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.
Creation of the unbuilt designs would be either very sketchy if the makers stuck to what they could document, or very conjectural if they didn't.
A representative from Skyline told me several years ago that they could digitally recreate a building for around $5K.
Of course, there are many more unbuilt designs that buildings no longer extant, but there would be choices to be made in any event. As some will be more interested in one category, and some the other, we can attempt to please both camps equally -- a "win-win" ?
While I wholeheartedly agree faithful CGI constructions of unbuilt Wright designs (where sufficient design and spec data are present to prevent excessive conjecture) is a valuable tool to understanding Wright's work and genius, it may not necessarily be the FLWBC's place to undertake this. I would think the present holders of the Wright Archive at Columbia and MoMA might be better able to facilitate this, particularly if it involved students at Columbia and exhibitions at MoMA.
I've just got the OA+D Journal double issue of earlier in the year, the one devoted to the Fuermann photos of T I, II and III. Comparison of the images is illuminating; in any event, seeing Taliesin I in all its
"primitive" glory, before the Birdwalk and the Blue Loggia, is a pleasure. There's a surprising view of the entrance porch from the east, 1:42 to 1:50 . . .
What would have been required -- in data load, time spent, etc -- for the image resolution to be photographic, do you know ? How do you like the retrographic flicker, the running scratches on the "film stock" ?
If anything is unfortunate it's the decision, due to the said lack of enough evidence of colors, to justify modeling in black and white rather than color. Wright described the finishes with enough specificity for an opportunity to take it to another level. If some detailing is known to be speculative, or simply not correct, why then not go beyond what Fuermann and Woolley have given us with a full color model? If concerned about historical accuracy, the date of this model would be from 1912 to 1913, not 1911. The upper tower between the dovecots had not yet been glazed (see OAD Taliesin 1, Plate 2, upper part of tower) and the roof feature venting the kitchen and the other with the monitor over the living room probably not added until after winter 1911. I've not seen the bells as located until T2. There's more, but again, quibbling! The film stock is somewhat pointless, IMO.
Regarding the OAD publication-it's wonderful. However, I don't see why they used the plans indicated for T1 & 2. Although published by Wright at the time, they are schemes that reflected what he might hope to yet build, and for some reason chose to portray Taliesin as a more grandiose complex than it actually was...and wouldn't be until much later. Plans portraying the actual built versions would have been instructive and consistent with the associated photos.
One thing viewing this model has confirmed to me is the general accuracy of my own images (which I've updated), especially assuming they had more to work with than what I've found trying to resurrect T1 as a whole. I've also started an 1/8" model which is proving equally challenging considering my own abilities and impatience!
The stonework here suffers, as I think you suggest, from too much uniformity -- even if the work is copied from the photos piece for piece, at least in the
one wall I've looked at closely, so far.
Maybe you could do readers of this thread a service by reprising some views of your own, nicely colored model ? Color was as important to Mr Wright,
and is to today's followers, as any other aesthetic component, it seems to me, and today we really have no excuse to ignore that aspect any longer.
Let's make up for lost time -- and perhaps counter some latter-day photos of Taliesin that have, if anything, too much hue ?
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gmfq3moh3pfr ... O2TKa?dl=0
thus more than one possible result. It's a pleasure, citing the most obvious difference between the two models, to see what color data adds to the effect of
this work, seen as restored to its original configuration. What a pleasure . . .