Wright Chat

 
FAQ FAQ Register Register
Search Search Profile Profile
Memberlist Memberlist Log in to check your private messages Log in to check your private messages
Usergroups Usergroups Log in Log in

>> Return to SaveWright Home Page

Spaulding Print Room
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 14, 15, 16  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edit to improve added molding in previous image.

S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
JimM



Joined: 06 Jan 2005
Posts: 1383

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely needs the additional fixture in the corner... but maybe detailing is "weighted" a bit to the one side? .... perhaps a full length vertical trim just this side of the fixture with a horizontal back to the fireplace same height as opposite trim?
Perhaps not? Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8515

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JimM, I believe not. Given that FLW's drawing does not show the trim on the left side of the window extending downward into the apse, it would be inappropriate to add it. The point of both small rooms is as entrance rooms to the gallery, the west accessed from the same floor, the east from the floor above. The emphasis would naturally be on the two 'grand' entrances, downplaying the opposite sides.

The process of entering a space in a grand manner was always important to FLW, as Sam Freeman said, "An extravagant use of space." He could easily have had the west entrance and the upstairs east entrance go directly into the main area allowing a larger asymmetrical room with more storage; the smaller rooms are really an extravagance.

The trim that I noted following the top of the gallery, north and south, dropping down into the side rooms, is matched on the east and west sections. Where the north/south trim turns, the secondary trim stops at the wall between side rooms an gallery; it does not continue, on FLW's drawing, toward the gallery entrances. What happens to the east/west trim is anyone's guess.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you both. One anomaly: the big section drawing shows the east and west wall trim at a greater distance from the ceiling than the molding seen on
the south wall. This, lacking further evidence, seems to invite speculation that the east and west wall trim may differ in other ways from the south (and north)
trim -- I guess ? Mr Wright continues to confound.

I take his drawing at face value when it comes to the disposition of hanging art, anyway. There's even a (framed ?) print partially covering the very L-
shaped molding we've depicted and discussed. This suggests an informality which accords with the asymmetries introduced into this symmetrical plan ?
Rather than adding moldings, however well reasoned, perhaps the hanging of additional art will serve to address perceived imbalances.

Wright seems not often if ever to have employed the standard Victorian convenience, the picture molding -- that handy device placed high on a wall,
perhaps just below the obligatory crown molding, from which pictures could be hung, on wires or rods. One can imagine him rejecting this device out of
hand, simply because it was the norm. But in a picture gallery, where art needs to be repositioned frequently, one would have thought this prohibition
might have been suspended. Perhaps a groove let into the wall at the ceiling, rather than a projecting molding, would be an unassertive solution ?

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe that last fixture makes the room a little too abstract -- even for Wright ?

S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8515

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Notice on page 6 that the Art Exhibition employed picture moldings. Perhaps the sheer number of pictures to be put on display demanded it, or they were already there. Perhaps his reluctance to give homeowners a convenience that would have allowed them to hang any amount of anything wherever they pleased dissuaded him from providing the moldings elsewhere.

Notice on the south fa├žade section that the moldings on east and west walls are drawn in section, lower than the south wall molding. A matter of hierarchy? Notice also that the molding on the east wall stops above the mopboards, suggesting a long, narrow patch of wall probably for display? On the west wall, the molding drops all the way to the lower level. The moldings on the end walls are the same distance from the corners as the ceiling moldings are.

Notice the perspective on page 1 that the subordinate molding is not there.

Notice that we are hammering out all these details to discover the design of a single room!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heh -- quite so. But, it's a Wright room -- and we're Wright nuts (speak for yourself, John), so what could be expected . . . ?

The wall moldings are echoed by a ceiling molding, as revealed in the reflected ceiling plan, and all the moldings shown in plans and section are equidistant
from the nearest change in plane -- except for that pesky south-wall frame. I'm pretty sure Meisolus has rectified that oddity; if so, I support the decision.

Wright will always be a beacon to designers, I believe -- idiosyncracies, "principles," and other traits and enthusiasms aside -- for his adherence to the
common-sense rules: regularity, repetition of detail, orderly relationship of parts to the whole and to each other, and legible hierarchies of scale. In addition,
his playing off each other of sober symmetry and its anarchic opposite, while certainly not rare, serve him well and set an inspiring example to designers of
every kind.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8515

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If FLW did it, it is not an oddity. It's the hitch in the gitalong that keeps the whole thing from seeming static.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We have six drawings to work with, on this project. They are appropriately provided on the first page of the thread. We are missing at least three section
drawings, and a plan section through the ground-floor space with fireplace.

Meisolus's first model shot on page two shows the east wall. He has failed to place the frame molding sufficiently far from the edges of the wall, which is
partially shown in Wright's elevation. And, pursuant to Roderick's comment, he has failed to complete the frame on the mezzanine level with a horizontal
molding, at a distance above the base board that matches the other three sides of the rectangle.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And so, at long last, the dawn breaks on Marble Head. Here are thoughts about what the east and west wall moldings should be, based on Wright's drawings and Meisolus's model, and on Wright's and Roderick's evidence.

Evidence for these moldings is found in the reflected ceiling plan and in sections #1 and #2, page one of the thread.

The red line is intended as the outermost edge of whatever molding or moldings are to be drawn. They replace the moldings seen on those two walls at present. With apologies and thanks to Meisolus:


"West"


"East"


Note that on the east and west walls the frame molding is held an equal distance from ceiling, walls, and base board. The difference in this number, N/S versus E/W walls, begins to make more sense.


(Readers of SketchUp models should be made aware that the default "lighting" protocol is more like a plane-differentiation tool. The default wall plane is white, but this changes with orientation so that,
depending on the viewpoint, a wall can be white, or some shade of gray. In both black-and-white and in color, the differing wall -- and floor and ceiling -- tones should not be misread as an indication of
material . . .)

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And . . . unaddressed is the fact that the area on each wall, and on the ceiling, bounded by a "frame" molding, is raised from the plane of that surface. This is not shown in the model, so far, nor in my hijacked images . . .

For what it's worth, the height of the fireplace opening -- the line of the lower edge of the "mantel" or lintel -- appears on the long section to match the height of the lowest horizontal molding in the "western" ancillary space.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Meisolus



Joined: 06 Jun 2010
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And here I thought I'd come back from my business trip and there wouldn't be any new replies to this thread. Smile

Thank you all for the incredibly detailed hard work with the trims and analysis. Some of what you've brought up were mistakes I'd already caught, and some I had not. I plan on writing a long post sometime this weekend to address everything and chime in on the discussion, but that will have to wait a bit.

In the mean time, I believe I mentioned that the wonderful David, of glorious Wright model fame, was going to be helping me with this. For this project, I'm the modeler and he is the renderer. Ultimately he will be in charge of lighting and materiality, though using what we've got so far as a basis.

He's been just playing around with the model a bit to do some preliminary studies and he asked me to post this for him. It doesn't reflect some recent changes, but gives an idea of what the finished product should feel like. Personally, I think it's absolutely stunning. Hope you all like it!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How exciting ! It's great to see the daylighting of this space . . .

Welcome back, and thanks in advance for indulging me/us in the exploration of your work. My play with the model was a gratifying self-indulgence, if nothing else !

I'm glad to know that David is cooperating on the venture. It's interesting to see that the data from a SketchUp model can be imported into a different program -- if I'm understanding the process correctly.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8515

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 12:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Props to David!

Seeing this with light and shadow gives the space a sort of ecclesiastical presence that makes terms like 'apse' and 'narthex' seem appropriate for the minor spaces, and 'nave' for the main room.
It is not merely a room to display Japanese prints, but to worship them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16114
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(I had to revert to the prior thread http://wrightchat.savewright.org/viewtopic.php?t=10285 to (re)learn the date of this project: 1919. There may be no
other projects from that year, if Pfeiffer is correct; none appear on the projects lists found in Taschen -- oddly, as in the main matter of the book
the three principal residences at Olive Hill are dated 1919 . . .)



A curious aspect of this design is that it could always be read, among other things, as an intervention: a new and purpose-built construction
undisguisedly inserted into an existing* envelope (*I have assumed that's the case). This impression is suggested by the view above, perhaps
occurring only (but most importantly) from this vantage, as one enters the main gallery . . .?

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 14, 15, 16  Next
Page 8 of 16

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP