marks_vision

marks

the story so far

marks were deducted for grammar errors, lack of sourcing, incompleteness etc. . . .

Boulevard of Castilla

see attached link to article with the 'Boulevard of Castilla' in Medellin, Colombia.
http://www.sept.org/techpapers/1369.pdf

tuesday 23 april crits

3 people present.  each for 3 minutes. then feedback will be given.
tjaka to keep time and make sure time is respected.
kwanda, ayanda + rakale to present their drawing and then state what they need to still draw to complete their narrative for friday 3 may 2013.

the rest must present their vision using the 3004 drawings to communicate their methodology and to state where they intend to take their individual project.  all to give tjaka their electronic work for her to place on the desktop of the computer for crit + marking by 14.03 on tuesday 23 april 2013.  crits are as follows:

lande kwanda                14.15 - 14.23
Msibi Ayanda                 14.25 - 14.33
Rakale Kamogelo          14.35 - 14.43
Baloyi ¸ Nyiko                 14.45 - 14.53          
Dugmore ¸ Matthew       14.55 - 15.03
Hadebe ¸ Sizakele   15.05 - 15.13
Kluth ¸ Charnelle   15.15 - 15.23
Letsile ¸ Lesego   15.25 - 15.33
Mahlalela ¸ Simangele   15.35 - 15.43
Mavuso ¸ Nkosilenhle   15.45 - 15.53
Mndawe ¸ Thabi   15.55 - 16.03

break

Mtshali ¸ Skhumbuzo   16.15 - 16.23
Nathoo ¸ Nishkal   16.25 - 16.34
Ngoqwana ¸ Lulama   16.35 - 16.43
Njapha ¸ Phelelani   16.45 - 16.53
Segooa ¸ Tjaka   16.55 - 17.03
Sibiya ¸ Zwelibanzi   17.05 - 17.13
Simoes ¸ Vanessa   17.15 - 17.23
Tayob ¸ Muhammad   17.25 - 17.34

School Talk ‘CITIZEN ARCHITECT’

strongly suggest you attend

task_2 final marks + comments

▪    content – 4%

idea and concept

scales and layers covered, understanding of subject matter

originality, innovation and relevance of idea

▪    techniques – 4%

research, method, process and presentation

design, method, process and presentation 

▪    presentation – 2%

clarity and quality of the presentation

aesthetics and quality of visuals

language

completeness

group_1 – block 1 analysis

▪    content             – 2.4/4

▪    techniques     – 2.9/4%

▪    presentation – 1.2/2%

– a rather odd project title.  on the locality of block one page (which is page 1, but doesn’t demonstrate this), the “other brt busstops” should be demonstrated especially on the aerial map to better explain access to the block.  other transport hubs like parkstation, metromall, mtn etc. should have been highlighted.  aerial map should have been pushed south to point out gandhi sq.  graphic images on page 1 would have benefitted from explanatory captions.  why aren’t smal, kerk, pritchard, kruis, von brandis + eloff sts. marked | labelled?  page 2 is strong conceptually but remains vague.  all the observations made should have been demonstrated graphically, perhaps with another photographic inventory page indicating things like poor aesthetics yet strong architecture, vegetation, green open space etc.  this is applicable to page 3.  i have never seen audiovisual files imbedded into pdf.  is this possible?  why didn’t you handin project as a powerpoint then?  thus the page between 3 + 4 appears incomplete.  why are too many pedestrians making safety difficult to control?  project begins to get a bite on the pedestrian market linkage narrative page 4.  30 images were used which tell an interesting visual narrative, but the text is insufficient.  this should have been done with a minimum of 5 pages – as in 6 orange arrows per page.  let the reader get into the spaces through your eyes and words, as you have began to do.  pity this wasn’t pushed further.  one has to commend the group on the north-south line done photographically.  very rich material.  page 5 is a gem.  what would have been beautiful would be to duplicate the photo inventory page, then on the duplicate replace every picture with a frame and then have text, words, and a phrase, or title – which may be personal – in the frame for descriptive access.  a map showing the where the activity on page 6 + 7 occurs would have helped.  overall project is effectively framed yet marred with spelling errors like “manicans” which should read mannequins.  document still has format issues, things like font size + continuity concerns.  conclusion page could have done with an appropriate demonstrative graphic.  references are thin – joburg has a plethora of literature, use it.  strong submission.

group_2 – every step tells a story

▪    content – 2/4%

▪    techniques – 1.9/4%

▪    presentation – .9/2%

– contents page is meaningless without page numbers.  what does the beanlike graphic signify?  caption to accompany the image is required.  introduction is a pleasant read, especially the lesson learned: experience is the best teacher.  the lines could be further articulated with: experience, plus critical engagement, is the best teacher.  not quite sure i agree whole heartedly with, “we don’t make cities for people; instead people make the city theirs,” line.  what about, we structure cities for people to use how best they see fit, for example?  text on the location of site page is too small – is it a caption or not?  text mentions streets like pritchard, kruis etc., where are these on the map?  this page requires additional work for clarity.  uncovering the block is a good beginning for what is to come, but this needs proper structure for the narrative to be easily accessible.  who is saying the text in bubbles, is it the street actors or the authors?  narrative: visions of the eye page is beginning to be of critical engagement, however, for it to do this, it has to name the street – assist the reader to locate the line traversed.  give us the cross streets as well.  what does ‘coparitive’ mean?  edge relationships page is too busy, but very well drawn diagrams.  have less on a page, and pump up the story, for better clarity.  in a contested space, use the word columns instead of ‘pillars’ and make sure you always include streetnames for orientation purposes.  lovely drawings on the bottom right hand corner.  legend is confusing, the colour for pedestrians is the same as the block colour.  why?  behind every person theres a story page is a rich beginning which the project needs to interrogate further, especially in the spatial dimension.  the actors names all interact with the city spatially – where does this happen?  where does alex + abraham trade, for example?  how much does alex pay to the municipality and for how much trading space?  what are ‘stoles’ do you mean stalls?

overall an intriguing submission marred by spelling errors and improper formatting + layout.  street names cannot oscillate between caps + non caps.  font size should be consistent.  what isn’t there a project reference page?  wasn’t any additional reading done in executing the project?  it is not acceptable to name the file as submitted [group_2task_2], especially after you were instructed how to submit project files.  a submission that takes a small step and then stumbles.

group_3 – “a mirage of hope and potential”

▪    content – 3.8/4%

▪    techniques – 3.8/4%

▪    presentation – 1.9/2%

– think of working boldly with the image + project title on the cover page.  coursename, task # plus author names can all be made smaller.  cover page should be about the image and the mirage of hope + potential.  excellent introductory quotes on the incorrectly labelled context but should be contents page 1.  think of sourcing 2 other quotes to place beneath the 2 other photographs.  something regarding joburg will suffice.  use one or more of the following: achille mbembe + sarah nuttall, clive chipkin or lindsay bremner as a resource.  excellent introductory page which articulates and frames your intentions and methodology.  page 3 is very good and necessary, but after this, insert another page where you zoom into your block so the reader can see where the streets you mention framing the block are located – where the orange square is located.  page 4 + 5 are good.  be careful not to get repetitive with text as you do in page 6 when you state: ‘david travels approximately . . .’  his map needs its own page, so does lindiwe + mr arnando.  great orienteering technique on page 8, captions below 1, 2 + 3 would have enhanced the page.  the active | inactive strip on page 9 would could have been better used – use it as a slight transparent gouache over the image, so the background is still readable yet the edge is what is coloured.  some of the inactive edges look like roll down shutters, which might be porous depending on the time, thus your image is somewhat misleading.  might be beneficial to note time + day when the images were taken.  project is well structured and is a pleasure to read make sure that before you print, you get a proof reader to highlight some spelling + grammatical errors so these may be addressed for a crisper read.  bring in joburg voices, like the one’s suggested, in the references.  a very strong submission mildly marred by improper file name – xaba + momberg were not privy to this, but mndawe has no excuse.

group_4 – block 4

▪    content – 1.7/4%

▪    techniques – 1.3/4%

▪    presentation – .3/2%

– peculiar project title accompanied by a very powerful image.  contents page requires proper formatting.  text on the intro page needs to be broken up into a minimum of 3 columns.  project states that: to understand how the user interacts with the spaces around them, we have conducted an interview with one of the people in the block, 1 actor isn’t sufficient to give an impression of space usage.  1 actor results in 1 dimension, which serves no purpose in critical academic analysis.  page 2 or 1 – which is it? – images are too pixelated to be of any use plus captions are missing.  what do the green + orange signify?  page 3 is difficult to access – what does the size of the spheres mean?  the north arrow is incorrect.  project after movement 4 page was difficult to open.  landuse map proved problematic, but once opened it was difficult to access, hatching didn’t do the graphic justice.  this should be reworked for crisper articulation.  as beautiful as the photographs are on the architecture page, the info provided is not well structured and clear.  when the project states:  and most of the buildings in the block were built around the 1920s-1930s, what, exactly is it saying?  is it referring to the 2 buildings on the page?  why not be specific and identify which building and when they were built?  afterall, this is the point of the exercise – the anatomy of a block.  the opening 2 lines of page 7 is confusing, just as the so called detailed drawing is –  what is it depicting?  the rest of the project is cryptic, making the narrative difficult to follow.  group 4 must make an appointment for consulting purposes.

group_5 – understanding inner city blocks

▪    content – ?/4%

▪    techniques – ?/4%

▪    presentation – ?/2%

– content page needs page numbers.  page 2 is clear and locates the block well within the greater context.  page 3 states that income levels are increasing in johannesburg, where is this from?  substantiate.  map 1 requires additional work for appropriate academic clarity.  circulation networks page could benefit from images depicting the conflicts and stated site vehicular network dysfunctionality.  where, exactly, is the insufficient on-street parking and other observation?  page 5 introduces cyclists as a form of non motorised transport, where are the cyclists in joburg – all that is depicted in the images are trolley pushers and informal recyclers, so why make that claim – or is this about cities in general?  images and text do not work together on this pertinent topic which needs to be unpacked and cannot be done is a thin manner.  be consistent with captioning images and referencing them – do as you do on page 8, page 5 is insufficient.  the street history layer is welcome but it feels as if it should come earlier in assisting unpack the context.  image on page 7 is a gem.  was the sky really that azure?  page 9 is confusing.  urban form and vertical usage page needs additional work for clarity, sections are somewhat confusing.  use a somewhat more communicative plan – like the one on page 11 – to demonstrate where the sections are taken from.  page 11 – 14 are very good and assist in capturing the spirit of the place and setting up a rich narrative.  the use of graphics and text complements each other and forms a single thread – why isn’t the rest of the document like this?  project appears to made up of  too many disconnected strands, making it difficult to assess it as a single project produced by a single group.  group 4 must make an appointment for consulting purposes.

group_6 – different faces of the colosseum block

▪    content – 2.9/4%

▪    techniques – 2.8/4%

▪    presentation – 1.1/2%

– fantastic cover page with an interesting title – the block 6 has remnants of prison architecture or something, or is it the font?  excellent font, make the authors names smaller as to bring strong focus on block 6 and make the title bolder using the same font as block 6.  page 1 needs to articulate where bock 6 is in relation to the streets + spaces named like gandhi sq. joubert park etc. – as the project demonstrates on page 3.  page 2 suffers from formatting issues.  project starts of with 2 columns per page in the intro, then moves into 3 when dealing with history, then 1 in proximity.  why?  be consistent.  use 3 as in it is crisper.  parts of the text are amputated in the last column of page 2.  page 4, 5 + 6 are beautiful, especially the interviews grant the reader access to what the authors experienced.  well done.  why is the area not safe between 3 – 5pm?  how far if malume mchna’s commute?  how much does he spend on fuel?  does he pay for parking?  how much does he earn?  why does he live in voslo?  the project would have been greatly enhanced if it began to tackle some of these questions for a richer narrative to the some of the actors who navigate the colosseum block.  sections on page 7 need additional work.  good to see the line drawing from the other class being brought into the project on page 9.  why only this one when groups consist of 3 members?  that been said, the line drawing needs further textual explanation as to, what are we looking at etc.  photographic inventory on the concluding page is welcome, but it could be pushed further as stated in response to group 1.  project has come long way.  well done.