Max Dupain and the photography of Australian architecture

This thesis considers Max Dupain (1911-1992) and his contribution to the development of architectural photography in Australia. Through his continuous and prolific output over six decades of professional photography Dupain greatly stimulated awareness of and interest in Australian architecture. Before Dupain began specialising in the field, little consistent professional architectural photography had been practised in Australia. He and some of his close associates subsequently developed architectural photography as both a specialised branch of photography and - perhaps more significantly - as a necessary adjunct to architectural practice. In achieving these dual accomplishments, Dupain and like-minded practitioners succeeded in elevating architectural photography to the status of a discipline in its own right. They also gave Australians generally a deeper understanding of the heritage represented by the nation's built environment. At the same time, some of the photographic images he created became firmly fixed in the public imagination as historical icons within the development of a distinctive Australian tradition in the visual arts. Within his chosen field Dupain was the dominant Australian figure of his time. He was instrumental in breaking the link with Pictorialism by bringing Modernist and Documentary perspectives to Australian architectural photography. He was an innovator in the earlier decades of his professional career, however, his photographic techniques and practice did not develop beyond that. By the end of the 1980s he had largely lost touch with the technology and techniques of contemporary practice. Dupain's reputation, which has continued growing since his death in 1992, therefore arises from reasons other than his photographic images alone. It reflects his accomplishment in raising his fellow citizens' awareness of a worthwhile home-grown artistic tradition.

Building information modeling in the Australian architecture engineering and construction industry

Building Information Modeling (BIM) is a modern approach to the design, documentation, delivery, and life cycle management of buildings through the use of project information databases coupled with object-based parametric modeling. BIM has the potential to revolutionize the Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) industry in terms of the positive impact it may have on information flows, working relationships between project participants from different disciplines and the resulting benefits it may achieve through improvements to conventional methods. This chapter reviews the development of BIM, the extent to which BIM has been implemented in Australia, and the factors which have affected the up-take of BIM. More specifically, the objectives of this chapter are to investigate the adoption of BIM in the Australian AEC industry and factors that contribute towards the uptake (or non uptake) of BIM. These objectives are met by a review of the related literature in the first instance, followed by the presentation of the results of a 2007 postal questionnaire survey and telephone interviews of a random sample of professionals in the Australian AEC industry. The responses suggest that less than 25 percent of the sample had been involved in BIM – rather less than might be expected from reading the literature. Also, of those who have been involved with BIM, there has been very little interdisciplinary collaboration. The main barriers impeding the implementation of BIM widely across the Australian AEC industry are also identified. These were found to be primarily a lack of BIM expertise, lack of awareness and resistance to change. The benefits experienced as a result of using BIM are also discussed. These include improved design consistency, better coordination, cost savings, higher quality work, greater productivity and increased speed of delivery. In terms of conclusion, some suggestions are made concerning the underlying practical reasons for the slow up-take of BIM and the successes for those early adopters. Prospects for future improvement are discussed and proposals are also made for a large scale worldwide comparative study covering industry-wide participants

The shifting value of design in the Australian Architecture Industry

Architects regularly employ design as a problem-solving tool in the built environment. Within the design process, architects apply design thinking to reframe problems as opportunities, take advantage of contradictory information to develop new solutions, and differentiate outcomes based on context. This research aims to investigate how design can be better positioned to develop greater differentiated value to an architect’s current service offering, and how design as a strategy could be applied as a driver of business innovation within the Australian architecture industry. The research will explore literature relating to the future of architecture, the application of design thinking, and the benefits of strategic design. The future intent of the research is to develop strategies that improve the value offering of architects, and develop design led solutions that could be applied successfully to the business of architecture.

Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Architecture

The development of the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Architecture (the Statement) centred on requirements for the Master of Architecture and proceeded alongside similar developments in the building and construction discipline under the guidance and support of the Australian Deans of Built Environment and Design (ADBED). Through their representation of Australian architecture programs, ADBED have provided high-level leadership for the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards Project in Architecture (LTAS Architecture). The threshold learning outcomes (TLOs), the description of the nature and extent of the discipline, and accompanying notes were developed through wide consultation with the discipline and profession nationally. They have been considered and debated by ADBED on a number of occasions and have, in their fi nal form, been strongly endorsed by the Deans. ADBED formed the core of the Architecture Reference Group (chaired by an ADBED member) that drew together representatives of every peak organisation for the profession and discipline in Australia. The views of the architectural education community and profession have been provided both through individual submissions and the voices of a number of peak bodies. Over two hundred individuals from the practising profession, the academic workforce and the student cohort have worked together to build consensus about the capabilities expected of a graduate of an Australian Master of Architecture degree. It was critical from the outset that the Statement should embrace the wisdom of the greater ‘tribe’, should ensure that graduates of the Australian Master of Architecture were eligible for professional registration and, at the same time, should allow for scope and diversity in the shape of Australian architectural education. A consultation strategy adopted by the Discipline Scholar involved meetings and workshops in Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, Canberra and Brisbane. Stakeholders from all jurisdictions and most universities participated in the early phases of consultation through a series of workshops that concluded late in October 2010. The Draft Architecture Standards Statement was formed from these early meetings and consultation in respect of that document continued through early 2011. This publication represents the outcomes of work to establish an agreed standards statement for the Master of Architecture. Significant further work remains to ensure the alignment of professional accreditation and recognition procedures with emerging regulatory frameworks cascading from the establishment of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). The Australian architecture community hopes that mechanisms can be found to integrate TEQSA’s quality assurance purpose with well-established and understood systems of professional accreditation to ensure the good standing of Australian architectural education into the future. The work to build renewed and integrated quality assurance processes and to foster the interests of this project will continue, for at least the next eighteen months, under the auspices of Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC)-funded Architecture Discipline Network (ADN), led by ADBED and Queensland University of Technology. The Discipline Scholar gratefully acknowledges the generous contributions given by those in stakeholder communities to the formulation of the Statement. Professional and academic colleagues have travelled and gathered to shape the Standards Statement. Debate has been vigorous and spirited and the Statement is rich with the purpose, critical thinking and good judgement of the Australian architectural education community. The commitments made to the processes that have produced this Statement reflect a deep and abiding interest by the constituency in architectural education. This commitment bodes well for the vibrancy and productivity of the emergent Architecture Discipline Network (ADN). Endorsement, in writing, was received from the Australian Institute of Architects National Education Committee (AIA NEC): The National Education Committee (NEC) of the Australian Institute of Architects thank you for your work thus far in developing the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards for Architecture In particular, we acknowledge your close consultation with the NEC on the project along with a comprehensive cross-section of the professional and academic communities in architecture. The TLOs with the nuanced levels of capacities – to identify, develop, explain, demonstrate etc – are described at an appropriate level to be understood as minimum expectations for a Master of Architecture graduate. The Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA) has noted: There is a clear correlation between the current processes for accreditation and what may be the procedures in the future following the current review. The requirement of the outcomes as outlined in the draft paper to demonstrate capability is an appropriate way of expressing the measure of whether the learning outcomes have been achieved. The measure of capability as described in the outcome statements is enhanced with explanatory descriptions in the accompanying notes.

Enacted Cartography : Formations - 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale

RESEARCH BACKGROUND Enacted Cartography documents 10 years of creative research practice by Ian Weir Research Architect and was developed as standalone exhibition to support Dr Weir’s selection by the Australian Institute of Architects to represent innovative architectural practice via the Institute’s review entitled Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture – which took the form of an exhibition and book presented in Venice, Italy for 13th International Architecture Exhibition (Venice Architecture Biennale). All works exhibited in Enacted Cartography are original works by Dr Weir and are generated either from or for the remote biodiverse landscapes of the Fitzgerald Bioregion on the south coast of Western Australia. RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION As a creative work in its own right, the Enacted Cartography exhibition makes the following contributions to knowledge: 1. Expands understandings of architectural practice by presenting a geographically-specific but multimodal form of architectural practice - wherein practitioners cross over discipline boundaries into art practice, landscape representation, website design, undergraduate university teaching and community advocacy. 2. Contributes to understandings of how such a diverse multimodal form of practice might be represented through both digital media and traditional print media in an exhibition format. 3. Expands understandings of how architectural practitioners might work within a particular place to develop a geographically-specific sense of identity, a ‘landscape of resistance’. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Enacted Cartography was presented to an international audience during the 13th International Architecture Exhibition (Venice Architecture Biennale). The significance of Dr Weir’s research is evidence by his selected by the Australian Institute of Architects to represent innovation in architectural practice for the Biennale. Enacted Cartography addresses problems of national and international importance including: 1. The sustainable development of biodiverse remote landscapes; 2. The reconciliation of bushfire safety and biodiversity conservation; 3. The necessity for rethinking of architectural design methodologies to meet the complexity of landscape management and design; 4. It challenges orthodox forms of landscape representation (aerial photography, for example) which are demonstrably inadequate registrations of biophysical and cultural landscapes.

In pursuit of an architecture realism

The noble idea of studying seminal works to ‘see what we can learn’ has turned in the 1990s into ‘let’s see what we can take’ and in the last decade a more toxic derivative ‘what else can’t we take’. That is my observation as a student of architecture in the 1990s, and as a practitioner in the 2000s. In 2010, the sense that something is ending is clear. The next generation is rising and their gaze has shifted. The idea of classification (as a means of separation) was previously rejected by a generation of Postmodernists; the usefulness of difference declined. It’s there in the presence of plurality in the resulting architecture, a decision to mine history and seize in a willful manner. This is a process of looking back but never forward. It has been a mono-culture of absorption. The mono-culture rejected the pursuit of the realistic. It is a blanket suffocating all practice of architecture in this country from the mercantile to the intellectual. Independent reviews of Australia’s recent contributions to the Venice Architecture Biennales confirm the malaise. The next generation is beginning to reconsider classification as a means of unification. By acknowledging the characteristics of competing forces it is possible to bring them into a state of tension. Seeking a beautiful contrast is a means to a new end. In the political setting, this is described by Noel Pearson as the radical centre[1]. The concept transcends the political and in its most essential form is a cultural phenomenon. It resists the compromised position and suggests that we can look back while looking forward. The radical centre is the only demonstrated opportunity where it is possible to pursue a realistic architecture. A realistic architecture in Australia may be partially resolved by addressing our anxiety of permanence. Farrelly’s built desires[2] and Markham’s ritual demonstrations[3] are two ways into understanding the broader spectrum of permanence. But I think they are downstream of our core problem. Our problem, as architects, is that we are yet to come to terms with this place. Some call it landscape others call it country. Australian cities were laid out on what was mistaken for a blank canvas. On some occasions there was the consideration of the landscape when it presented insurmountable physical obstacles. The architecture since has continued to work on its piece of a constantly blank canvas. Even more ironic is the commercial awards programs that represent a claim within this framework but at best can only establish a dialogue within itself. This is a closed system unable to look forward. It is said that Melbourne is the most European city in the southern hemisphere but what is really being described there is the limitation of a senseless grid. After all, if Dutch landscape informs Dutch architecture why can’t the Australian landscape inform Australian architecture? To do that, we would have to acknowledge our moribund grasp of the meaning of the Australian landscape. Or more precisely what Indigenes call Country[4]. This is a complex notion and there are different ways into it. Country is experienced and understood through the senses and seared into memory. If one begins design at that starting point it is not unreasonable to think we can arrive at an end point that is a counter trajectory to where we have taken ourselves. A recent studio with Masters students confirmed this. Start by finding Country and it would be impossible to end up with a building looking like an Aboriginal man’s face. To date architecture in Australia has overwhelmingly ignored Country on the back of terra nullius. It can’t seem to get past the picturesque. Why is it so hard? The art world came to terms with this challenge, so too did the legal establishment, even the political scene headed into new waters. It would be easy to blame the budgets of commerce or the constraints of program or even the pressure of success. But that is too easy. Those factors are in fact the kind of limitations that opportunities grow out of. The past decade of economic plenty has, for the most part, smothered the idea that our capitals might enable civic settings or an architecture that is able to looks past lot line boundaries in a dignified manner. The denied opportunities of these settings to be prompted by the Country they occupy is criminal. The public realm is arrested in its development because we refuse to accept Country as a spatial condition. What we seem to be able to embrace is literal and symbolic gestures usually taking the form of a trumped up art installations. All talk – no action. To continue to leave the public realm to the stewardship of mercantile interests is like embracing derivative lending after the global financial crisis.Herein rests an argument for why we need a resourced Government Architect’s office operating not as an isolated lobbyist for business but as a steward of the public realm for both the past and the future. New South Wales is the leading model with Queensland close behind. That is not to say both do not have flaws but current calls for their cessation on the grounds of design parity poorly mask commercial self interest. In Queensland, lobbyists are heavily regulated now with an aim to ensure integrity and accountability. In essence, what I am speaking of will not be found in Reconciliation Action Plans that double as business plans, or the mining of Aboriginal culture for the next marketing gimmick, or even discussions around how to make buildings more ‘Aboriginal’. It will come from the next generation who reject the noxious mono-culture of absorption and embrace a counter trajectory to pursue an architecture of realism.

EMAGN2012 Exhibition

The EMAGN2012 exhibition, a partnership between the Australian Institute of Architects ‘2012 National Architecture Conference: EXPERIENCE’ and State Library of Queensland’s Asia Pacific Design Library. The exhibition was held in the Asia Pacific Design Library from the 10 May-10 June 2012. The EMAGN2012 exhibition celebrates the diversity, quality and experimental nature of emerging architectural work undertaken in Australia in the last 10 years. The annual exhibition is an initiative of the Emerging Architects and Graduate Network (EMAGN) currently active in all Australian states and territories. The EMAGN national group established in 2006, seeks to provide a vehicle through which the practice and production of architecture can be engaged with and reflected upon by the public, with the aim of fostering a much broader cultural awareness of Australian architecture.

Ian Weir Research Architect

Dr Ian Weir's practice is driven by a passion for the Fitzgerald Bioregion, a remote, bushfire-prone landscape on the south coats of Western Australia which is renowned internationally for its biodiversity. It is here that Dr Weir collaborates with individuals and organisations from the fields of ecology, botany, bushfire science, land surveying, landscape architecture and art practice, all of whom seek to expand understandings of this remarkable landscape. This diverse practice formation is constructed to address a significant problem beyond the scope of conventional modes of architectural practice: the reconciliation of biodiversity and bushfire with human habitation, through a multimodal approach using art practice cartography and architectural intervention. The chapter articulates Dr Weir's practice through a formation diagram and depicts key works of landscape representaion taken from "Enacted Cartography" and "Lightsite", two of Dr Weir's key research themes.

Ian Weir Research Architect : website

Research background: Communicating the diverse nature of multimodal practice is inherently difficult for the design-led research academic. Websites are an effective means of displaying images and text, but for the user/viewer the act of viewing is often random and disorienting, due to the non-linear means of accessing the information. This characteristic of websites limits the medium’s efficacy in regard to presenting an overarching philosophical standpoint or theme - the key driver behind most academic research. Research Contribution: This website: http://www.ianweirarchitect.com, presents a means of reconciling this problem by presenting a deceptively simple graphic and temporal layout, which limits the opportunity for the user/viewer to become disoriented and miss the key themes and issues that binds, the otherwise divergent, research material together. Research significance: http://www.ianweirarchitect.com, is a creative work that supplements Dr Ian Weir’s exhibition “Enacted Cartography” held in August 2012 in Brisbane and in August/September 2012 in Venice, Italy for the 13th International Architecture Exhibition (Venice Architecture Biennale). Dr Weir was selected by the Australian Institute of Architects to represent innovation in architectural practice for the Institute’s Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture, exhibition and catalogue (of the same name) held in the Australian Pavilion, The Giardini, Venice. This website is creative output that compliments Dr Weir’s other multimodal outputs including photographic artworks, cartographic maps and architectural designs.

Lindquist and Pytel

The foremost event in the international architecture calendar is the Venice International Architecture Biennale. In 2012, Creative Directors Gerard Reinmuth and Anthony Burke with TOKO Concept Design, led the Australian Pavilion exhibition, entitled FORMATIONS: New Practices in Australian Architecture. The exhibition focus was to explore and celebrate “the nature of innovative configurations of architectural practice in Australia today and the desire for a renewed form of architectural agency which drives them”. The Australian Pavilion exhibition purposely chose to highlight the actions and processes behind contemporary architectural practice, focusing not on ‘starchitecture’ projects but those far reaching and socially-engaged “practitioners who are making a substantial and consequential impact in the field and well beyond it”. FORMATIONS had two overarching themes: (1) to stimulate critical disciplinary commentary on a range of new types of Australian practices and their potentialities and (2) exciting a public audience with a spatially dynamic and thought provoking exhibition of new forms of architectural practice, their spatial consequences and transformative potentials. Six projects were displayed in the Australian Pavilion in Venice, with the printed catalogue showcasing 33 ground-breaking examples of Australian practitioners addressing internationally relevant issues in their practice. Lindquist and Pytels collaborative practice is programmed between the demands of academia and commercial fashion practice. Their interests lie in exploring the relationship between the body, new materiality and its application within different facts of design production. The creative practice is underpinned by scholarly theory such as Heidegger’s "nearness and revealing" (1927-1954), Simondon’s "transduction theory" (1989) and the Burke's "sublime" (1757). Outcomes feedback into academic studio programs, scholarly research and material development for commercial, installation and speculative design production.

Edible materials in design fabrication

Current practice based research explores the organic properties of edible materials such as rice-paper to contemplate possible material usage from garment manufacture, landscape interventions and temporary architectural canopies/facades. Research outcomes have been published through The International Conference on Designing Food and Designing for Food, London 2012, and in Burke, Anthony + Reinmuth, Gerard (Eds.) (2012) 'Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture.' Australian Pavilion 13th International Architecture Exhibition la biennale di Venezia.

Making strange

Marking Strange is a series of collaborative experimental creative works undertaken by Marissa Lindquist and Andrzej Pytel which explores the relationship between the body, new materiality and its application within different facets of design production. The ongoing experimental practice looks toward both organic and inorganic materials as a means of informing scholarly research, material development for commercial, installation and speculative design production and for academic studio programs. The work draws from theoretical positions such as Heidegger’s "nearness and revealing" (1927-1954), Simondon’s "transduction theory" (1989) and Burke's "sublime" (1757). Making Strange work has been exhibited within the Australian Pavilion Catalogue, FORMATIONS: New Practices in Australian Architecture, directed by Gerard Reinmuth and Anthony Burke with TOKO Concept Design, for the Venice International Architecture Biennale, 2012.

Velum

Velum continues material experimentation with edible materials as explored within Formations: New Practices in Australian Architecture 2012. 1 The work employs the central theme of veiling as a ‘second skin’, an intermediary agent simultaneously engaging with Heideggerian themes of ‘nearness and revealing’ (1927, 1954). This second skin creates a liminality distorting everyday objects of popular culture and technological consumption. In doing so, the work puts forth multiple considerations, the figurative play upon consumption itself; the role of the strange and obscure to affect a deepening awareness of our accelerated consumption and experience; and more tangentially, questions surrounding imminent scenarios of hybridity between body and technology. Velum represents a recent focus of the authors’ creative practice, ‘Making Strange’ (Strange Making) published and presented elsewhere. Making Strange explores the sublime process, fundamental to both the final design outcome and the designing experience. The sublime process is seen as a leading, a physiological overpowering of self to a state of intense self-presence, often leading to self-transcendence or state of otherness. As such, the work engages with the body and materials, experimentally and in a trans-disciplinary manner to inform new material practice.