Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

“Camera Eye”: Cinematic Studio Research into Architectural Practice

“Camera Eye”: Cinematic Studio Research into Architectural Practice This article deals with the process and results of an experimental research studio called “Camera Eye,” which has been conceived and executed at the Faculty of Architecture of the Delft University of Technology. This project departed from the presupposition that the relationship between architecture and film often has been construed through a very narrow window. The main issue at stake is that too often the emphasis lies on the differences between these two modes of expression. This essay elaborates on three vital errors in reasoning, each generating a number of consequences that bifurcate into the realms of philosophy, media theory, filmmaking and, ultimately, architecture itself. The first misconception is that of overrated medium specificity, which addresses media on their strengths and not on their weaknesses. Second comes the fallacy of shallowness, which prevents research looking for the real common denominators and thus remaining superficial and meaningless. The third delusion is that of the myth of representation, which contains critical flaws as it disregards the irreducibility of the complexity of reality. The description of the studio work offers some suggestions on how to reboot these misconceptions and demonstrates the effectiveness of “cinematic thinking” in architectural research. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Architecture and Culture Taylor & Francis

“Camera Eye”: Cinematic Studio Research into Architectural Practice

Architecture and Culture , Volume 3 (1): 18 – Mar 1, 2015

“Camera Eye”: Cinematic Studio Research into Architectural Practice

Architecture and Culture , Volume 3 (1): 18 – Mar 1, 2015

Abstract

This article deals with the process and results of an experimental research studio called “Camera Eye,” which has been conceived and executed at the Faculty of Architecture of the Delft University of Technology. This project departed from the presupposition that the relationship between architecture and film often has been construed through a very narrow window. The main issue at stake is that too often the emphasis lies on the differences between these two modes of expression. This essay elaborates on three vital errors in reasoning, each generating a number of consequences that bifurcate into the realms of philosophy, media theory, filmmaking and, ultimately, architecture itself. The first misconception is that of overrated medium specificity, which addresses media on their strengths and not on their weaknesses. Second comes the fallacy of shallowness, which prevents research looking for the real common denominators and thus remaining superficial and meaningless. The third delusion is that of the myth of representation, which contains critical flaws as it disregards the irreducibility of the complexity of reality. The description of the studio work offers some suggestions on how to reboot these misconceptions and demonstrates the effectiveness of “cinematic thinking” in architectural research.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/camera-eye-cinematic-studio-research-into-architectural-practice-WkGF2deeqw

References (24)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2015 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
2050-7836
eISSN
2050-7828
DOI
10.2752/205078215X14236574273709
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article deals with the process and results of an experimental research studio called “Camera Eye,” which has been conceived and executed at the Faculty of Architecture of the Delft University of Technology. This project departed from the presupposition that the relationship between architecture and film often has been construed through a very narrow window. The main issue at stake is that too often the emphasis lies on the differences between these two modes of expression. This essay elaborates on three vital errors in reasoning, each generating a number of consequences that bifurcate into the realms of philosophy, media theory, filmmaking and, ultimately, architecture itself. The first misconception is that of overrated medium specificity, which addresses media on their strengths and not on their weaknesses. Second comes the fallacy of shallowness, which prevents research looking for the real common denominators and thus remaining superficial and meaningless. The third delusion is that of the myth of representation, which contains critical flaws as it disregards the irreducibility of the complexity of reality. The description of the studio work offers some suggestions on how to reboot these misconceptions and demonstrates the effectiveness of “cinematic thinking” in architectural research.

Journal

Architecture and CultureTaylor & Francis

Published: Mar 1, 2015

Keywords: cinematic research; architectural design; modeling; philosophy; Deleuze, affect

There are no references for this article.