Rammed Earth
Pavilion

The submission is unique in its extensive use of photos to describe the construction of a built project. While it clearly communicates the project, it would benefit from a more balanced use, and reorganization, of drawings and photography. The drawings, especially the conceptual diagrams, are small and all located within the upper left hand corner of the sheet. As a result there is a great density of information here while the rest of the sheet is completed with large, simple images. It is recommended that the author distribute these concept drawings across the sheet and place them in correspondence with the photos they describe. The author would also benefit from adding annotation directly to the photographs to describe dimensions, materials, and structure and other design concepts. Finally, the use of human figures would more clearly communicate the scale of the project. As shown it is difficult to comprehend at first reading the way a user, and the plants, might inhabit the space.    

The submission is formatted in three clear columns of information to simply and effectively describe the pavilion project. It is an excellent example of a clear distribution of information about a single sheet. Diagrams that span the base of the sheet are well annotated to describe the unique construction process and communicate its constructability. As is the case in many such submissions, the text would benefit from a more precise description that places focus on the design intent and concept. The plans and sections would be augmented by more varied line weights to differentiate the cut plane versus background information, which would also strengthen the overall visual hierarchy of the presentation. All the line drawings would be strengthened by the use of annotation to describe materials or concepts. Finally, an enlarged detail drawing would also be useful for understanding the project’s materiality and components at a larger scale. 

The submission makes use of clear renderings, axonometrics and line drawings to describe the building in its whole, doing well to communicate the experience and materiality of this special pavilion. There are three recommendations Buildner would like to make: first, the inclusion of human figures in the sections would be beneficial to communicating the scale of this pavilion and could describe the ways by which a user inhabits the interior; second, the annotation of the plans and sections would better communicate the design intent; and third, the presentation would greatly benefit from more explicit text that describes the construction of the project, its forms and materials. 

The presentation is organized into three vertical columns, making use of perspective renderings and line-drawn plans and sections. The most immediate critique is that the layout is visually at odds with the design itself, which is horizontal in nature. It is recommended that the author consider an alternative layout scheme which organizes the sheet in rows, so the communications and the design work hand in hand. The imagery is generally gray and somber, and while the stormy skies may be representative of a typical day in Lyon, it would be beneficial for the author to consider either more muted colors for consistency or more dynamic colors to elicit a positive response from the reader. All imagery would benefit from at least basic annotation to describe concepts, materiality or structure. Finally, the use of text is limited in describing the design intent. Both enlarged details and a more cohesive text specific to the materials would help the reader to better understand the design intent.