Here is a video displaying how Tree Dispenser functions. We use an image of our design project in the background, embedded in processing file. And then define the areas where we want to plant different types of trees in processing again. When we run the code mouseclick enables us to draw the clarified information in the background image. Then we export it to be able to use in Rhino and Grasshopper.
As soon as the Easter Break ended MAS LA came back to Modul 4 where the landscape visualization is under the scope. While design ideas are still being developed we get to think the plantation decisions too. Georg has developed a software for exactly this phase of design. Tree Dispenser, as he named, is a script that runs in Processing and works together with Grasshopper and Rhino. Developed in Processing it provides applying a variety of species and scattering them on a certain surface. Since the processing file is easily modifiable it is possible to create different plantation strategies.
Processing file enables the definition and modification of the types and representations of the trees on the 2D ground -as seen above- while Grasshopper provides them to project in 3D environment to a certain surface in Rhino. This was one tool we tested while thinking the vegetation within our design projects.
Terrain analysis by Tasos and Ana consists of 4 subtitles that are experience, perception, memories, and impressions. They dealed with a huge amount data and explain us neatly how they achieved the proceeding. They too used GIS maps, so SAGA was the initial software to start with. Shadow and light, inclination-slopes, visibility and distance, height were among the information that are provided by them. They benefit from Grasshopper comprehensively and presented highly different visuals in terms of these analysis.
Karolina and I were to analyze the water network of the valley thus looked at the water flow, watershed transformation as well as flood pattern. It is totally inarguable that flood is the decision maker of many facts on the site. From the orientation of the settlement to the canalization and the transformation of the river bed the human interventions were leaded by flood precautions.
For the presentation we read two essays explaining the 2005 flood, the depictions beforehand and interventions that are done afterwards. Rhino 5, Grasshopper, Illustrator, Photoshop and Premiere were the tools that are used.
Claudia and Marina presented different layers that create the movement pattern of the valley. The main layers were pathways, bikelanes, regional train line, and highway. They scrutinized each of them considering their own approximate speed. At the end they define the 3 different speed range that never intersect on the site. This fact clarifies the most problematic situation at the site too.
In a similar way to their examining layers, their presentation had a clear visual language that made the work quite legible. Topography consisting of horizontal contours, and the emphasized infrastructures laying on it with different layers and textures were demonstrating how effective a good abstraction could be.
Silke and George presented the Built Structure layers that cover industrial buildings, housing zone, farming areas of the valley. GIS data were crucial for their work and by processing them in Rhino and Grasshopper they achieved exquisite topography images. Their representation of the site with vertical and horizontal sections of the site model provided a sort of radiography of the valley. They overlapped lighting analysis of the site with the current settlement density.
Territorial Scale layer was in charge of approaching the site from regional scale as well as revealing the movement network that covers the valley arriving from different directions. Other than the rest of the layers Anna and Karol approached to site regarding its strategical position as well as the proximity with the surrounding area. They demonstrated the settlement development and its depictions. Just like the other teams Rhino 5, Grasshopper and Photoshop were utilized, however they took relatively more advantage of open source data that we have been discussing its opportunities together with advantages and disadvantages with James.
Ioulitta and Wolfgang’s task was dealing with the vegetation diagrams, and they did it in a discrete way. We, people of other layers, were taken to a journey embellished with their very personal experience on the site and the diagrams were placed within these individual readings. Rather than only demonstrating rational vegetation facts, they showed a unique expression of insights which claims the data analysis can be subjective too. The work was done with a variety of tools that includes not only GIS, Photoshop, Rhino 5, Grasshopper, Final Cut but also their hand drawings done by watercolor and charcoal.
Below is the text which is the complement of their structure.
In the middle of the valley I feel myself trapped, almost imprisoned, even though I know the exit.
I close my eyes.
I manage to isolate myself completely from the noises of the environment.
No chattering of the cranes, no rattling of the railways and no thundering of the trucks are disturbing my thoughts.
I am standing here trying to transform what I actually perceive.
The cultural heritage goes far back to the past.
The human interventions were quite strong at that time and still are in the present.
Intrusion of foreign tribes, ancient kingdoms, beloved and unwanted kings, revolutions, pieces of religious works dedicated to the majesty of God, wars in the name of God and to assure the economic well-being, …
Urban myths which become reality keep the place alive and create a deep, insurmountable static energy.
Paralyzed (or better frozen?) movements are lying subtly above me.
A silent draft carries me away and leads me to the most enclosed, deserted and hidden places.
Suddenly all my senses are awake. I directly can sense the ambiance as it appears. It overwhelms me.
I smell the cultural traces of the Celts and I think I can even grab the apple of Wilhelm Tell´s son´s head.
The past is present.
Grave clouds are hanging in the sky, wafts of mist are tramping and from time to time getting caught in the higher trees..
Tania and Efi have analyzed the historical development of the valley. Examining 3 different time periods -late 19th century, middle 20th century and the present- they researched the proximity by visualising the distance and density of the built environment in relation to the water system, highway and railway as the 3 main corridors at the site. The historical data was digitilized and the overall visualization was achieved with Grasshopper, Rhino 5 and Final Cut Pro. The result was utterly extraordinary from the point of historical site analysis.
Exercise II of Modul II was presented on Friday. We have shared the various outcomes of Grasshopper while discussing the possibilities of the plugin. We have been divided into teams that each one is focusing on a specific landscape theme. 6 teams consisting of 2 have analyzed the water network, vegetation, movement network, territorial scale, terrain, historical development and built structures of Erstfeld.
Friday was the kick off the final exercise too, and the assignment is on December 12th. The teams of the mentioned themes will be proceeding the analysis widening their presentation with video and motion graphics.