Course Reflection
Azeem Khan CU@24fps Ian Harris
Filming a polemical video leads me to see that video can be used to focus on specific problems of a given neighborhood. The layperson's attention can be focused on places that need improvement, that they may otherwise ignore. Film is not just an informative tool, but can be motivational for the layperson. Architecture suffers from being an absurdly slow-paced field, and this is one of many reasons that laypeople are disinterested in it. Filming this semester, and having prior experience with fast-paced editing, the two combined have the potential to make architecture more accessible. For non-enthusiasts, experiencing and moving through spaces in a succinct timeframe can communicate more effectively than the slow drawl of reading plans, sections, and renders.
Academic studios could use film as a way to ease first year students into the program by placing themselves directly into the architecture and space. Also, professors will be able to see what the student is seeing and focusing on. They will have more ease in guiding the student to learn what they need to. Working in premiere and seeing a timeline, motivates me to challenge the perception of time as a linear progression in architecture, that buildings get old and unused with age.
My design process can be enhanced by seeing architecture through a time lense and what the long term effects of certain spaces are. Whether a space is communicating the experience it is supposed to or not by looking at precedent spaces compared with rendered flythroughs. In the housing matrix, we touched upon some human and social scales, which are far more relatable than flattened facade shots. Seeing these aspects will generate more context-specific spaces. More importantly, I would use film as a way to make architecture an active and debatable issue for the layperson. These debates would range from small private issues to larger public ones. This would turn architecture into an activist for social change at a much faster pace.