Landscape – Great Idea! X-LArch III - Department für Raum ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

128 The traditions of landscape scholarship and practice are so deeply ingrained that adapting to an “alternative” or “new” technology is, for some, more effort than they can imagine it is worth. Figure 4: steam plant figure ground studies, 2005. Before receiving input on their site analysis conclusions, the students were asked to return to the site to conduct a second analysis, this time with a video camera. Video captured consisted of views from multiple vantage points and an extensive collection of panoramic shots. Before leaving the site, however, the students used the video camera to capture footage of each other engaging with the various elements of the site in whimsical, even farcical ways. Figure 5: screen captures from Steam Plant, 2005. When they returned to the studio, the students were asked to edit their footage as a component of their inventory. The “serious” footage was edited into a very static and unimaginative collection of video pans, shot systematically from various points throughout the site. Students were forbidden from using any sound not natural to the environment they were documenting. In a twist of fate, a group of the same students undertook to edit their “other” footage: the images of them whimsically interacting with the remnant features of the site. When seeing these features as props, these young designers perceived the space quite differently. As their design schemes developed for the site, these features became the focus of the design proposals. Of the 23 design concepts produced for this landscape, 21 of the schemes kept the industrial remnants of the site. The other 2 schemes kept only the most visible feature: the water tower. Limitations As a medium, video can be challenging. To realize its full potential, it must be viewed in its intended format: with pictures that move and with sound that can be heard. Video also requires that it be captured manually. As an impressively large cache of still photographic data is becoming available to us online through applications such as GoogleEarth, video still needs to be captured by somebody on the ground. When it is captured, it is almost always captured from the point of view of a human eye. While this is arguably a more natural way of viewing landscapes, this limited perspective does not afford us the same sense of scale of aerial photography. The technology that is required to capture and edit video is readily available and easy to use. The greatest limitation facing the use of video as an instrument and method of landscape study is arguably little more than our mind-set. Conclusion The Great Ideas of landscape are many and varied. They span perspectives, scales, contexts and continents. Great Ideas can be reflected in, or inspired by, landscapes. By knowing the motives for understanding the Great Ideas of landscape, we can identify and adapt the most appropriate methods and means to investigate, analyze and interpret the meanings of place. We have made impressive strides in understanding place and in our ability to represent the meanings of landscape. In the past few decades, we have refined the technology and the skills that enable us to expertly map the bio-geographical conditions of the earth’s surface the world over. As our advancements have resulted in vast improvements in the way we understand the physical attributes of landscape, the technologies and advanced methods for understanding the human perspective of landscape have not been as impressive. Landscape perception has, for better or worse, focused almost entirely landscape’s visual attributes. The act of “seeing” is a good start in the process of building an understanding of the Great Ideas of landscape. Still, “seeing” is very different from “knowing.” Video is a visual medium that offers collection and presentation of other spatial attributes such as sound and motion. It provides a rich repository of spatial cues that significantly bolster the inventories that form the basis of our landscape analysis. Video is a dynamic medium. It offers expressive communication of ideas in a form that other media simply cannot.
129 Video has its limitations. It requires some adjustment in the way we think about the discipline of landscape. In a world where perspectives can be instantly altered at the tap of a touchpad, video data relies greatly on its manual capture. While the medium can incorporate a wide variety of traditional media, the unique qualities of video’s representational powers is its closer approximation of the more sentient qualities of landscape. Being closer to knowing these qualities brings us closer to being able to share in the Great Ideas of landscape. References Corner, J. (1999): Eidetic Operations in New Landscapes (ed.) Recovering Landscapes: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press: 153 - 70 Cosgrove, D. (2003): Landscape and the European Sense of Sight – Eyeing Nature (ed.) Handbook of Cultural Geography. New Delhi: Sage Publications Cosgrove, D. (1984): Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press Holdsworth, D. (1997): Landscape and Archive as Texts. In P. Groth & T. Bressi (ed.), Understanding Ordinary Landscapes. London: Yale University Press Howett, C. (1997): Where the One-Eyed Man Is King. In P. Groth & T. Bressi (ed.), Understanding Ordinary Landscapes. London: Yale University Press Lewis, P. (1979): Axioms for Reading Landscape: Some Guides to the American Scene. In D. W. Meinig (ed.), Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 11 - 32 Meinig, D. W. (1979): The Beholding Eye: Ten Versions of the Same Scene. D. Meinig (ed.), Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 33 – 48 Norton, W. (1989): Explorations in the Understanding of Landscape: A Cultural Geography. New York: Greenwood Press Riley, R. (1997): The Visible, the Visual, and the Vicarious: Questions About Vision, Landscape and Experience. In P. Groth & T. Bressi (ed.), Understanding Ordinary Landscapes. London: Yale University Press Spirn, A. W. (1998): The Language of Landscape. New Haven: Yale University Press Papers
Page 1 and 2:
University of Natural Resources and
Page 3 and 4:
Authors of the papers are fully res
Page 5:
3 Day 2 Thursday, April 30, 2009 Se
Page 8 and 9:
6 The “Landscape-Infrastructure
Page 10 and 11:
8 a) b) Fig. 2 : Study of the perme
Page 12 and 13:
10 Endnotes [1] Bernetti, Casini, M
Page 14 and 15:
12 Urban landscapes need great idea
Page 16 and 17:
14 the term “overall expression
Page 18 and 19:
16 Fig. 2: Initial overall pictures
Page 20 and 21:
18 Evaluation of Open Space Form an
Page 22 and 23:
20 Fig. 5: Other vegetation This st
Page 24 and 25:
22 Type of activity: • Exercise/p
Page 26 and 27:
24 Landscaped, Modern, or Social? T
Page 28 and 29:
26 Fig. 2: Rose and Perennial Show
Page 30 and 31:
28 Herbert Bayer’s Megastructures
Page 32 and 33:
30 a large extent the Japanese deve
Page 34 and 35:
32 A Fertile Wilderness: The CPR’
Page 36 and 37:
34 Fig.3 as their destination. The
Page 38 and 39:
36 The Method of Structuralist Land
Page 40 and 41:
38 Fig. 2: SLA implements gender eq
Page 42 and 43:
40 Landscape Evaluation Process. A
Page 44 and 45:
42 systematic application of certai
Page 46 and 47:
44 holders (as Piemonte Region, Riv
Page 48 and 49:
46 Frameworks - Preparing rural lan
Page 50 and 51:
48 The issues are organized into fa
Page 52 and 53:
50 Do Landscape Architects make the
Page 54 and 55:
52 within the larger landscape piec
Page 56 and 57:
54 Landscape as Urban Structure: th
Page 58 and 59:
56 city extension area but also in
Page 60 and 61:
58 housing neighborhoods. Construct
Page 62 and 63:
60 “massive change, required - ni
Page 64 and 65:
62 architecture’s ability to conc
Page 66 and 67:
64 cape Journal 6 (1): 4-12 Jackson
Page 68 and 69:
66 Green Idea/Grey Reality Carl Smi
Page 70 and 71:
68 argument was put forward for omi
Page 72 and 73:
70 Green Streets Potential for Down
Page 74 and 75:
72 size of rain garden through the
Page 76 and 77:
74 Climate Change asks for Sustaina
Page 78 and 79:
76 Fig. 2: Simplified example (livi
Page 80 and 81: 78 Sustainability in Park Design -
Page 82 and 83: 80 Fig 2: Integrative Design Approa
Page 84 and 85: 82 Preserving community gardens in
Page 86 and 87: 84 the City applied the military so
Page 88 and 89: 86 Endnotes [1] Anyone interested i
Page 90 and 91: 88 Urban imageability & open space
Page 92 and 93: 90 ning up degraded wetlands, plant
Page 94 and 95: 92 How to balance the multiple role
Page 96 and 97: 94 to the site. The public domain i
Page 98 and 99: 96 public spaces in the HBA, and by
Page 100 and 101: 98 Questions of scale for sustainab
Page 102 and 103: 100 Fig. 4: Nested structure of an
Page 104 and 105: 102 Fig. 8: Fragmentary planning mo
Page 106 and 107: 104 Moving Land: International Buil
Page 108 and 109: 106 Fig. 3: Concept Desert/Oasis We
Page 110 and 111: 108 Exploring a New Mode of Sustain
Page 112 and 113: 110 Serveral private sectors initia
Page 114 and 115: 112 Structuring the Concept of Land
Page 116 and 117: 114 transformation; the regulative
Page 118 and 119: 116 Anti-planning, anti-design? Exp
Page 120 and 121: 118 ate them, provided they still r
Page 122 and 123: 120 Complexity Ethos + Strategies:
Page 124 and 125: 122 cher” from a twenty-five foot
Page 126 and 127: 124 Great Ideas in Landscapes Seen
Page 128 and 129: 126 Depending on motivation, these
Page 132 and 133: 130 Landscape Insertions: Operation
Page 134 and 135: 132 Fig. 02: Llorca Stéphanie, AXY
Page 136 and 137: 134 and creative innovation that in
Page 138 and 139: 136 Significance of the post-mining
Page 140 and 141: 138 Designing the post-industrial c
Page 142 and 143: 140 Hidden landscapes - The Enclose
Page 144 and 145: 142 Fig. 3: Paley Park is an inters
Page 146 and 147: 144 House and Exterior in the archi
Page 148 and 149: 146 Fig. 4 architectonical work“
Page 150 and 151: 148 The socio-cultural role of peri
Page 152 and 153: 150 Ecological networks representat
Page 154 and 155: 152 Veneto integrated water landsca
Page 156 and 157: 154 Fig. 2: Ponte di Piave 2025 (A)
Page 158 and 159: 156 Observing the Landscape Roland
Page 160 and 161: 158 Fig. 2: signalman house and rai
Page 162 and 163: 160 Mobility and Territory Sanja Cv
Page 164 and 165: 162 Kevin Lynch’s Openness of the
Page 166 and 167: 164 Phytoremediation as an Experien
Page 168 and 169: 166 Fig. 2: Rhizotron: An undergrou
Page 170 and 171: 168
Page 172 and 173: 170
Page 174 and 175: 172
Page 176 and 177: 174
Page 178 and 179: 176
Page 180 and 181:
178
Page 184:
Many Thanks to our Supporters ILA -
show all

Landscape – Great Idea! X-LArch III - Department für Raum ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?