CompuServe Messages

Scott: The main problem I have with physical models is scale. Some people may be able to acurately judge a space when they are looking at it through King Kong's eyes, but most, I believe, get a better understanding of and feeling for a space when they can see it from the perspective of a normal person. And don't bring up model scopes, 'cause they suck. Also, changes in lighting (heck, lighting in general), changes in material, and physical changes are all generally more easily made to a "virtual" model than a physical one. The main advantage to a physical model (and if it isn't obvious by now, I'm talking from an architectural perspective) is that you can give the client something physical that they can stick out in a lobby, or take to their board meeting without having to orchestrate VCR/monitor setup. Also, I think people have an emotional attachment to scale models — they're neat — just like that HO train set you used to have as a kid (And heck, they can be fun to make!). Are 3D (virtual) models FASTER to make than physical? I'd say this depends on the situation. If you've something that contains a lot of repetition (fenestration on a tall building, say) then virtual will definitely be faster. If the item to be modeled contains lots of unique little pieces then maybe (MAYBE) physical would be faster. BUT, regardless of which is faster, virtual is more FLEXIBLE. Dave