/architecture thread/

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

couple more of the cormier house

...

this isn't any great feat of architecture obviously but I do like the way these buildings look

damn i got beaned
you are right

lmao what a retard

lets all laugh at him >fucking kek

...

op here, this guy has some great photography of architecture
le-blanc.com/dramatis-personae-ii/

I fucking hate buildings that look gorgeous from the outside but sacrifice functionality for architectural flair. I can hear the architect slowly wanking himself every time I look at them.

That building, for instance, looks really striking. Until you realize that like 2/3rds of those windows will barely get any fucking sunlight, defeating half the fucking purpose of putting windows there in the first place. They're like windows that face into alleyways, except at least that's people making do as best they can with what they've got - here it's completely unnecessary. Dozens of unnecessarily gloomy rooms, all because the architect wanted to design a "famous building" in the shape of an open cube. What a terrible use of space.

At least it makes for cool photographs. No argument there.

these kinds of art deco statues always creeped me out. like this one legit spooked me when i was a kid

pls no modernist trash

...

...

...

...

...

...

That is one ugly piece of crap. If you look at the culture it's a good indicator of the health of a civilization.

...

...

> Commie architecture
> good

...

...

communists made a lot of beautiful buildings

care to give a few examples of these beautiful buildings I seemed to have missed?

pleb

always nice to see someone who appreciates salamone

Nice argument kiddo, brutalism is shit and you know it. If there so great why does nobody ever visit them?

Been there this summer, looks even better irl

Art deco is sort of normiecore, everyone likes it. That said the brickwork here is worth noting

>"pls no modernist crap"
>posts kitschy, overly HDR'd vernacular tourist crap instead
We get it, you're 56% white. Congratulations, what an achievement. Sure it looks nice (not arguing that) and it's great for selling postcards but it's uncontroversial and literal peasant taste. Not to mention the fact that this is a fucking mess, and IS outright ugly. I'm not arguing that the craftsmanship isn't amazing, but it's oversaturated with detail to the point of looking like a monstrous and overindulgent piece of bloated shit.

since you all seem to be fans of government dictated culture and WEWUZism have perhaps the only good architecture to come out of the modern right wing

...

...

...

fascist molestation of godly italian history

...

...

...

I agree that function should dictate form, but in this particular example you're wrong...
Glass facades that let in direct sunlight are notorious for wasting energy by letting the inside of the building heat up. Windows that face open sky but not direct sunlight are actually much more efficient because they let in ambient light without getting hot. Those rooms are nowhere near "gloomy" lol (at least not anymore gloomy than Parisian weather already is)

...

...

...

>Worth noting
No it's not

Yeah if only the was real

> My taste is good because not many people like it

that some high IQ logic.

The reason why those buildings are good is because they mimic the natural world. They have natural patterns, proportions and colours. Not grey concrete monstrosities that depress the soul.

how can you criticize the logic of a post and then go on to fall prey to the naturalistic fallcy

How's naturalism a fallacy? People feel more comfortable and relaxed around natural environments. That's been proven multiple times.

>tfw you have to share a board with people who unironically love brutalist architecture

when you say

>The reason why those buildings are good is because they mimic the natural world. They have natural patterns, proportions and colours. Not grey concrete monstrosities that depress the soul.

this is an appeal to nature

hurr
brutalism mimics rock cliffs and caves
therefore it's naturalist
QED

> Rocks are perfect squares and rectangles

yeah, and trees and plants look exactly like this.

you dumb faggot

it still looks much more pleasing than pic releated

>Go to city looking for natural things
>Be shocked when you see man-made buildings

Kys, family

lol

I believe some inspiration was taken from the poppy.

But that doesn't make my point incorrect that being in natural environments improves ones sense of being.
The appeal to nature fallacy only applies without specific context.

rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=3639

> Go to city
> look around
> be shocked by ugly building

I get you like communism but it doesn't have to extend to your architecture.

aw so now that your retarded appeal to naturalism got proven wrong you have no more valid criticism other than "wahh i think it looks ugly"?

>defending gothic architecture with naturalist fallacy
>doesn't even know what plant the floral motifs are based on

come on stop being a cunt

FWIW I love gothic architecture but you're just being retarded if you can't see how brutalism "mimics nature" in the same degree and instills a sense of comfort and security due to the fortress-like and cave-like qualities. especially when so many brutalist buildings are decorated with real plants

>so many brutalist buildings are decorated with real plants
thats just because they try to hide the ugliness of them

>build brutalist building
>cover every square inch with green plants
>would still look amazing

really not helping your case here

> Shows very specific example with different motifs
> hurr durr yr a cunt XD

All your doing is playing the ad-hominem game and proving very little substance. I get your too lazy to try and explain your point but you won't convince anyone.

> many brutalist buildings are decorated with real plants

The vast majority aren't it's just plain old concrete.

> brutalism "mimics nature" in the same degree and instills a sense of comfort and security due to the fortress-like and cave-like qualities

Aesthetically brutalist buildings share no resemblance to anything that could be conceived as natural. Nature doesn't build in straight lines.

are you some north korean troll or something becuse ive never seen anyone defending brutalism this passionately

More to the point brutalism is an internationalist style that pays no respect to the architectural history of it's surroundings. It's alien, out of place and only depresses the spirit.
It's a grey concrete block with very little form, how can that be considered beautiful?
probably a communist you grew up in eastern Europe and misses the splender of communist architecture :^)

who*

why does this always have to turn into an everyone against brutalism fight :(

jesus christ imagine having to live in there

...

they should film some dystopian film in there

people like different things. get over it. you can appreciate a lot of different architectural styles it doesn't have to be so black and white

who likes begin depressed?

Because like communism we don't want to see it's ugly head ever show itself again.

terrible reasoning, show your workings.
suddenly it's a political argument?
Now I hate communism too mind, not even a massive brutalism fanboy but it has a lot of very unique aspects & it may not be your cup of tea, but it has helped architecture evolve & you can't deny its impact.
do you not see any of the appeal others do, or are you purposefully being dense because of your communism boogeyman

>it doesn't have to be so black and white
>literally compartmentalizes instantly
lmao

>it doesn't have to be so black and white
apparently it has to be grey or begie though

howhigh.ru
architecture was the only thing commies did half-decent

only thing that commies did half-decent was killing eachother

> helped architecture evolve

A clear example of how not to do architecture

> do you not see any of the appeal

But user I just don't understand the appeal. The simple fact is that there hideously ugly and an eye sore to look at. Can you honestly say that you find brutalisitc buildings attractive?

>decorating something = hiding it's ugliness
lmao

wow, all this butthurt and still no rational argument. Nice!

...

...

The fuck you talking about? Of course heat management becomes a problem in large buildings with a lot of windows, that's not a novel observation. There are ways of dealing with that, some better than others. Designing your building in the shape of a (wide) arch so that 2/3rds of those windows spend most of the day in complete shade is not one of the better ways. I don't know how to put this more plainly to you - THOSE WINDOWS DO NOT FACE OPEN SKY. Look at them, for chrissakes! And they won't let in much ambient light at all.

Glass facades that receive direct sunlight have downsides. That does not mean that any and all alternatives you may encounter are well-designed.

Ironically the north and south (outer) faces of that building are traditional glass facades. The building was not really designed with thermal efficiency in mind. It was designed with aesthetics in mind. It's modelled off the Arc de Triomphe.