should not extend to the corner; it should also recess back to the wall plane beyond. Columns, when supported on pedestals, should have their pedestal widths equal to the column's plinth (base). Not more and not less.

4. A cornice is not a bunch of moulding profiles stacked upon each other. A simple cornice consists of a square projecting soffit that has a vertical face called the corona and an underside called the soffit. Along the wall is a bed moulding that acts as a corbeled support for the cornice above, and at the top is a crowning trim called the cymatium, which originally acted as a gutter. There are other components that can be added below the soffit such as modillions, a band of dentils or both, but most classical cornices have at least these four components: bed moulding, soffit, corona, and cymatium.

5. An arched opening cannot be located near the corner of a building. Arches require some amount of dead load mass to resist the horizontal thrust that is exerted. The exception is that arches can be located close together and share the same support, in which case the horizontal thrust of one equals, and counters the thrust of the other. This does not work on corners, therefore arches must be located away from the corner. How far away? Whatever looks comfortable to the eye.

What is great about this thread is that it shows that there is a growing demand for good traditional work. The architecture schools need to follow through. So far there is Notre Dame and a few others, but the traditional to non-traditional ratio for architecture schools is like 1 per 100, if even that much.

Notre Dame is reputed to be a have a great classical architecture program, however I have yet to see any graduate from that university capable of reproducing the fidelity of architecture once seen in the Rococo, Renaissance, or Late Gothic periods.

However, there is a university which can teach this level of design in all of its glory, New York's Beaux-Arts Atelier of the Institute of Classical Architecture & Art (ICAA). http://www.beauxartsatelier.org

Students of this school have and are capable of producing the greatest forms of western tradition. Take Atelier and Company for example and their recent work for NYC's Jade Hotel.

Project can be seen here:
http://www.atelierandcompany.com/Web...ade_Hotel.html


Atelier and Company's facebook page here (highly recommended!)
https://www.facebook.com/pages/ATELI...11393252235233
__________________

Highcliff liked this post
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:04 PM   #1270
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Townhouses - Chicago, USA








Source: http://www.houzz.com/projects/57443/Facade
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:08 PM   #1271
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Townhouses - Chicago, USA








Source: http://www.houzz.com/projects/57443/Facade
__________________

alexandru.mircea, Highcliff liked this post
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:12 PM   #1272
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Townhouses - Chicago, USA








Source: http://www.houzz.com/projects/57443/Facade
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:16 PM   #1273
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Townhouses - Chicago, USA








Source: http://www.houzz.com/projects/57443/Facade
__________________

alexandru.mircea, r0cc0, Highcliff liked this post
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 09:30 PM   #1274
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

New Townhouses - Chicago, USA






Source: http://montgomeryplanning.org/blog-design/?p=792
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2013, 11:25 PM   #1275
alexandru.mircea
Ars longa, vita brevis
 
alexandru.mircea's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,218
Likes (Received): 1742

I adore most of these American townhouses. Gorgeous stuff.
alexandru.mircea está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 11:26 AM   #1276
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,082
Likes (Received): 72

I apologize for my posts then. I don't know enough about architecture to distinguish. Feel free to remove my examples.
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 04:28 PM   #1277
L e o n i d a s
Registered User
 
L e o n i d a s's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Tilburg
Posts: 49
Likes (Received): 20

^ It was fascinating to see though..
How are architects in the USA allowed to build such horrific, cheap buildings? Is there no council or organisation to keep the public space aesthetically appropriate? Or is anyone basically allowed to build whatever they want if there's people willing to pay for it?
It's interesting to see such a huge contrast between the Chicago residences and those apartment buildings in Dallas. I guess it really depends on the state then?
L e o n i d a s no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 04:39 PM   #1278
Hed_Kandi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,429
Likes (Received): 1865

Palais des Anges - Beverly Hills, USA (Built 2010)











Source: http://priceypads.com/palais-des-anges-49500000/
__________________
Hed_Kandi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 05:23 PM   #1279
Generacion del 80
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 640
Likes (Received): 330

Generacion del 80 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 3rd, 2013, 06:35 PM   #1280
socrates#1fan
Registered User
 
socrates#1fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,104
Likes (Received): 251

Quote:
Originally Posted by L e o n i d a s View Post
^ It was fascinating to see though..
How are architects in the USA allowed to build such horrific, cheap buildings? Is there no council or organisation to keep the public space aesthetically appropriate? Or is anyone basically allowed to build whatever they want if there's people willing to pay for it?
It's interesting to see such a huge contrast between the Chicago residences and those apartment buildings in Dallas. I guess it really depends on the state then?
So long as a structure follows code and zoning laws the answer is yes. If a structure is in a designated historical district it can be altered (depending on the district). For the most part, there is no aesthetic police. However, this also allows us more freedom in architecture. Who decides what is aesthetically appropriate?
__________________
"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything"- Alexander Hamilton

What the hell is a United Statian? Is that like some sort of insurance company?
socrates#1fan no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
classic architecture, neo-urban plan, new urbanism, stipson

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu