Toronto Bridgepoint Hospital | 61.87m | 10s | Bridgepoint Health | Diamond Schmitt

urbandreamer said:
020dc.jpg


024xec.jpg
Click to expand...

There's actually great architectural counterpart btw/the new hospital and the half-round (hint, hint)
 
Urban Shocker said:
I'd find the ROM Crystal's tonal differences more engaging if, as suggested earlier, they were the result of artifice rather than error - Bridgepoint being the example.
Click to expand...

How does the knowledge that something was planned - the 'organic' appearance of mismatched cladding for example - change the effect it brings? Would you opine differently had Danny blown more hot air into his 'I was inspired by a crystal I saw in the museum' schtick and claimed that the tonal differences were indeed part of the design?
 
adma:

Agreed. It is a shame to lose the half-round - now even more so. Bit of an unintended consequence of the juxtapositioning.

AoD
 
ProjectEnd said:
How does the knowledge that something was planned - the 'organic' appearance of mismatched cladding for example - change the effect it brings? Would you opine differently had Danny blown more hot air into his 'I was inspired by a crystal I saw in the museum' schtick and claimed that the tonal differences were indeed part of the design?
Click to expand...

Designing something - compared to abandoning that process and letting errors decide things for you - results in a more harmonious and satisfying effect, which is why a culture of design exists. That the Crystal cladding differs from the cladding shown in the rendering is merely a back-story to that which can be perceived firsthand ... by looking. Those naughty Germans somehow managed to produce different die lots for the Crystal's cladding. Had there been a possibility of sawing up the cladding that the naughty Germans provided, and rearranging it on the surface of the Crystal, the result would have been more pleasing to the eye ( i.e. designed ), but all the panels were of differing sizes and had to be fitted in predetermined locations. The result - the building that we see - is therefore more about the aesthetic of process than the design aesthetic that was intended - when you "read' the Crystal you can see which sections of cladding were produced from which die lots. It's also about materials - compare the Crystal with the copper spire of St. James Cathedral and notice how the recent copper cladding hasn't had time to age and match the earlier green-coloured copper. The difference, I believe, is that the Crystal won't age so that all sections of the cladding will eventually come together and match. Another comparison of interest when considering the Crystal might be to FCP which, when it was built in the mid-70s, had to be partly re-clad because the marble on the upper sections was darker in tone. The saga continues to this day because the clading worsened as a result of pollution and became mottled and had to be entirely redone. Meanwhile, across the street, the TD centre merely has to be repainted every once in a while - there there's an aesthetic of time, of gradual change from black to grey and back to black again.
 
Urban Shocker said:
Designing something - compared to abandoning that process and letting errors decide things for you - results in a more harmonious and satisfying effect, which is why a culture of design exists.
Click to expand...

I'm hardly arguing for a haphazard design process, merely that when things go wrong, sometimes the resulting effect is pleasantly more engaging than what was originally planned.

Urban Shocker said:
That the Crystal cladding differs from the cladding shown in the rendering is merely a back-story to that which can be perceived firsthand ... by looking. Those naughty Germans somehow managed to produce different die lots for the Crystal's cladding. Had there been a possibility of sawing up the cladding that the naughty Germans provided, and rearranging it on the surface of the Crystal, the result would have been more pleasing to the eye ( i.e. designed ), but all the panels were of differing sizes and had to be fitted in predetermined locations. The result - the building that we see - is therefore more about the aesthetic of process than the design aesthetic that was intended - when you "read' the Crystal you can see which sections of cladding were produced from which die lots.
Click to expand...

There's no denying the aesthetic of the mismatched panels is indeed more about the 'process' than the 'look,' but so what? If you later found out that the randomized panels denoting the vertical circulation corridors on Bridgepoint were intended to be uniform, would it change how you felt about the effect?

Urban Shocker said:
It's also about materials - compare the Crystal with the copper spire of St. James Cathedral and notice how the recent copper cladding hasn't had time to age and match the earlier green-coloured copper. The difference, I believe, is that the Crystal won't age so that all sections of the cladding will eventually come together and match.
Click to expand...

Why should they?

Urban Shocker said:
Another comparison of interest when considering the Crystal might be to FCP which, when it was built in the mid-70s, had to be partly re-clad because the marble on the upper sections was darker in tone. The saga continues to this day because the clading worsened as a result of pollution and became mottled and had to be entirely redone. Meanwhile, across the street, the TD centre merely has to be repainted every once in a while - there there's an aesthetic of time, of gradual change from black to grey and back to black again.
Click to expand...

The trouble with an FCP comparison is that it was 'designed' to look a certain way and that it was in fact, the pixelated, pre-redo patina itself that compelled it's owners to rethink its cladding (while retaining that 'look'). Likewise, the TD Centre's paint is also in an effort to get the old girl back to her former glory. Danny's rock was essentially born pockmarked and as such, there's nothing but a few renderings and small man's campfire story about a trip to the museum to tell us that that condition is a problem.
 
The tonal differences in Bridgepoints glass are clearly not a mistake, wheras the ROM Crystal cladding is less satisfactory because it is an error. It is not possible for the Crystal cladding to undergo the evolutionary process that the Cathedral's spire will, and those limitations form the point of comparison, as do the different approaches that were taken with FCP's various recladdings when compared to the Crystal. The evolution of the surface appearance of buildings over time is the purpose of the TD comparison ( more so with FCP than with the Crystal ). Looking back to the Crystal's renderings and comparing them to the finished building is the basis for comparing that error with Bridgepoint's more satisfying artistry.
 
Urban Shocker said:
The tonal differences in Bridgepoints glass are clearly not a mistake, wheras the ROM Crystal cladding is less satisfactory because it is an error.
Click to expand...

You're casting those judgements because you know the history of each. My point is that if you didn't know what you know, and were seeing each for the first time, it wouldn't be clear and I doubt you'd feel the same.

Urban Shocker said:
It is not possible for the Crystal cladding to undergo the evolutionary process that the Cathedral's spire will, and those limitations form the point of comparison, as do the different approaches that were taken with FCP's various recladdings when compared to the Crystal.
Click to expand...

No, but the Crystal will undergo its own unique process - one which began with a set of mismatched clothes. You're quick to remind others that one building is not another and that each should be judged by their own merit. If that's the case (and it surely is), why should all buildings age the same?

Urban Shocker said:
The evolution of the surface appearance of buildings over time is the purpose of the TD comparison ( more so with FCP than with the Crystal ). Looking back to the Crystal's renderings and comparing them to the finished building is the basis for comparing that error with Bridgepoint's more satisfying artistry.
Click to expand...

But do Bridgepoint's panel locations exactly match those promised in the drawings? Even if this idea is the same, where do you draw the line in terms of the failure of its execution? We're constantly reminded here (both in conversation on the site and in execution around the city) that what someone draws isn't necessarily what will be built. Why would the conceptual stages of our very excellent cultural and healthcare projects be any different?
 
Urban Shocker said:
The tonal differences in Bridgepoints glass are clearly not a mistake, wheras the ROM Crystal cladding is less satisfactory because it is an error.
Click to expand...

It's not that the Crystal looks bad because the cladding was an error. Rather, the cladding was an error because the Crystal looks bad. This is a purely aesthetic judgement but it is one that almost everybody who looks at the damn thing agrees with. In my opinion, aesthetics just *is*. Your attempt to rationalize it in this case is interesting but unconvincing.
 
k10ery said:
It's not that the Crystal looks bad because the cladding was an error. Rather, the cladding was an error because the Crystal looks bad. This is a purely aesthetic judgement but it is one that almost everybody who looks at the damn thing agrees with. In my opinion, aesthetics just *is*. Your attempt to rationalize it in this case is interesting but unconvincing.
Click to expand...

I know I'm in the minority (of one?) here, but I like the Crystal. As is. I like the variance in cladding, I like the mysterious windows with glimpses of dinosaurs, I like how imposing it is when you first see it as you drive along Bloor.

That having been said, Bridgepoint is going to look awesome, IMHO. Really, really cool so far.
 
Riverdale Rink Rat said:
I know I'm in the minority (of one?) here, but I like the Crystal. As is. I like the variance in cladding, I like the mysterious windows with glimpses of dinosaurs, I like how imposing it is when you first see it as you drive along Bloor.

That having been said, Bridgepoint is going to look awesome, IMHO. Really, really cool so far.
Click to expand...

I like it too.

I see it as the Rom's version of the Louvre Pyramid.. Half love it, half think it's a disgrace. There's really no in-between. I also like the Louvre Pyramid for the record.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top