Artefact 1

Evaluation

The first artefact was to demonstrate the potential of 3D walk-throughs. The artefact depicts the discussion in my Research document where I talk about 3D walk-throughs being a superior architectural method in comparison to drawn architectural designs.

My argument for that section of the document was that drawn architecture can sometimes leave clients in the position where they must “imagine” (Azza A. Arif, 2001) what the drawn structure will look like. Whereas 3D walk-throughs provide clients exploration of their desired proposition in more detail, and gives them greater information on the structure as a whole.

For this this artefact I downloaded a house, and put my own modelled furniture within it.

After the scene was finalized I had to think about the materials needed for the piece. Due to the short deadline of the presentation I couldn’t apply wood, metal or plastic materials as it would take an endless amount of time to complete. Therefore I applied ambient occlusion; this gave great detail to the piece and prevented time loss.

The next stage and most important stage was the camera angles. I needed to make sure the cameras gave off the impression that the viewer/client was walking through the house and the area outside. I think the cameras demonstrated a good walk-through cycle; the only disadvantage to this piece is that it may be a bit fast, and doesn’t allow enough time for information on the house’s layout to be absorbed.

I think the addition of the Azza A. Arif quote was a great addition to the piece. The addition of quotations should be a future reoccurring application to each individual artefact, as it will demonstrate that the artefact represents a portion of the Research document I submitted.

The feedback from my presentation was relatively positive. One of the critical feedbacks was that the camera movement was a little too fast as I expected people would say. Also Roma suggested putting some slow pan movements in there to get detailed close shots of the environment. From the questionnaire information I gathered it is clear that most people still understood it was a walk-through, which was the main objective (even without indications by me or written suggestions in the artefact itself). But overall I was pleased with this artefacts outcome and response.