Institutional Repository
Technical University of Crete
Technical University of Crete
EN
|
EL
| URI: | http://purl.tuc.gr/dl/dias/5D293282-BE12-4129-9315-3DFBF9F9EB2C | ||
| Year | 2008 | ||
| Type of Item | Peer-Reviewed Journal Publication | ||
| License |
|
||
| Bibliographic Citation | P. Parthenios. (2008). Analog vs Digital : Why_Bother? The role of Critical Points for Change (CPC) in the conceptual design process. Architecture and Modern Information Technologies (AMIT). [Online]. Available: http://www.parthenios.com/pdf/research/2008-analog-vs-digital-why-bother-the-role-of-critical-points-for-change-(CPC)-in-the-conceptual-design-process.pdf | ||
| Appears in Collections |
The war between Analog and Digital in the field of design is definitely not new. Designers havethe tendency to pick a side and fight for what they believe is the “right” way to perform design.“Now that we have digital, why do we still need analog?” or “Analog is perfect. Why did we everneed digital?” Moreover, since the transition from one media to the other is –still- not troublefree, why do we bother switching tools? Why don’t we find which tool is convenient for each oneof us and stick with it? Why bother?This paper seeks to shed light on the role that analog and digital tools play during conceptualdesign by explaining the mechanism of the Critical Points for Change. The critical question ofthis study is whether the two worlds (analog and digital) are antagonistic and if one of the two isgoing to prevail. The following two short cases are part of a series of case studies conducted aspart of the doctoral study Conceptual Design Tools for Architects1 at Harvard Graduate Schoolof Design. They are included in this paper not with the intention to propose a model of thedesign process but in order to illustrate some of the findings.
Copyright © DIAS 2013
