1

History, Theory and

Method 3
/ ARK 600 / Jonas Lundberg

/Chalmers University of Technology

/Marta Casiraghi

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 2

Index
Part 1. Media & Representation History p. 3

Part 2. Media & Representation Theory p. 4

Part 3. Media & Representation Method p. 5

Part 4. Media & Representation Manifesto p. 7

References p. 8

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 3

Part 1. Media & Representation History

Through history representation has had the fundamental role to express, in many
different ways, ideas, concept and theories. It began as a verbal matter which then
evolved into a visual one, to culminate into a spatial kind of representation. As a matter
of fact, before the Renaissance, the recording and transmission of data and information
took place through a verbal communication. It was very unusual to use images as a
vehicle of representation since its meaning could have changed from author to author.
The means of representation changed drastically in the 15th Century thanks to the
developing of two new revolutionary technology in terms of image making: perspective
and xylography. With xylography, images could be produced by the same machine (using
woodblocks) one identical to the others, taking away the personal interpretation.
Perspective, on the other hand, characterized the Renaissance period and then remained
dominant in our visual culture. Defined by the Italian artist Leon Battista Alberti,
perspective allowed every painter to make the same drawing by adopting the same
geometrical conditions and the rules dictated by Alberti. It can be an incredible
technology for data compression since it geometrically projects the infinite distance
behind the perspectival screen into a picture plan which is not.
Another debate, known as Paragone delle Arti, encouraged the shift from visual to spatial
representation. The two main contenders were Michelangelo and Leonardo discussing
about the effectiveness of communication between sculpture and painting. According to
Michelangelo, sculpture was the art to choose when representing a body since it could
hold much more information and express the idea of volumes. On the other hand,
Leonardo favoured painting because he considered it the most powerful mean of
representation since it could perfectly represent materials and distances.
By the end of the Eighteenth Century Gaspar Monge formalized the parallel projection, a
device that could be considered as a meeting point between sculpture and panting; as a
matter of fact, it can compress a 3D object into a small piece of paper without losing the
correlation between dimensions and also keeping the materiality.
Nowadays this mean of representation has been replaced by computer-based 3D
modelling and scanning which can hold an incredible amount of data in a small place and
at a relatively cheap price. With this kind of technology, 3D scan can capture much more
information than any perspectival image ever could. Therefore, digital technologies have
moved from word processing, to image processing, to 3D processing and this evolution
is supported by the presence on the market of computers that are now cheaper and can
store bigger data. Yet, even if an alphabetical file is much lighter than an image, the
difference in cost storage is irrelevant.
According to Mario Carpo two are the digital turns that have occurred in the last years.
The first digital turn is the one promoted by Frank Gehry with his renowned fish design
where the form created is smooth and harmonious. In order to obtain such shapes, he
adapted and simplified an existing software to architecture needs, known as Catia. The
second digital turn, instead, is the one of the “potatoes”, the 3D scanning and the complex
and fragmented 3D elements.
For the present and especially for the future it is important to know what there is out
there in terms of technology and learn new ways of working. If we think about what we
use today as media and representation tools such as photo scanning and
photogrammetry, we can realize that it is an update of what already existed (think about
Alberti’s measuring device for statuary replication). Therefore, the goal is to free
ourselves from the restraint of what we know and find new ways of representation and
3D modelling. VR technologies are already moving towards an innovative approach by
allowing users to directly modify the project inside the virtual reality.

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 4

Part 2. Media & Representation Theory

Is it really the end of the projected image? In answering this question, it is important to
bear in mind the importance of the subjective point of view. As a matter of fact, every
method of representation has its own characteristics and because of those it will be
preferred by one subject or the other. According to a multitude of different features each
can show a different point of view of the project, thus enhancing its strengths.
After this preliminary clarification, I can personally assert that I do not think that the
projected image has reached its end, since there will always be one person that will find
this mean of representation as the most effective one. According to Mario Carpo, the risk
is that this more “ancient” method of representation will disappear in the moment in
which there will be no technical reason to use it.
Representation has always been the most crucial phase in the designing process since it
is considered as the only way of effectively expressing the final outcome to people that
do not know how to properly read an architectural drawing (plans and sections). Yet it is
extremely important in my opinion to make use of these digital tools responsibly. As a
matter of fact, nowadays is very common to lose sight of the importance of a well-made
project when trying to create the perfect visual representation. When using these means
to create a digital image, we have to think about how to deal with creativity, whether is
more important to use it during the design process or when producing digital
representation. One could easily answer that we should adopt creativity in both
processes, but I personally believe that most of the effort must go into the first one.
Going back to the projected image, I don’t believe that we should lose the ability of
creating and reading 2D drawings and images since those are able to transmit an
incredible amount of data. Yet right now, people are losing the ability to read 2D maps
and new generations will only be able to navigate through 3D models which could result
in an enormous loss in knowledge.
Then, what about the future? Will that have to deal more with the virtual world or with
the real one? By observing the trends that are developing in these years, I am afraid that
we are moving everyday towards a virtual approach to the reality; an easy example can
be made with the VR and the new features developed, such as the ability of directly
creating and building in a virtual space. It is yet worth saying that 3D modelling can be
extremely helpful when teaching: three-dimensional models of historical building can be
used to better explain and appreciate a specific author or an art movement. It is also
necessary to say that most of the Architecture Schools have no means nor devices to
switch to a more technological way of teaching and I think that some steps in this
direction should be made. After all we are in an experimental phase and everyone should
be able to experiment.
Emergent media and representation tools can be considered 3D scanning and modelling
since they can hold so much more information than a traditional drawing, but is that what
we really want? Have loads of information that maybe we cannot even understand nor
use? Or would it be better to be able to sort that information in order to create a clear
picture of our project? Our mind, since it cannot hold all the data as a computer does, is
already capable of sorting the useless information and keep only the important one. So
what about using a software that works exactly like the human mind, for example the AI.
This kind of technology could be used as a clear way of representing architectural project
without all those useless information and artifice that most of the times make the design
itself incomprehensible. Or will the AI considered useless since it will not be able to assign
meaning to different information?

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 5

Part 3. Media & Representation Method

The construction of digital images or better of computer-generated imagery (CGI) is one

of the most crucial moment in the design and communication of a project. Firstly, it allows
the architect to better deal with clients and people that are not familiar with architectural
representation; secondly it is a way to fully understand how the final project and habitat
will look like.
In my personal experience, the representation always starts from the drawing of a plan.
By doing that, it is easier to have control over the entire project without losing sight of
the importance of the internal spaces where people live. It is possible to affirm that the
way I prefer to work is moving from the inside to the outside, not vice versa. I thus find
very tricky and challenging to start my designing process from the external appearance
of the building.
Since I personally give lot of importance to 2D representations, it is essential to
understand how to deal with them. For instance, plans need to be able to communicate
features and details that in any other kind of representation is not possible to deduct.
Therefore, the drawing produced must be simple and clear, with no useless patterns that
can make the reading challenging. It is also important to differentiate the thickness and
types of lines used to represent different elements: a thicker line will be used for
sectioned walls, while a thin dashed line will be used to represents projections.
One of the main advantages in dealing with plans as a first step, consists in having a mean
of subsequently treating the facades without losing the equilibrium created in the inside.
Therefore, it is extremely important to work with modules in different sides of the project,
from the structural design to the envelope.
Yet, to the untrained eye, 2D representations does not give the idea of how the volumes
and spaces work and are comprehensible only to architects and builders. Thus, is clear
that we have to rely upon 3D images that can better explain the personal point of view
inside the project. In defining the ways of dealing with this mean of representation it is
crucial to affirm that the digital images produced must be simple and clear, the most
natural and realistic possible. Useful can be the idea of inserting silhouettes in order to
clarify the scale and dimensions of the spaces. I tend to distance myself from those kinds
of representation that are heavily adjusted and altered, which could create a fictional
overview on the project or became completely incomprehensible.
Many times the issues I encountered in the crafting of 3D images are due to the software
used; in my opinion it is essential to find a rendering tool that allows you to create a view
on your project in the quickest way possible and with the highest resolution possible,
since time is always an issue in architect’s life. I believe that nowadays few developments
have been made in this direction yet rendering technology still need some improvements.
Some good software which can be a perfect combination of time saving and good quality
are Lumion and Twinmotion. Another option could be to leave the work to the
professionals. As a matter of fact, in these last few years lots of companies have been
founded to deal with CGI only; those firms also started a new philosophy since their focus
is on turning those images into incredible works of art. If we take a look at the images
produced by two of the main leaders in this field, “Mir” and “Beauty and the Bit”, it is
possible to appreciate the extreme realism with which they treat every view and I think
this is the feature we have to tend to when dealing with architecture’s images (Picture
[1] and [2]).

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 6

[1] Internal rendering of the Anthony Timberland Center; Image

taken from www.mir.no; Author of the image Dorte Mandrup

[2] External rendering of the Le Compact; Image taken from www.beautyandthebit.com/work; Author of the
image Unknown

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 7

Part 4. Media & Representation Manifesto

What I firmly believe, and I will always promote, is to never put representation before the
actual design. It is in our duty as creators of spaces and habitats to give the project all
the attention it deserves, without losing ourselves in the sea of the unknown and useless
information and data.
My personal fear for the future is that architects will not be able to create lively and
attractive places since they will be more focused on the impression of representation
rather than on the intrinsic values of the project. Be careful: a well-represented project is
not a well-designed project! If we do not switch our attention from how it looks to how
it works, soon we will not be able to design in order to satisfy people’s needs but more
for the selfish desire to create something that will be remembered only for its
appearance. We will only create empty beautiful boxes which are useless to people. How
sad would that be!
Yet if I have to think about the future, a provoking solution to these issues comes up to
my mind: what about a new way of representing, where the computer can create a
picture of what you are thinking? Most of the times when I think about how to represent
a project, it is difficult to bring that thought into reality, I do not know how to recreate
that beautiful image that I have in my mind. Therefore, it will be extremely helpful to have
this device that, in the quickest way possible, can create a perfect image of one’s project,
without losing the quality of a well-designed building. Future or science fiction?
And again, what will be the future of architecture itself? The answer is simple: no more
empty beautiful boxes but more human habitats. To my fellow architects, design more
for people rather than for money! Run away, or better, S.K.N.E. as the brilliant Portaluppi
would have said, from those kind of sad buildings with no personality and built only in
view of a pure capitalist reasons. Do not be afraid of going against the grain and fight all
those who do not believe that architecture is meant to be a tool to provide a safe
environment for people and not a mean of speculation.

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600

 8

References

- M. Carpo, “The Second Digital Turn: Design Beyond Intelligence”, Cambridge (MA),
The MIT Press, 2017

- N. D’Souza, B. Balakrishnan, J. Dicker, “Transparency: Literal, Phenomenal, Digital”

in Proceeding of the 100th Annual Meeting of Association of Collegiate Schools of
Architecture, Boston, 2012

- S. Ings, “Future by design: will the power of AI reshape our world?”, in New
Scientist, November 2017 (https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23631530-
900-future-by-design-will-the-power-of-ai-reshape-our-world/)

- C. Farinella, L. Greco, “Dynamically Sublime, Vision and Image in Architecture. The

Relationship between 3D Graphics and Physiology of Vision in the Construction of
Rendering Images”, in Proceedings, Vol. 1 Issue 9, Roma, December 2017
(https://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/1/9/951)

- M. Gross, “Ignorance and surprise: science, society and ecological design”,

Cambridge (MA), The MIT Press, 2010

Marta Casiraghi History, Theory and Method 3 / ARK 600