Comparison of the two articles "The Pioneers of Digital Art" by R. Lewis and J. Luciana and “Computing in Architectural Design” from Architecture’s New Media by Yehuda Kalay demonstrates the strong contrast between the development of computer tools for the architectural community as compared to many other industries. Particularly when looking at the time line of developments in computer technology, it is quite surprising how slowly CAD systems have changed.
It is particularly ironic that much of the graphics in micro computers happened because of the development of CAD, but just as computer graphics were making giant leaps, CAD started the process of “dumbing down”. The graphics of CAD systems improved, but the potential analytical aspects of it were abandoned. (Kalay, 70, 71)Considering that as long ago as 1983 Worldview, a system for supporting analysis of a building's cost, habitability or potential energy consumption had been developed or KAAD (knowledge-assisted architectural design) could let designers know if certain building codes had been violated, one would imagine that CAD systems now would routinely be calculating and drawing some of the more tedious aspects of a structure, notifying designers when spaces do not follow ADA codes or calculating building materials required for a structure (Kalay, 72, 73).
In “Computing in Architectural Design” Kalay suggests there are two reasons for this. One is the difficulty of constructing comprehensive data bases of all of the required materials and components for architectural designs. The other is the reluctance of the architectural community to relinquish any part of the design process to a computer (Kalay, 74). Of course one should always consider that the potential for profit can be the most effective means to encourage research. Just imagine what AutoCad would be like if there were as many architects and designers willing to purchase the latest version of it as there are young men waiting in line to purchase the latest version of Halo or World of Warcraft.
However, I am sure there are many tools available which I personally have yet to discover. On a daily basis I am enthralled with new tools discovered on software programs which I thought I knew well. Recently I learned about the feature of InDesign which allows multiple persons to be working on a document simultaneously and making updates in real time. After participating in the development of large furniture catalogs being designed by multiple persons in three different cities, I appreciate the enormity of the contribution of that one feature. Because I became a practicing designer when pencils and triangles were the tools, it is easy for me to appreciate just how much just the drafting capabilities have changed design. When making revisions involved actually removing lead from paper, revisions were costly and time consuming. Being able to copy and paste, changing dimensions on all related documents simultaneously and the many other advantages of computer drafting not only increase efficiency but encourage more experimentation and creativity. Another useful aspect of computer graphics is the ability to show three-dimensional representations of a building or product. Many nuances about the design seen in 3-D are not apparent in 2-D drawings.
It would be easy to underestimate the changes possible in the future of computer-aided design. Reading about how research from various sources came together to make radical changes in an industry or everyday life increases my optimism regarding the possibilities. How the combination of Adobe developing a language for describing page layout in 1983, the Apple being released in 1984 and Aldus corporation releasing Pagemaker in 1985 changed the world of printing is an example of how the convergence of technologies can make a dramatic change (Lewis, 104). I am looking forward to seeing what happens.
"The Pioneers of Digital Art" by R. Lewis and J. Luciana, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2002, pp 90-112.
“Computing in Architectural Design” from Architecture’s New Media by Yehuda Kalay, The MIT Press, 2004, pp 63-81.
