UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

May 19 , 2000

I, Heather Chitwood ,
hereby submit this as part of the requirements for the
degree of:

Master’s

in:

Design

It is entitled:
The Aronoff Center for Design and Art
at The University of Cincinnati:
Simulating Reality

Approved by:
Professor Dennis Puhalla, Chair
Associate Professor J. A. Chewning
Assistant Professor Marty Plumbo
 THE ARONOFF CENTER FOR DESIGN AND ART
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI:

SIMULATING REALITY

A thesis submitted to the

Division of Research and Advanced Studies

of the University of Cincinnati

In partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF DESIGN

In the School of Design

of the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning

2000

by

Heather A. Chitwood
B.S. Georgia Institute of Technology, 1995

Thesis Committee:
Professor Dennis Puhalla, Chair
Associate Professor J. A. Chewning
Assistant Professor Marty Plumbo
The Aronoff Center for Design and Art at the University of Cincinnati:
Simulating Reality

Heather A. Chitwood

(ABSTRACT)

The intention of this project is to create a virtual, 3-Dimensional environment

representative of Peter Eisenman’s Aronoff Center for Art and Design, which

houses the Colleges of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning at the University

of Cincinnati. Architectural drawings and photographs of the building cannot

describe the space of the building. Rather, they can only depict the building’s

form. A 3D model of the building would be useful in that it could convey more

depth to the viewer. The final multimedia piece will be used to introduce

prospective and new students to the building’s layout, provide a detailed

overview of the building and the theories behind its creation, and allow people

who do not live in Cincinnati to experience some aspects of the building’s form.

According to Eisenman, architecture has left the “mechanical paradigm” of

physical structure for the “electronic paradigm” of the information superhighway

and the “virtual reality headset. Virtual reality is a new possibility for reality,” he

says. “Actual places” will be supplanted by a “place of communication.”1 This

project hopes to achieve some similarities to virtual reality, or the feeling of

emotionally being somewhere while not physically being there.

1 Slatin, Peter. “Virtual Places.” ARTnews (Apr 1994): 27.

The scope of the project involves the determination of the target audience,

evaluating the communications objectives, gathering preliminary data on Peter

Eisenman and the Aronoff Center, and assessing the delivery environment. In

the case of this project, the target audience will be anyone with an interest in

Peter Eisenman’s architecture. This includes, but is not limited to, current and

prospective students in the study of architecture, as well as professors in

architecture who may never have seen the Aronoff Center in person. The target

audience will also include current and prospective students in the college of

Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning who would like to learn more about the

building. This paper presents the background information about the architect

and the building itself, and evaluates different methods of 3D-modeling and the

incorporation of that model into multimedia format.

Acknowledgments

During my four years as a graduate student in the School of Design, I have had

the opportunity to work with many wonderful people. My artistic skills have been

much enlightened, and the knowledge I have gained from working with these

people is immeasurable. These people include Leslie Blade, J. Chewning, Ann

Firestone, Tony Kowanari, Karen Monzel, Carrie Nixon, Marty Plumbo, Dennis

Puhalla, Margaret Voelker-Ferrier, and McCrystle Wood.

I am also grateful for the support of my close friends Fran Cash and Nancy

Hopkins, who were always willing to give me helpful suggestions and honest

critiques of my work.

I appreciate the support from my parents Ron and Patsy Hoenes, who always

believe in me, no matter what goals I am trying to acheive.

Finally, I am thankful for the unending support from my husband, Denny. He is

always willing to help me with my various projects, no matter what hour of the

night it is. Without his encouragement and words of motivation, I would probably

still be working on this thesis.

Table of Contents

Figure Table 3

Part I 5

Introduction 5

Peter Eisenman 5

Eisenman Buildings in Ohio 8

Theory behind the Aronoff Center for

Art and Design 10

Aronoff Center Specifications 15

Aronoff Center Wireframe Generation 17

Computer Modeling 25

Granting the University’s Wishes 26

Pastel Color Scheme 27

Poor Choice of Materials and

“Value Engineering” 28

Part II 31

Thesis Design Process 31

Kinetic 3D Studio MAX 31

AutoCAD Release 14 33

Maxon Cinema 4D 34

Visualization 35

1
 Modeling the Aronoff Center in

3D Studio MAX 37

Multimedia Presentation 38

Building History 43

Peter Eisenman — Other Buildings 44

Part III 46

Conclusion 46

CD-ROM Installation Guide 47

Bibliography 48

2
Figure Table

Figure 1: Peter Eisenman 5

Figure 2: House of Cards I 6

Figure 3: House of Cards II 6

Figure 4: House of Cards III 6

Figure 5: IBA Social Housing 6

Figure 6: DNA Helix 7

Figure 7: The Wexner Center 8

Figure 8: The Columbus Convention Center 9

Figure 9: The Aronoff Center for Design and Art 10

Figure 10: The Eisenman “L” 13

Figure 11: The Aronoff Center for Design and Art 14

Figure 12: The Engineering Research Center 15

Figure 13: Aronoff Center Auditorium 16

Figure 14: Cafeteria from Above 16

Figure 15: “Box Geometry” forming segmented line 19

Figure 16: “Box Geometry” transformed to curved line 19

Figure 17: Phase Shift Plan 20

Figure 18: Phase Shift Section 20

Figure 19: Torqued solid / Torqued Trace Series, Plan 20

Figure 20: Torqued solid / Torqued Trace Series, Section 21

Figure 21: Stepping — Functional Notation 21

Figure 22: Box Geometry 21

3
Figure 23: Atrium Overlap Plan 22

Figure 24: Atrium Overlap Section 22

Figure 25: Existing Building Outline 23

Figure 26: Existing Building with Chevron 23

Figure 27: Composite Box Geometry / Existing Building Traces 24

Figure 28: Incorporation of Columns 25

Figure 29: North side of Aronoff Center buried in the hill 27

Figure 30: Internal Signage 27

Figure 31: Pastel Color Scheme 28

Figure 32: Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center 32

Figure 33: Aronoff Center Entrance modeled in 3D Studio MAX 38

Figure 34: Initial Layout in Director 39

Figure 35: Revised Layout in Director 40

Figure 36: 3D Map Rotation Sequence 41

Figure 37: Final Layout in Director 42

Figure 38: Individual Movie Screen in Director 43

Figure 39: Building History Screen in Director 44

Figure 40: Peter Eisenman Screen in Director 45

4
Part I

Introduction

The intention of this project is to create a multimedia piece that will be

representative of Peter Eisenman’s Aronoff Center for Art and Design. This

paper is not intended to convey the building’s form to the user — it cannot. The

Aronoff Center is vastly different from other forms of architecture. In some

cases, one must see it to believe it. Therefore, the user must examine the final

piece, distributed on the accompanying CD-ROM, in order to understand the full

scope of this project.

With the accompanying CD-ROM the Aronoff Center can be seen in all its three-

dimensional glory, and studied by current and prospective students at the

College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning at the University of Cincinnati,

or even allow people who do not live in Cincinnati to experience the

overwhelming aspects of the building’s form.

Peter Eisenman

Peter Eisenman was born on August 11, 1932 in

Newark, New Jersey. He received a Bachelor of

Architecture Degree from Cornell University (1955), a

Master of Architecture Degree from Columbia

University (1960), M.A. (1962) and Ph.D. (1963)

degrees from Cambridge University, and an honorary Figure 1

Peter Eisenman

5
 Doctor of Fine Arts Degree from the University of Illinois Chicago (1986).

Early in his career, Eisenman’s work entailed the elaboration of an autonomous,

self-referential architectural language that defied the particularities of site, not to

mention the conveniences of daily life. Undeterred by conventions, history, and

commonplaces about how people live, he labored to achieve a pure,

uncontaminated architecture that would transcend the real. His Cardboard

House Series involved mathematical and geometrical sequences, and even

though most of them remain unbuilt, he still regards them as architecture. In

1978, he followed up with the Cannaregio Project for Venice. In this project,

colors symbolized things (gold for the mysticism of the alchemist, red for the

martyrdom of Giordano Bruno), and a grid of Le Corbusier’s unbuilt hospital

design was superimposed on the irregular contours of Venice’s streets. Two

years later, a different project incorporated another set of imaginary lines — the

Mercator grid, 18th-Century walls, and 19th-Century urban demarcations —

which were divided and overlaid upon one another in order to generate an IBA

Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5

House of Cards I House of Cards II House of Cards III IBA Social Housing

6
housing project for a Friedrichstrasse location adjacent to the Berlin Wall.2

Although his reputation as an “architectural impresario” was at its peak, he

suffered the taunts of those who accused him of engaging in the construction of

“paper architecture”. In 1980, after many years of teaching and writing, he

decided to focus his efforts on building, and as he said “to get dirty and

practice.”

Although many critics view Eisenman’s work as an expression of the theory

known as Deconstruction, Eisenman himself has said that he is not a

Deconstructivist. It is important to note that the project for the Aronoff Center

was produced in 1986, two years before Deconstructivist Architecture took place

in MOMA.3 Destabilizing, decentering, deconstructing, or displacing traditional

hierarchies or repressive conditions came to mean, in Eisenman’s designs,

recovering things such as preexisting but subsequently lost land divisions, or

abstract divisions such as the Mercator grid.4 As sources for

his designs, Eisenman includes archaeological excavations,

mathematical models such as fractals and the “Boolean cube”,

chemical compounds such as DNA, and the Moebius strip.

The Aronoff Center for Design and Art, Eisenman suggests, is

like ‘the plates of an armadillo’ or ‘the segments of an airport

Figure 6
DNA helix
baggage carousel’.

2 “Eisenman’s Bogus avant-garde.” Progressive Architecture (Nov 1994): 70.

3 Zaera, Alejandro. “Eisenman’s Machine of Infinite Resistance.” El Croquis (1997): 57.
4 “Eisenman’s Bogus avant-garde.” Progressive Architecture (Nov 1994): 70.

7
Eisenman Buildings in Ohio

Ohio has been the location for three of Eisenman’s recent projects, each with a

different look and feel. The Wexner Center is a combination of brick, glass and

steel, consisting of diagonal lines and towers that remind the viewer of

traditional buildings. At 580,000 square feet,

the 2-story center, completed in 1989, was

Eisenman’s largest creation to date. The

Center was surrounded by controversy when it

first opened, and although this controversy had

to do not with the building’s architectural

originality, which is undisputed, some critics

argued that the center did not serve well in its

Figure 7
functional capacity.5 The Wexner Center

Fortunately, the good parts stand front and center. Eisenman based his design

on the 12.5-degree shift in the street grid from city to campus, and slipped the

new building in between two older ones. The slashing, gridded structure, made

of white-painted steel that he deployed to dramatize his in-between building is

splendid and can be called one of modern architecture’s great pathways.

However, the building’s flaws are out in front as well. Eisenman decided to block

the main campus axis, which leads directly and dramatically to the library

5 Henderson, Justin. “Unconventional Wisdom: Peter Eisenman reinvents the convention center.” Interiors
(June 1993): 82-85.

8
building. Critics called this a terrible mistake, which he compounded by blocking

the view with a “whimpering little amphitheater” that already is falling apart. On

top of that, he added “not doors” and a dozen or so of his patented leftover

spaces.6 According to Eisenman, “People either love the building, or they hate

it, but what I love is that they are concerned.”

The Columbus Convention

Center is a big box broken

up with an assortment of

abstract forms. The design is

said to be at once strangely

familiar and quite unfamiliar.

It is simultaneously
Figure 8
The Columbus Convention Center
suggestive of the rail yards

that once occupied the site, nearby highway ribbons, and overlays of delicate

fiber optic cables that represent the information age.7 In an interview, Peter

Eisenman admits that the original structure of the building had to be modified

because the tipped grids made people dizzy. They could not retain their balance

and would lose orientation. He believes this was because people were used to

orienting themselves in Cartesian geometry.8

Finally, the Aronoff Center in Cincinnati, can be seen as a lively concoction that

6 Forgey, Benjamin. “Hype and Pretense.” The Washington Post (October 7, 1996): G1, G7.
7 “Columbus Convention Center.” El Croquis (1997): 80-87.
8 Zaera-Polo, Alejandro. “A Conversation with Peter Eisenman.” El Croquis (1997): 14.

9
 appears - both outside and inside - to be

tumbling merrily down a hill.9 Eisenman

admits that this building opposes longer

resistance to absorption than the Wexner

Center or the Columbus Convention

Center: Figure 9
The Aronoff Center for Design and Art

Walter Benjamin has said that people viewed architecture in a

state of distraction, as opposed to painting. We look at painting
because it is framed and placed on a wall in a museum.
Architecture is always in one sense framed by a ground, and this
framing we look at as if it were habit. The Aronoff Center in
Cincinnati, on the other hand, requires you to pay attention. You
have to struggle not to pay attention. It causes one to pay
attention without simultaneously grounding you.10

Theory behind the Aronoff Center for Art and Design

Peter Eisenman is committed to an architecture which emphasizes meaning

over form and broadens his expressive features. He feels that architecture is no

longer just about aesthetics, but also about economics, politics, and history. In

the early 1980s, he began to incorporate memory and history into his designs,

and took a stand against rationality, clarity, and purity in architectural form.

Eisenman wants his buildings to be narratives. With the design of the Aronoff

Center of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning, Eisenman replaces the

narrational emphasis with an intent to realize architecture as a spatial creation.

These buildings treat space as their ultimate meaning, to be grasped intuitively,

9 Forgey, Benjamin. “Hype and Pretense.” The Washington Post (October 7, 1996): G1, G7.
10 Zaera-Polo, Alejandro. “A Conversation with Peter Eisenman.” El Croquis (1997): 20.

10
 not intellectually. Eisenman has begun to link architectural design to fiction and

poetics, aiming to create buildings which are self-referential and not merely an

end to a predetermined theoretical cause.11 For Eisenman, theory is like a

machine that automatically produces art when it is followed through

systematically. The work he does is idea-let, and thus, there is always the

transformation of certain concepts that provide consistency and drama. Because

he also incorporates scientific devices, there is a raw relation to truth outside the

human condition.12

Peter Eisenman is acutely aware of the importance of theory in generating

critical interest in his buildings:

I don’t think you can practice signature, authentic, or singular

architecture without some theoretical base. But it has lost its
underlying ideology. It’s no longer driven by the need to change
people or society. One has to distinguish between theory and
ideology. While the underpinnings of my work used to be
ideological, I don’t think that they need to be any longer. Yet they
are not purely pragmatic. Pragmatics is a form of theory. I cannot
have a theory that does not impinge on the history of architecture.

I have been trying to build into my later projects the question of

uncertainty, of where or what defines what. Cincinnati [the
University of Cincinnati’s Aronoff Center for Design and Art] is a
very good example. It’s what I call interstitial space. There are two
definitions of interstitial. If you take a balloon filled with air and you
pop it, the air just escapes. There is inside, outside, and the
balloon in between. Now let’s fill the balloon with water. If you push
on it with your hand, it takes on a different form. The hand presses
in and the water presses out: The inside pressures the outside at
the same time that the outside pressures the inside. Conceptually,
this is what we’re trying to do. It doesn’t have to do with

11 Morgenthaler, Hans. “Peter Eisenman’s Realist Architecture.”

http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/eisenman/morgen.html (Accessed: 2/21/1999).
12 Jencks, Charles. The Architecture of the Jumping Universe. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995.

11
 conceptualizing the metaphysical environment from the body and
that which surrounds it. Instead, the body and its surroundings -
the container and the contained - interact. Take the example of the
sand in the hourglass. It’s calibrated to contain the sand so that if
you turn it upside down, the sand will define time because it’s
constrained by something outside of itself. This is the traditional
architectural condition. But if you take the sand in your hand,
unconstrained, and let it drop out, it will pile up. As it piles up, you
cannot predict where the piling will suddenly shift because it won’t
be able to sustain itself and it will collapse. That’s what I call an
internal time. And it’s a time that allows for unformed material to
begin to take form. I work between the water in the balloon and
the sand that is forming itself.

Now add program.

One of the constraints of architecture is how you deal with its

metaphysics - time, space, presence, absence - which is what
architecture is about. At the same time, architecture must satisfy
function. But if it merely satisfies function, it’s not going to do
anything. It’s easy to do a house because you can satisfy the
function in any number of shapes and forms and still do other
things, the same with a museum. But when you get to concert
halls, football stadiums, and the like, you are dealing with a very
defined program. These functional containers are givens. But they
aren’t the balloon. They’re the water, the inside. We’re going to
create the balloon that takes pressure from a symmetrical stadium
or concert hall, as well as from the context of the environment. We
are trying to say, “How do you make something that acts as a
football stadium or a concert hall, but doesn’t symbolize its
function?” That is, it doesn’t look like a football stadium or a
concert hall, but like something that has emerged, like the sand
pile, of its own will, from the context.”13

Eisenman never questions the fundamental tenets of traditional Western

geometry, but rather forces those tenets to submit to the destabilizing pressure

of time. Even the most regular, immutable structurally stable form - like a square

or cube - if allowed to move against itself in time, that is, not only in relation to

13 Eisenman, Peter. “The Peter Principles.” Interview by Architecture (Nov 1998). Architecture, 87 (Nov
1998): 87-93.

12
 the regular grid from which it was born (through excision or extrusion) but in

relation to any earlier position, any segment of its own duration will begin to emit

qualities entirely irreducible to static geometry. All of Eisenman’s early or

“classical” work consisted of variations on this single operation: the mobilization

of the static points of traditional geometry and their transformation into

oscillators. This meant that every form came accompanied by an “associated

space” - one that was never fully the isotropic space of the rational grid, but

“singular,” particular only to itself, one that described the double beat of a

specific, two-step oscillation. The famous Eisenman “L” describes the steady

state, or interval, of one such oscillation: shift any point on a square to a

different point on both the x and y axes -

and, if the shift is less than the metric of

the original square, two Ls will always be

produced in inverted, reciprocal, and

oscillatory relation to one another.14 Figure 10

Eisenman “L”

Peter Eisenman’s buildings are known for their slicing diagonals, tilting forms,

and complex floor plans. All convention is ignored, and the buildings may be

both exciting and frustrating at the same time. “Eisenman’s buildings are rare,

and every one of them is something of an event,” wrote Paul Goldberger in The

New York Times in 1996 on the occasion of the opening of Eisenman’s Aronoff

Center for Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning at the University of Cincinnati.

14 Kwinter, Sanford. “The Genius of Matter: Eisenman’s Cincinnati Project.” Peter Eisenman and Frank
Gehry (July 6, 1991): 8-9.

13
Many people, when they first confront

the Aronoff Building will quip that it is

amazing that the architect gets such

things built. Few of them will realize that

they have said something important.15

Even though the Aronoff Center occupies

an unpromising site, on top of a parking

garage and shoved between two other

buildings, Peter Eisenman is still able to

push the boundaries, creating spaces

Figure 11
that are bewildering and exhilarating. The Aronoff Center for Design and Art

According to Eisenman:

Developed from within the place itself - the site, the existing
building, and the spirit of the college - the work was to find the
building in the site. Its vocabulary comes from the curves of the
land forms and the chevron forms of the existing building setting
up a dynamic relationship to organize the space between the two.
We worked together with the students, faculty, administrators, and
friends of the College so that the building was not a monument to
architecture, but rather an evolutionary process of work which
everyone can say “was created by us.”

The project is going to challenge and change the mode by which

the College educates students. We can no longer train people to
design the superficial and the inconsequential. Design disciplines
have a far more important role in our age of information that is
dominated by media, than ever before.

Therefore, we need to rethink, for a unique college, what it is they

do, how they do it, and why they do it. This means that we had to

15 Kipnis, Jeffrey. “P-Tr’s Progress.” El Croquis (1997): 36.

14
 rethink what a building has to be to house such activity. The
building is to be a model for this kind of leadership. The building
should express an attitude about society and about design’s role in
the society, and how the College will meet that challenge.”16

Aronoff Center Specifications

The DAAP building was commissioned

and built as part of the University of

Cincinnati’s master plan, developed in

1989. The master plan is to add more than

one million square feet of new academic

and research space to the university’s

campus. Eisenman’s building has since

been joined by Michael Graves’, Henry

Cobb’s, David Childs’ and Frank Gehry’s

buildings and will soon be joined by an Figure 12

The Engineering Research Center
Michael Graves
additional structure designed by signature

architect Robert Venturi.

The $35 million Aronoff Center for Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning

opened in October, 1996. The structure includes a 350-seat, multipurpose

theater suitable for lectures, performances, film and video presentations; 91,000

square feet of studio, lab, and office space; a 5,100 square foot exhibition

16 Eisenman, Peter. “Project Descriptions and Gallery: Aronoff Center for Design and Art, Cincinnati, Ohio
(1988-1996).” http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/eisenman/projects.html (Accessed: 5/18/2000).

15
 gallery; and a main library with 80,000

volumes.17 The building also incorporates

145,000 square feet of existing facilities

into its design. The Aronoff Center “is a

very intriguing building,” notes Jay

Chatterjee, Dean of the College. “The

space is always expanding and contracting, Figure 13

Aronoff Center Auditorium
always presenting a changing aspect as

you look from one area to another, making the mere act of walking down the

hall into a thoroughly engaging experience... I think that anyone who is at all

sensitive to architecture will exult in the sheer exuberance of expression in this

building.”

Eisenman’s exploratory, anti-orthodox approach

has transformed the usually marginal areas of a

university building - stairways, cafeteria, pockets

of areas where students can loiter, relax and

converse - into the emphatic focus of the

Figure 14
building. Classrooms and lab areas are aligned Cafeteria from Above

off the main pathway of the gradually inclining stairway that loops through the

building to the right of the main entrances. The center’s eleven separate

entrances may appear confusing, but they are actually highly accommodating of

17 Weathersby, William, Jr. “New Building by Peter Eisenman Kicks off Major Expansion at University of
Cincinnati.” http://www.etecnyc.net/etecw3/archt/arch19.htm (Accessed: 2/21/1999).

16
 the students, who arrive from every conceivable direction for class. Some levels

do not lead directly to the next; in a structure with so few right angles any

attempt to orient oneself as a conventional university building is futile. Although

all the classrooms are ordered off the central walkways, much of the circulation

in the building feels random.18

“Any space created for a school of design should somehow reflect the activity

carried out in the building,” Eisenman adds. “It would seem to me that design

instruction always involves innovation and risk, as well as history and process -

in other words, all the issues that are involved in the disciplines to which the

school is devoted. For the students, living with, and working in, this building

ought to be an education in itself.”

Aronoff Center Wireframe Generation

The Cincinnati project can be said to comprise two formal series. The first is an

angular, contrapuntal, “digital”, a disposition of rigid elements in deliberate,

regular variation (a linear definition of the exiting structures). The second series

is almost randomly undulant, anexact (vague but rigorous), continuous, multiple,

and “soft.” Eisenman adopted the geological paradigm of plate tectonics,

sedimentation, and a soft structure in order to weaken the rigid structure of the

earlier form.19

18 Murphy, Jan. Metropolis (August/September 1998): 81.

19 Kwinter, Sanford. “The Genius of Matter: Eisenman’s Cincinnati Project.” Peter Eisenman and Frank
Gehry (July 6, 1991): 8-9.

17
 The idea of self-similarity, a process analogous to symmetry-breaking in

science, was part of the theory behind the Aronoff building. In science, the

process of symmetry-breaking explains observed complexity within a nonlinear

system that is described mathematically by simple laws. For example, friction

and air resistance must be disregarded as experimental nuisances in order to

reach the essence of the science of mechanics. The physicist is often faced with

understanding outcomes that are separated from the underlying “simple” laws of

physics by a long sequence of hidden symmetry breaking. These include the

idea that space can be curved, that mass is not constant, and that the relative

position of the body effects the measurement of the space between the object

and body.20

Likewise, in relation to the Aronoff building, self-similarity is a process of

repetition that produces an asymmetry. It suggests a recurring pattern inside a

pattern with a formal relation of one to the other. Thus, it sets up a duality

between the original form and the copy or trace of that original form. The

original and the trace are then superimposed to create a third form that

incorporates them both. This notion is applied to the design process in order to

produce a level of complexity that allows the distinction between the old and the

new buildings to become blurred.21

In the beginning of the design process, a series of three-dimensional rectangles,

20 Barry, Donna. “Connecting the Dots: The Dimensions of a Wireframe.” Eleven Authors in Search of a
Building. New York: The Monacelli Press, Inc., 1996: 48-59.
21 Ibid.

18
which provided the basis for what

came to be known as “box

geometry,” were placed side to

Figure 15
“Box Geometry” forming segmented line
side to form a segmented line

(Figure 15). This line was then

transformed into a curved line in

order to contrast with the hard Figure 16

“Box Geometry” transformed to curved line
rectilinear edge of the three

existing buildings on the site (Figure 16). In one of the two moves to transform

the segmented line into a curve, the box geometry was overlapped horizontally

based on a logarithmic function. In order to maintain the nonlinear nature of the

relationship between the boxes, the algorithm that produced this logarithmic

function was developed so that no overlap would be sequentially repeated.22

The algorithm that was derived simultaneously with the overlap introduced a tilt

or twist to each box in the x-y axis. This was the second move made to

accomplish the curve. The exponent and phase of the plan tilts do not

correspond to the exponent and phase of the overlaps, thus reinforcing the idea

that nothing in the lines is constant or predictable. The resulting conditions are

neither regular nor random, but merely an index to be marked in space.23

The original geometric phase is shifted twice along the x-axis in order to

produce a series of three phases, one for each functional level of the building
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.

19
(levels 400, 500, and 600). Each

phase maintains the form of the

original x-y twist (Figure 17).

Figure 17
Phase Shift Plan
However, the torque applied to

each box of each phase varies at

A6 600 level
each level, so that there is no one-
A5 500 level
to-one relationship possible in

section (Figure 18). The uppermost A4 400 level

600 level has the most extreme

Figure 18
Phase Shift Section
torque, while the lower 400 level

has the least torque.

This series of phases (torqued

solid series) is shifted and copied

along the x-y axis (Figure 19) and

dropped in elevation (Figure 20) as

Figure 19
a complete series. This lowering Torqued solid / Torqued Trace Series, Plan

in the z plane blurs the section, while the shift in the y plane blurs the plan. This

series of phases traced over the torqued solid series is referred to as the

torqued trace series. The original phase is then copied to form a self-similar

series, which is then copied to form a self-similar trace. The two series create

an overlapped figure that became the atrium space of the building.24

24 Ibid.

20
The stepping phase was

introduced into the diagram in

order to provide both the 600 level

500 level
formal and functional notation
400 level
required for the stepping

contours of the site. The Figure 20

Torqued solid / Torqued Trace Series, Section
diagrams could not merely be

placed level on the site. The east

edge of the site became the 200,

or mechanical, level of the

building, while the west edge

Figure 21
climbs to an elevation referred to Stepping - Functional Notation

as the 600 level. Each of the

boxes steps consecutively in

elevation, and is vertical without a

torque along the z-axis. This

distinguishes the stepping boxes Figure 22

Box Geometry

from the torquing boxes, so that one can be read against the other. Finally, the

two series are shifting in order to provide the notation for stepping “on and up”

the slope while providing the double, or trace, that steps into and out of the

same slope. This combination of the torquing and stepping series of phases

forms the portion of the diagram known as the box geometry.25

25 Ibid.

21
The superposition of the solid form

with the trace form creates the third

element. This is a negative space

produced from the overlapped

condition. Beginning as an exterior

Figure 23
element at the east, 200-level Atrium Overlap Plan

garage, College Hall ascends

through a series of platforms

to the 400-level entry plaza 600 level

and forms the main interior, or 500 level

400 level
central space. The negative

space continues to rise Figure 24

Atrium Overlap Section
through another series of

platforms, programmed as critique area, to the 500 level. At the entry to the

library in the west segment, the negative space rises again to the 600 level and

exits to the west.26

The Aronoff Center is the fourth addition to an existing group of buildings: the

original Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning (DAAP) building, the Alms

building, and the Wolfson building. Each building is articulated around a stair

tower, which allows them to have independent floor to floor heights, with the 500

level in the Aronoff being the only common elevation. The L-shape of the eight-

26 Ibid.

22
foot-wide corridor in the original

DAAP building can be described as

a chevron. These dimensions were

used to extend a similar figure

across the site and into the two

ALMS DAAP WOLFSON
other existing buildings, which Figure 25
Existing Building Outline
became one of the devices that

connected the existing buildings with the new one.27

The outline of the three buildings

and their structure, along with the

extended chevron figure, forms a

composite figure. This figure is

shifted to make the chevron

orthogonal to the north edge of each

existing building. The northernmost

Figure 26
Existing Building with Chevron
chevron is aligned with the Alms

building, and is referred to as the Alms trace. The southernmost chevron is

aligned with the Wolfson building, and referred to as the Wolfson trace. Then,

the composite of these traces is coupled with the plan of the original existing

buildings to create a blur between the original and the trace. This makes it

difficult to distinguish the existing buildings from the new construction.28

27 Ibid.
28 Ibid.

23
The combination of the existing

building traces and the box

geometry forms the overall

diagram for the Eisenman project.

The chevron figures of the traces

displace portions of the boxes that

lie within particular chevron

zones, defined as the space

between two chevron figures. Figure 27

Composite Box Geometry / Existing Building Traces

The portion of a box edge that passes through any chevron remains in its

original location, while the portion a box edge between two chevrons shifts

parallel to itself along the y-axis. The boxes of each phase are then connected

at the overlap. This connection can be seen as an interlock. Because these

blocks are immobile, their movement can only be implied. The leading edge of a

trace is produced by overlapping the previous box edge, which obscures the

interlock while creating the illusion of movement. In the transverse section, the

boxes are joined by an extension.29

The structural grid of the building is organized by the 500-level torqued solid

phase of boxes. The rectilinear column grid moves through the space

independent of the form of that space. The walls pass in and out of the

columns, as well as through them. These columns are vertical on one side and

29 Ibid.

24
slope with the profile of the building’s geometry on

the other and thus, are read against the round

columns that are a part of the trace of the existing

building. Not all columns are necessarily structural,

but are rather incorporated in order to integrate

structural members into the box geometry.30

Computer Modeling

When a building reaches the level of complexity of

Figure 28
the Aronoff Center, the architect is compelled to Incorporation of Columns

invent methods and technologies with which to illustrate and build in an industry

and system where “standard practice” is a dictum. At the same time, the

architect cannot violate the fundamental rules of construction.31 Because the

structural design of the building presented special engineering challenges, the

architects had to “toss away all conventional wisdom and try to visualize the

building as a shape. Computer modeling was indispensable,” says Tim

Raberding, president of Progressive Engineering, the engineering business unit

of Lorenz & Williams, Dayton, Ohio.

“We had to develop the geometry of the building on our computer in three

dimensions using xyz coordinates because of the shape of the building,”

Raberding says. “The modeling helped everyone involved visualize the project

30 Ibid.
31 Ibid.

25
during both design and construction. We made the modeling available to the

contractors to help them plan their layouts of the building.”32

In an interview with Peter Eisenman, he states that his work is ultimately about

conceptualizing other methods. “That is what I started working with computers,

because all we can do as humans is to draw axes and places. The computer

conceptualizes and draws differently. I rely more and more on computers

because through them we can produce things we could never produce twenty

years ago. For example, morphing is a vectoral operation. An axis is a neutral

vector that has no direction, magnitude, or intensity. A vector has direction,

magnitude and intensity. It confronts form and space differently from an axis.

Computers can analyze vectors in a way that a human could not”.33

Granting the University’s Wishes

There were a few aspects in Eisenman’s original design that unfortunately could

not be incorporated into the final building. Benjamin Forgey argues that for a

product that is supposed to stand out, the center cuts a disappointingly modest

figure. Mainly, this is due to the site. From the south side, the addition is hidden

by the three earlier buildings, and its west and north sides are half buried in the

hill. Only the narrow, east elevation is visible enough to dramatize the building’s

dynamic character.34 Due to the wishes of the University administration, the

32 “University Arts Building Presents Structural Challenge.” Civil Engineering (Nov 1996): 10.
33 Zaera-Polo, Alejandro. “A Conversation with Peter Eisenman.” El Croquis (1997): 13.
34 Forgey, Benjamin. “Hype and Pretense.” The Washington Post (October 7, 1996): G1, G7.

26
 knoll upon which the DAAP building is

sited was not reduced in height, as

Eisenman originally wished. This is

quite tragic since half the height of

Eisenman’s building is hidden behind

berms and grass mounds.35

Figure 29
North side of Aronoff Center buried in the hill
Pastel pinks, greens and blues are

used. Again, as in earlier designs, Eisenman wanted to use much bolder

colours; again, he demurred to the University’s wishes. The ridiculous bright

yellow parking kiosk was obviously erected without consultation with Eisenmen.

The internal signage throughout the building is a

debased form of Roman typography on brown plates,

and raised the question, ‘who selected it?’ (certainly not

Eisenman). These petulant thoughts are raised here

only because, given a radical design of such quality,

Figure 30
why spoil it with badly considered extras?36 Internal signage

Pastel Color Scheme

Much has been made of the building’s pastel color scheme, but Eisenman says

the colors are “not used as colors”, per se. They are coding. They are a Braille

for people who are not architecturally sensitive. Most people aren’t. So we

35 Zardini, Mirko. “How to Judge Peter Eisenman? (The Aronoff Center at the University of Cincinnati).”
Any 21 (January 1998): 27-31.
36 Ibid.

27
created a system of notation, so that

people will ask, ‘What about those

colors?’

You can read the whole system of how

the building was designed by knowing

that pink represents ‘step blocks’, green

is ‘torque’ and blue is the ‘chevrons.’”

These are the ways Eisenman ordered

Figure 31
the computer to manipulate the spaces Pastel Color Scheme

— to step them up and down, to “torque’ or rotate them. The chevrons represent

the angle between two of the older buildings that Aronoff is meant to tie

together, the Alms Building and the DAAP Building.37

Poor Choice of Materials and “Value Engineering”

Perhaps the most often discussed aspects of the Aronoff Center besides the

choice of colors, are the poor choice of materials used. Although the shell of the

building looks grand and fantastic, it is a lightweight construction of synthetic

Stucco and gypsum wall.38 This synthetic stucco is considered the architectureal

equivalent to food coloring and gruel. Non-tectonic and void of any intrinsic

qualities, this faux-material and others like it are often chosen today for large,

37 Foreman, B.J. “DAAP: In Your Face.” The Cincinnati Post (October 8, 1996): 1D, 3D.
38 Murphy, Jan. Metropolis (August/September 1998): 81.

28
difficult forms because they are inexpensive, highly plastic, and easy to use. As

such, they are typically found in the construction of pseudo-historical buildings,

theme parks and miniature golf courses. The finishing matierial for the exterior

was originally a far more convincing Italian tile.39

Eisenman has emphasized that “there are not precious materials anywhere in

the building.” Although the gypsum wallboard in the interior and the façade’s

synthetic stucco were inexpensive and afforded flexibility of design, they are

also easily damaged - which is a problem, considering the vagaries of university

maintenance budgets. After less than two years of occupancy, the Aronoff

Center looks worn, scuffed and bruised. Dents in the walls can be repainted,

and indoor-outdoor vinyl industrial carpeting replaced, but the center requires

more constant vigilance and care than a university of some 35,000 students can

bestow on one of many buildings on a 212-acre campus. As one faculty

member puts it, “There is a general consensus that the building didn’t deliver

what we hoped for. We had hoped for something better, better materials.”40

Udo Greinacher, an assistant professor of architecture questioned “whether we

can inhabit the building. There is a neatness policy here based on the fragile

building... I’m worried that the “hands-off” attitude isn’t going to promote good

citizens. I have to say ‘Don’t do this’ and ‘Don’t do that.’ I feel like a parent.”

Gerald Michaud, a professor of Industrial Design, says the center has

39 Kipnis, Jeffrey. “P-Tr’s Progress.” El Croquis (1997): 46.

40 Murphy, Jan. Metropolis (August/September 1998): 81.

29
“outstanding details.” It’s a building that will be a joy to walk in over time, [but]

we don’t have great maintenance budgets around here. Corners can’t be

protected, for example. If maintenance is able to keep up with it, there will be no

difficulty.”41

Most of these problems could have been avoided if it wasn’t for “value

engineering”, a term that generally means cost-cutting and is a sore point with

Peter Eisenman:

“You know what value engineering is? It’s people who don’t understand, saying

the culture and art and all the things that are important to the well-being of a

society don’t matter...as long as we get enough lights and enough square

footage, enough place for storage, it doesn’t matter about art. And that’s what

value engineering took out of this building — a lot!”

“It’s something that happens two-thirds through the construction of public

buildings,” he says, “but, listen, we can’t complain. You try for a lot and you get

somewhat less than a lot, but we got a lot for our money.”42

41 Ibid.
42 Foreman, B.J. “DAAP: In Your Face.” The Cincinnati Post (October 8, 1996): 1D, 3D.

30
Part II

Thesis Design Process

By using computer graphics, one can examine every aspect of a design before

the item actually goes to market. In the scope of this project, computer graphics

will be employed to allow the visitor to stroll through a three-dimensional space.

The design of the building already exists in actuality. The goal of this project is

to convey the same sense of the building’s form using a digital format.

The first stage of the design project is almost always conceptual. The designer

must assess the situation thoroughly before committing to a single idea. The

designer must brainstorm and come up with numerous options from various

directions while investigating their validity.43 In the case of this project, it is

important to understand which computer program is the best to use in the

creation of the building model. Several 3D software packages have been

considered, including 3D MAX, AutoCAD, and Maxon’s Cinema 4D.

Kinetix 3D Studio MAX

3D Studio MAX has been used successfully by many architecture firms in the

design of their buildings. With this program, the designer is able to produce

high-resolution still renderings, animated fly-bys, lighting studies, and VRML

output for 3D walkthroughs on the Web.

43 Bartlett, Brandon. 3D Studio: Architectural Rendering. Indianapolis: New Riders Publishing, 1996.

31
Most architects begin with models generated in AutoCAD(r) R14 and then bring

them into 3D Studio MAX. However, the use of 3D Studio MAX alone is a logical

choice when high precision is not required. Mark Thompson, CAD manager with

Haysom Spender Architects, notes, “Models are exceptionally realistic because

3D Studio VIZ offers a flexible format that lets me place photographs and film as

the backdrop for many designs. This added realism further facilitates client

communication.”44

London-based architectural designer Zaha Hadid has a reputation for testing the

boundaries of architectural design. No matter how difficult the project at hand,

Hadid continually rises to the occasion with unique designs, often involving the

innovative use of space, light and shadow. To accomplish these feats, she relies

on Kinetix modeling and animation tools to successfully demonstrate how light,

time and space can dramatically enhance an architectural design.45

Hadid plans to use 3D Studio VIZ Release 2 in modeling her latest architectural

design challenge - the

Cincinnati Contemporary

Arts Center. Hadid

previously relied on 3D

Studio MAX to create

designs complete with 3D

Figure 32
graphics and multimedia. Cincinnati Contemporary Arts Center

44 http://www.kinetix.com (Accessed: 2/21/1999).

45 Ibid.

32
Once she discovered the capabilities of 3D Studio VIZ R2, Hadid decided to

carry her work a step further by leveraging the CAD-like tools and AutoCAD

integration in 3D Studio VIZ R2. This would allow her to still use the same

sophisticated animation and modeling tools she found useful in 3D Studio

MAX.46

Hadid summarizes, “3D Studio VIZ R2 is essential to helping us tackle complex

design problems, since its sophisticated set of tools was specifically developed

to resolve architectural design issues.”47

AutoCAD Release 14

AutoCAD is used by many architects as a 2D drafting tool. Because they have

to prepare a set of construction documents, which will be used in the

construction of buildings, bridges, and highways, CAD software is useful in that

it reduces the amount of excessive “erasing” and redrafting of the drawings.

AutoCAD Release 14 software delivers enhancements in areas that most

influence efficiency: exceptional performance, smart drawing tools, high-quality

presentation features, and time-saving reference, faster, and Internet file-sharing

capabilities. Other improvements make the software easier to learn, manage,

and customize to a user’s specific needs.

The AutoCAD Release 14 software modeling toolset makes it easy to turn

46 Ibid.
47 Ibid.

33
design ideas into drawings. Release 14 adds fast photorealistic visualization

capabilities, for example, to the Phong and Gouraud shading tools and

integrated ACIS-based solid-modeling features introduced in Release 13. Other

modeling improvements include an accelerated Zoom Extents feature, a

combined real-time pan and zoom option, and substantially fewer regenerations

than previous releases.48 In addition, drawings from AutoCAD can be brought

into Kinetix 3D Studio MAX and further updated.

Maxon Cinema 4D

Cinema 4D XL is packed with high-end modeling, animation and rendering tools

demanded by modern film and video professionals. Extended modeling

features, including NURBS, enable the user to easily create organic objects in

real time. In addition to these features, Cinema 4D has stability across all

platforms.

Cinema 4D uses adaptive anti-aliasing, authentic light refraction, authentic

reflections, depth of field, lens effects, and volumetric effects to generate

images that are photorealistic. In addition, it can output QuickTime VR

panoramas and animation. It incorporates an expandable material library with a

choice of projection types including spherical, cylindrical, uv-mapping, and

displacement mapping. An unlimited number of objects, cameras, light sources,

and animation tracks and effects per object can exist in a single project.

48 http://www.autocad.com (Accessed: 2/21/1999).

34
Visualization

Visualization is not a new concept. It can be traced back to the first time anyone

ever graphically described a concept, thought, or design. However, in the world

today, there are new tools with which architects can explore and express their

designs. The designer’s tools for visualization have been limited to hand

sketches and scale models for thousands of years. Today, tools such as

photorealistic renderings, walkthroughs, and dynamics sections are available

and bring with them visualization opportunities that were only dreamed of a few

years ago.49 In this project, 3D Studio MAX will be used in order to take full

advantage of these new advances in technology.

After evaluating the software packages available to me, 3D Studio MAX

appeared to be the most logical choice. Being familiar with the software, a huge

learning curve would not need to come into play. As an architectural package,

AutoCad might be extremely useful. However, having no detailed plans of the

Aronoff building, it seems an unneccessary step to build a floorplan in AutoCad

before importing it into 3D Max. As most of the surfaces of the building are not

“straight up and down” but rather “angled”, to build them up from scratch in 3D

Studio MAX appears to be the best solution.

Once the skeleton of the building is completed, the interior space must be

considered. The various pieces of furniture throughout the building must be

49 Bartlett, Brandon. 3D Studio: Architectural Rendering. Indianapolis: New Riders Publishing, 1996.

35
evaluated, and it must be determined if each piece contributes to the overall end

product. There are several problems that exist in modeling the interior of the

building. The texture maps generated for each section of the interior may not be

in the correct scale, and will therefore have to be modified. Second, it is

important that items be placed in their correct context. The person examining

the building through the computer must have a feeling that the setting is

realistic. Third, the effects of correct lighting must be considered. In reference to

the DAAP building, there are many overhead skylights. It is important that the

3D model conveys the same sense of openness as the building.

After the 3D model of the building is complete, the project must then be

transformed into a multimedia format. Director, the multimedia authoring

software created and marketed by Macromedia, will be used to transport the

viewer into the 3D environment. Macromedia Director is part of a specialized

genre: software used to create other software, and because Director can

incorporate sound as well as still and moving images, the productions created

are referred to as multimedia. On top of that, since the productions can include

a high degree of user feedback, the word interactive multimedia is often

applied.50

Director is the premiere tool for authoring in the multimedia world today. Director

produces graphic motion with the same techniques used by conventional

animators, in that it places elements on individual layers and moves them

50 Roberts, Jason. Director 6: Demystified. Berkeley: Macromedia Press, 1998.

36
through the scene one frame at a time. Although laborious at times, the end

result are objects that move in a believable fashion. Most other authoring

platforms do not use a frame-by-frame system, which might be faster, but the

finer elements of action are usually harder to control.51 Thus, Director seems to

be the ideal solution for the task at hand, which will involve many screens of

animation in order to allow the viewer to navigate through the building.

Seamless movement through the building, on the other hand, might be difficult

to accomplish. One possible way to accomplish this would be with the

incorporation of QuickTimeVR (QTVR) movies of each navigational sequence.

QTVR allows the user to render key scenes, which represent each place where

the viewer can stand and look around. These points are referred to as nodes.

However, further studies would need to be made into this form of media in order

to understand whether or not the movement between the nodes can be

extrapolated into Director.

Modeling the Aronoff Building in 3D Studio MAX

The construction of the actual 3D model has been allocated the most time, as

the structure is extremely complex in nature. By taking digital pictures of the

building’s various levels, several computer models can be constructed in 3D

space. Starting with the entrance at the third floor level, and moving up to the

grand stairway from the fourth to the fifth floor, the models are representative of

51 Ibid.

37
 the building’s open spaces.

The central element of the

internal space is a longitudinal

walkway that extends up the

sloping landscape from east to

west. It originates with an

exterior ramp leading from the Figure 33

Aronoff Center Entrance modeled in 3D Studio MAX
parking area to an above-grand

entrance, then proceeds inward, winding alongside the existing building, and

literally comprising the new addition.52 The goal of the computer models is to

give the viewer the feeling of moving through this continuous cascade of stairs

and platforms.

This was a difficult process to undertake as the models were made completely

from photographs. Nothing in the building is parallel and nothing seems to be

exactly vertical or horizontal. The shadows from the overhead lights play on the

walls and floors of the building, casting even more random elements that need

to be incorporated in the computer renderings.

Multimedia Presentation

Once the 3D modelling process was underway, the controls for the multimedia

piece could be tested and evaluated. Several different versions were made and

52 Zardini, Mirko. “How to Judge Peter Eisenman? (The Aronoff Center at the University of Cincinnati).”
Any 21 (January 1998): 27-31.

38
 critiqued by fellow students.

In the first layout (Figure 34), actual photographs of the Aronoff Center for

Design and Art were used. The initial idea was that users could “click” on

different images that would represent virtual ones. Once that image was

chosen, a movie would begin to play that was representative of that section of

the building. A map of the building was also displayed in the upper left-hand

corner so the user could know what section was currently being explored.

Figure 34
Initial Layout in Director

Some thought the use of actual photographs in the piece distracted from the

virtual images. As a lot of time and effort went into creating the virtual images, it

39
 would be unwise to confuse the user by showing the actual images on the same

screen as the virtual ones.

The size of the screen was also discussed and evaluated. In the beginning, it

was a standard 640 x 480 pixel screen. However, it was decided that most

users today have screen resolutions of at least 600 x 800 pixels. Therefore, it

was decided that a larger screen size could be used.

Figure 35
Revised Layout in Director

Different formats were evaluated in Director, with a lot of focus being placed on

how the user would know which section was being shown.

40
 Initially, the map showing the relationship of the movie to the location in the

building was a 2-D top view of the Aronoff Center. This map did not work well,

as the user only knew which part of the building he was exploring, not which

floor was being shown. This problem was solved with a 3-Dimensional

representation of the building, that rotated from top to side, keeping the user’s

current section shaded in blue (Figure 36). With this model, the user could

easily see what area was being protrayed. Once the movie began to play, an

arrow would appear, allowing the user to follow the motion of the camera path

Figure 36
3D Map Rotation Sequence
throughout each particular section of the building.

The next step was to determine how the user would interact with the various

movies, as well as determine how much background information should be

presented. Because the 3D movie renderings are the focus of the project, it was

decided that the movies should always be accessible to the user. Therefore, the

buttons which allowed the user to go to each movie section are placed along

the left-hand side of the screen. No matter which section the user is exploring,

he could always go to any one of the movie sections. In addition to always

having accessibility to the movies, smaller icons, representitive of the other

sections in the project are placed at the bottom of the screen. At any point, the

user can decide to move on to another section of the program.

41
Figure 37
Final Layout in Director

Figure 37 illustrates how the final layout was organized in Director. Once the

user begins the program, he has the option to explore the various movies, or

journey to other sections, including the history/background information on the

Aronoff Center, Peter Eisenman’s other forms of architecture, and a credit page

detailing why the program was created.

Any time the user goes to one of the movie sections by clicking the icons on the

left-hand side of the screen, a new window will appear. The small icon that was

chosen will appear in a larger format, the 3D map will rotate to let the user know

what section is being explored, and a brief explanation of that part of the

building will be shown. By clicking the “Play” command, the movie will begin. By

42
 examinining Figure 38, one can see the layout described.

Figure 38
Individual Movie Screen in Director

Building History

The icon that represents the section on “Building History” is in the form of the

Aronoff Center. To get to this section, the user clicks on the building icon, and

that portion of the program appears on the screen (Figure 39). Here, the user

can learn useful background information about the building including why the

building was built, how the architect decided about its form, and why the colors

were chosen. In this section, the user is also given the option to watch several

videos in which Peter Eisenman discusses various issues involved in the

43
Figure 39
Building History Screen in Director

building of the Aronoff Center for Design and Art. By watching these clips, the

user can learn even more about the building.

Peter Eisenman — Other Buildings

If the user wants to learn more about Peter Eisenman’s other buildings, he can

choose to explore the section on Peter Eisenman by clicking the drafting table

icon at the bottom of the screen. In this section, some background information is

given about Peter Eisenman himself, and there are links to his various other

buildings. The user can choose to learn more about the Cardboard House

Series, Cannaregio Town Square, IBA Social Housing, the Wexner Center and

44
Figure 40
Peter Eisenman Screen in Director

the Columbus Convention Center by clicking on those images at the top of the

screen. A brief paragraph about each of the different buildings allows the user to

learn more about Peter Eisenman’s architectural syle (Figure 40).

Finally, to exit the program, the user can click on the “Door” icon at the bottom

of the screen. Here, he will be asked if he is sure he wants to quit before the

program ends.

45
Part III

Conclusion

This thesis, along with the accompanying CD-ROM, has documented the

process of taking an existing building and transforming it into a 3D virtual

building, easily accessible to people not just in Cincinnati, but all over the world.

In creating the virtual building, aspects of the actual building were studied and

incorporated into the computer model. Once the models had been constructed,

they could be placed in a multimedia authoring program, which in this case is

Macromedia’s Director. Thus, the users of the program can navigate through the

space of the Aronoff Center for Design and Art from the comfort of their own

computer.

Additionally, the elements of the building’s poor use of materials could be

avoided. The users could see how the building looked during its first weeks,

rather than how it looks at the present and in the future. The use of a virtual

model allows Eisenman’s creation to remain forever preserved in an ideal

environment.

46
CD-ROM Installation Guide

In order for the program to run properly, it is necessary to create a folder on

your computer’s desktop and drag all the files from the CD-ROM to that folder.

This is extremely important. On some systems it may actually run off the CD,

but it will be extremely slow. On other systems, it may not run properly at all off

the CD.

There are two CD-ROMs — one for the Macintosh platform and one for the PC.

Be sure to use the correct CD-ROM for the platform you are using.

Once you have dragged all the information to your harddrive, run either the

program entitled DAAPpc.exe if you are running on a PC, or DAAPmac.exe if

you are running on a Mac. From there, the program should be self-explanatory.

47
Bibliography

Bartlett, Brandon. 3D Studio: Architectural Rendering. Indianapolis: New Riders

Publishing, 1996.

Davidson, Cynthia. Eleven Authors in Search of a Building. Ne York: The Monacelli

Press, Inc., 1996.

Eisenman, Peter. “The Peter Principles.” Interview by Architecture (Nov 1998).

Architecture, 87 (Nov 1998): 87-93.

“Eisenman’s Bogus avant-garde.” Progressive Architecture (Nov 1994): 70.

Foreman, B.J. “DAAP: In your face.” The Cincinnati Post (October 8, 1996): 1D, 3D.

Forgey, Benjamin. “Hype and Pretense.” The Washington Post (October 7, 1996): G1,
G7.

Henderson, Justin. “Unconventional Wisdom: Peter Eisenman reinvents the convention

center.” Interiors (June 1993): 82-85.

Jencks, Charles. The Architecture of the Jumping Universe. New York: St. Martin’s
Press, 1995.

Kwinter, Sanford. “The Genius of Matter: Eisenman’s Cincinnati Project.” Peter

Eisenman and Frank Gehry (July 6, 1991): 8-9.

Levene, Richard C. and Cecilia, Fernando Marquez. El Croquis: Peter Eisenman 1990
1997 (1997): 83.

Morgenthaler, Hans. “Peter Eisenman’s Realist Architecture.”

http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/eisenman/morgen.html (Accessed:
2/21/1999).

Murphy, Jan. Metropolis (August/September 1998): 81.

48
Roberts, Jason. Director 6: Demystified. Berkeley: Macromedia Press, 1998.

Slatin, Peter. “Virtual Places.” ARTnews (Apr 1994): 27.

“University arts building presents structural challenge.” Civil Engineering (Nov

1996):10.

Weathersby, William, Jr. “New Building by Peter Eisenman Kicks off Major Expansion
at University of Cincinnati.” http://www.etecnyc.net/etecw3/archt/arch19.htm
(Accessed: 2/21/99).

Zardini, Mirko. “How to Judge Peter Eisenman? (The Aronoff Center at the University
of Cincinnati).” Any 21 (January 1998): 27-31.

49