Stephen:
You are looking solely at the posts. Everything else which can be construed as screens are merely shadows, albeit on different surfaces.
I agree that the image can be confusing, and capable of many interpretations.
Wooden Usonian Gate ?
-
Education Professor
- Posts: 594
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:10 pm
I too was fooled by the light at the top and bottom of what I thought to be glass and what appear to be reflections of the piers on the same. Interesting that it's all open space.
I do like the room and I do like the fence but I don't like them together. I'm not an architect but I do enjoy outdoor living and outdoor spaces. I think I'd rather have an outdoor dining area in which all of the elements - overhead shelter, insect screening and privacy were more integrated into one complete design.
To me this image reads as if the house and dining area came first and then later external forces created the need for the privacy fence. Is this the case?
I do like the room and I do like the fence but I don't like them together. I'm not an architect but I do enjoy outdoor living and outdoor spaces. I think I'd rather have an outdoor dining area in which all of the elements - overhead shelter, insect screening and privacy were more integrated into one complete design.
To me this image reads as if the house and dining area came first and then later external forces created the need for the privacy fence. Is this the case?
ch
From a true designer and one that the best work is his next. Laurie is a fine architect and a fine human being. What perhaps is most important, is his unending passion for what he does. I'm fortunate to have been in his company for near a month on our 2,400 mile architectural journey. I learned a great deal about attention to detail and the proper use of materials from him and still do. And he's quite the expert on American history!I am yet to be entirely satisfied with any work with which I have been associated. The life so short, the craft so long to learn.
I suspect the reason the fence and outdoor porch room shown here are in such close proximity is due to the sighting of the remainder of the house, which we can't see. Perhaps a case where a little compromise creates big rewards elsewhere in the whole design scheme? We want to know more!
-
Laurie Virr
- Posts: 472
- Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:32 pm
Craig:
I understand, and concur, with you desires with regard to an outdoor eating area, and should you ever commission an architect to design a house with such a space, I surmise that you will be happy.
In the meantime you may care to reflect on the fact that almost all life encompasses compromise. Â Particularly is this so in fields of design, and not least in Architecture. Â There are many factors relevant to the design of a house over which the architect has little or no control. Â These can include the site, its location, climate, dimensions, orientation, and topography. Â Other factors are the budget, the availability of materials, access to skilled artisans, and the preferences and desires of the clients as expressed in their briefs. Â Local codes may also have a profound influence on the final result.
During the more than 60 years I have been involved in design and construction, 9 as a civil engineer, and 51 as an architect, I have never had a commission where the situation was perfect, in all respects, prior to its commencement. Nor do I ever expect such a one in the future. The task is to answer the client’s brief, but sometimes, no matter to what degree it has been studied and absorbed, there are conflicting requirements that only appear when the main elements of a design are close to completion. With this commission there was no such conflict.
In this instance, the lot was comparatively small and narrow in width.  The requirement was for a solar hemicycle, a long, narrow house, one room wide, facing W 10˚ N.   The distribution of the principal spaces resulted in the house stretching across the lot from easement to easement.  Given the fierceness of the Australian sun in summer, there was no desire to have an outside dining area facing north, and ‘integrated’ with the principal spaces: gratifying shade was what was called for. The porch was not a later addition to the original design. Please give me a break.
My solution to the client's briefs was such that, whereas before the house was built they were inveterate travelers, since then they have declined to be away from home, even for short periods of time.
Your comments regarding this particular screened porch, and its relationship to the fence, makes manifest for all of us the importance of not passing too hasty a judgement on a work of Architecture without first having had reference to the ground plan and, preferably, the brief. That you can determine without knowledge of the brief, and never having seen the ground plan that the screened porch is not integrated with the rest of the house beggars belief. Â Despite my years of experience, I willingly admit of my inability so to do. With an imagination like that you should be doing my job.
I understand, and concur, with you desires with regard to an outdoor eating area, and should you ever commission an architect to design a house with such a space, I surmise that you will be happy.
In the meantime you may care to reflect on the fact that almost all life encompasses compromise. Â Particularly is this so in fields of design, and not least in Architecture. Â There are many factors relevant to the design of a house over which the architect has little or no control. Â These can include the site, its location, climate, dimensions, orientation, and topography. Â Other factors are the budget, the availability of materials, access to skilled artisans, and the preferences and desires of the clients as expressed in their briefs. Â Local codes may also have a profound influence on the final result.
During the more than 60 years I have been involved in design and construction, 9 as a civil engineer, and 51 as an architect, I have never had a commission where the situation was perfect, in all respects, prior to its commencement. Nor do I ever expect such a one in the future. The task is to answer the client’s brief, but sometimes, no matter to what degree it has been studied and absorbed, there are conflicting requirements that only appear when the main elements of a design are close to completion. With this commission there was no such conflict.
In this instance, the lot was comparatively small and narrow in width.  The requirement was for a solar hemicycle, a long, narrow house, one room wide, facing W 10˚ N.   The distribution of the principal spaces resulted in the house stretching across the lot from easement to easement.  Given the fierceness of the Australian sun in summer, there was no desire to have an outside dining area facing north, and ‘integrated’ with the principal spaces: gratifying shade was what was called for. The porch was not a later addition to the original design. Please give me a break.
My solution to the client's briefs was such that, whereas before the house was built they were inveterate travelers, since then they have declined to be away from home, even for short periods of time.
Your comments regarding this particular screened porch, and its relationship to the fence, makes manifest for all of us the importance of not passing too hasty a judgement on a work of Architecture without first having had reference to the ground plan and, preferably, the brief. That you can determine without knowledge of the brief, and never having seen the ground plan that the screened porch is not integrated with the rest of the house beggars belief. Â Despite my years of experience, I willingly admit of my inability so to do. With an imagination like that you should be doing my job.
Laurie,That you can determine without knowledge of the brief, and never having seen the ground plan that the screened porch is not integrated with the rest of the house beggars belief.
I think you misunderstood what I was trying to express. I didn't say that the screened porch was not integrated to the house at all. It's a lovely space, quite beautiful. I also think that the neighboring fence/wall is quite attractive. Rather, I was wondering if the fence came after the dining patio rather than as a original component of the overall design. It is the relationship of these two elements that I was referring to, attractive but discordant.
You're correct, of course, I haven't seen the complete work, know nothing of the program, site or budget. My questions and comments were based solely upon my impressions of the single photograph referenced above, just as others routinely comment upon visual material shared on this board.
I did not mean to offend, merely to inquire as to whether anyone else shared my sentiments of the relationship between this particular fence and the space which it encloses. Either way, I would be delighted to find myself sipping a glass of Australian shiraz on this patio. Cheers.
ch
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 10537
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
Looking again at Laurie's dining porch, I have to disagree with Craig. The charm of the place has a lot to do with both its intimate scale and the contrast between the simple elegance of the structure and the more lively design of the fence. Without the contrast, the composition would be less interesting, and a simpler fence would provide less privacy.
People tend to place a great deal of importance on a dining space with a significant view, but the nature of gathering around a dining table inevitably focuses attention inward, and the view, for all practical purposes, recedes.
People tend to place a great deal of importance on a dining space with a significant view, but the nature of gathering around a dining table inevitably focuses attention inward, and the view, for all practical purposes, recedes.