Discovering Depth + Emergence in Experimentation

Kevin LaferriereFinal Report

ARCH 3800 - Sensory DesignDecember 11, 2014

Architecture holds a unique place in the realm of human experience, assuming equal footing in both the world of utility and the world of art. This unique position alone communicates an inclusive, multi-modal character to the discipline. Architecture meets a basic human need for shelter. It makes hu-man existence “doable”. Beyond this utilitarian function, though, it connects us with a transcendent part of our existence. It can make life more beautiful and enriching. Throughout the semester, we have dis-cussed this notion of “editing”. In order to pay attention or to notice one thing, we must block out or dis-regard another. Architecture can act as a device that heightens our awareness of the beauty that already exists around us every moment.

The goal of this seminar, as I have interpreted it, is to awaken students to the reality that architec-ture engages a person’s entire being, whether or not the designer thinks about that fact. If we can realize this, though, and begin to consider all aspects of human experience, specifically sensory and perceptual experience, we can connect with and potentially enrich the lives of others on a much deeper level. Conse-quently, much time has been spent talking about the role of all the senses, not just vision, in the way that we experience space. Ironically, though, my most fruitful experimentation occurred in the exploration of visual phenomenon. However, these explorations sought to “see” vision on a perceptual level and how does a component of time our experience of visual effects. How can visual perception affect our experi-ence of a space? Does our visual perception feed back into the way we perceive with our other senses? I was very interested in the idea of “pleasurable deception” that was introduced in the case study of Rich-ard Neutra. Does it matter if a phenomenon gives a false sense of reality, if our perception of that phe-nomenon communicates no difference? Can designers harness principles of perception in order to create their own realities that may be more delightful than the true reality outside of the space? My experiments sought to explore these questions, and I gained some insight into the phenomenon of depth perception. This was not the most impactful outcome of these exercises, though. The most important lesson learned was that drawing, while a useful and necessary tool for architects, can be severely limited when exploring certain phenomena. Model-making and constructing sensory devices allow for a more holistic exploration of a proposal, while also opening up an entirely new sphere of discovery.

I should not have found this surprising. J.J. Gibson points out that this tendency is rooted in our anatomical structure. He states, “The generally accepted picture of a sense organ as a mosaic of energy transducers each connected to a distinct nerve fiber and thereby to a distnct cell in the brain is quite wrong...the receptive units constitute overlapping fields of cells, the peripheral beginnings of the afferent neurons being intermingled like the roots of trees in a dense forest.”1 These overlaps of our own biology attest to the collaborative nature of perceptual systems. The metaphor also suggests unexpected inter-change between these neural connections. Engaging more senses increases the likelihood of this collab-orative effect. Architecture cannot ignore this reality in the design of the built environment.

1 J.J. Gibson, The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. (Boston: Housghton Mifflin, 1966), 41.

This image of Steven Holl’s Chapel of St. Ignatius was the chief inspiration for the experiment. The quality and depth of color created solely by reflected light was fascinating, and the spatial implications were intuitively obvious. Rather than a color being appre-ciated and understood as surface application, colored reflected light could become a substance that per-meates an entire space. I asked myself how this idea could be further explored.

I decided to test how basic principles of color theory interacted with this effect of reflected light. Would the behavior of warm and cool colors be enhanced by the unique quality of light? How would this affect one’s perception of the color?

“perception 1” from “Why color schemes work :: part 3”. http://www.brandigirlblog.com (accessed December 10, 2014)

This following series of devices looks at both the surface application of color and its behavior in the presence of reflected color. The center square is colored either a cool or warm color. The reflect-ing side was colored the opposite.

The hypothesis was that the effect of the center and border color would be exaggerated by the presence of its opposite.

As you can see in the pictures to the right, the reflected red light advances and appears to physi-cally fill the void around the border. The blue square in the center recedes and the roles of void and surface are exchanged.

The images on the right are the two original devices, comparing cool and warm primary colors. The im-ages on the left took it one step further by applying the principle of complementary colors. Complemen-tary colors have the highest constrast. The hypoth-esis, therefore, was that the effects would be even more exaggerated. By comparing these images, it is apparent that the hypothesis was correct.

The next phase was to test the spatial effect of reflected color, while still applying the previous principles of color theory. Different “caps” were created for the viewing tube so that multiple sce-narios could be generated rather quickly.

These images show the effect of caps that were a sin-gle color. The device was pointed directly at the sun when these were captured. It was anticipated that the red light would make the space seem contracted while the blue light would increase the space’s depth. The effect, however, was not as pronounced as an-ticipated.

I didn’t take into account the directionality of the sun’s rays, so re-positioning the viewing tube and al-lowing the sun to stike the surface obliquely created some unexpected effects. This was the first emergent discovery of the experiment series.

The next series of studies combined the spatial ex-ploration with the principle of complementary colors. This series gave rise to several more unex-pected results.

The hypothesis was that the opposite colors would cause the end of the space to seem angled, the warm side advancing and the cool side receding. This ef-fect was not very pronounced, but, again, testing the device in the sun produced some more unexpected results.

These two images are using the same cap. As you can see on the left, though, the angle of the light makes it appear as if there is only one color rather than two.

Here is another example of an emergent effect. Again, these images are of the same cap, but the entire device has been rotated. As you can see, the ambient light and thus the character of the space changes quite significantly.

This image appears once again to show the cap of the final test. The emergent discoveries regarding the sun angle and different colors gave rise to this test. How would the character of the space change over the course of a day?

The device was moved in an arc to replicate the motion of the sun, and the following series of im-ages were taken at different points along that arc.

While this test was not so precise as to document specific hours of the day or months of the year, it does show quite clearly the drastic variation that such a simple intervention can have on a space.

1 5

6

7

8

2

3

4

9

13

14

15

16

11

12

These images are in sequence. One aspect that these images cannot convey is the transition from one “atmosphere” to the next. This phenomenon can only be captured in video, several of which have been included with this report.

Due to time and material constraints, a mecha-nism for matching visual effect to time of day and year could not be designed and constructed. However, it is easy to see the possibilities inherent in this simple approach.

There are two significant outcomes from both this experiment and the seminar as a whole. The first outcome is a realization. I now realize how limited in scope my own view of architecture was. The outside world touches us in so many unique and powerful ways. Architecture, in a sense, is a created world that has the same potential to either filter the stimuli of the natural environment or to create expe-riential effects of its own. The second outcome was a new way of working and a new attitude towards it. Previously, I only thought of physical models as a representational technique. I never thought of myself as a gifted craftsmen so I stuck to drawings as a design tool. This exercise showed me that models are a powerful generative device and need not be overly complex or detailed. Furthermore, physical models en-gage more of the senses and allow one to experience a design in time. This cannot be done through draw-ing. I’m sure that a designer who is well-versed in playing with perception is able to predict much more than a novice like me, but I am conviced that the world around us is far too complex for everything to be anticipated. This is an exciting realization. Approaching and testing designs in a holistic manner allows for more emergent possibilities. By exploring all of what it means to be human, through architecture, we gain a new appreciation for what is already around us and we are constantly surprised by the things we overlook. I will conclude with a quotation by Juhani Pallasmaa as he expresses this idea so clearly and so powerfully: “Architecture is essentially an extension of nature into the man-made realm, providing the ground for perception and the horizon of experiencing and understanding the world.”2

Here’s to a renewed sense of wonder.

2 Juhani Pallasmaa, Eyes of the Skin. (West Sussex: Wiley & Sons, 2012), 44.