EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
Copyright Â© 1985 by the Frank Lloyd Wright Memorial Foundation
I have yet to learn how SketchUp modelers translate what they find in measured architectural drawings into what is represented in their models. In a couple of cases there is evidence that the model is built directly atop a found plan drawing. That's probably what I'd attempt, as a starting point. But it doesn't account for the vertical measurements nor for certain subtleties of form, angle measurements, etc, nor for matters like accurate representation of material.
Modelers should be reminded that the standard for historical reproduction is absolute fidelity to the original design as presented in the architect's drawings. The essence of Wright's form-making is found in his proportions: the thickness of elements, the deviations from the vertical and the horizontal, the depth of shadow-creating elements. These particulars are as vital as are the generalities of plan layout and window count; models lacking precise reproduction of each and all cannot and should not be called "models of Frank Lloyd Wright designs."
Among the many notes on the elevation drawing, crucial to its correct interpretation, is this one, indicating that the unit measurement is not 4'-0" but 3'-6". No further work should be done on this model, it seems to me, without access to an adequately large scan of the relevant drawings.
Copyright Â© 1986 A.D.A. EDITA, Frank Lloyd Wright 1937-1941 (Monograph 6), pp 282-83
In this design we have Mr Wright once again inflecting a symmetrical form with off-center elements. And the logic of this choice again reflects certain realities: a house needs only one chimney, one bathroom, one stair. It would be most unusual (though not unheard-of) for all of these elements to straddle the centerline of a symmetrical envelope. Further, the principle view occupies only a portion of the skyline---and the sun in the sky doesn't move through an arc which is directly overhead.
Given these five factors (and there may be more), it would really be illogical for a building to be symmetrical about two axes (like a Palladian villa) or even one---especially in the realm of the supposedly organic ?
As for the SketchUp model of Watkins, the maker has given away some of the most delightful and even crucial pieces of Wright's design, beginning with the fact that the house was drawn for a sloping portion of the site. This, and the sloping siding and underbelly of the original, are missing entirely in this recreation. Finally, the masonry elements are either misshapen or absent altogether; the fact that random ashlar stonework appears on the model, rather than concrete, is a relatively minor inaccuracy considering the more egregious lackings . . .
Well, here it is... I don't know what happened with the link but I uploaded again... even the furniture has been modeled... 648 vs 173 000 polygons
https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model/ ... tkins-1940
It is interesting to note that, working only from the perspective drawing (and plans) published in Taschen, the modeler wasn't aware that another version of the detailing exists, where the meeting of vertical and diagonal boards is not mitered, but woven or braided---alternating boards making a zig-zag pattern. The elevations in the Monograph show the house in that dress. It's impossible to say which version Wright would have preferred---but I suspect the more unorthodox, "organic" solution might have prevailed.
I am going to have to repeat my advice, that no modeler begin a project if at least plans and elevations are not available to him or her. I have done a little SketchUp modeling, so I have some idea of how much effort would be required to correct an error like that. As with most construction jobs, it's so much easier to get it right the first time !
Anyway, it's a pleasure to see the house appear in 3D. I downloaded the model in SketchUp 2017, and turned off the shadows so I could get a better look at the other side of the building.
Here's the other thread, which contains more graphic material including alternate plans and the elevations---and further interesting discussion.
http://wrightchat.savewright.org/viewto ... =2&t=13831