Jump to content

architect vs. architectural designers


TryC

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

There was a lot of heavy stuff about contract administration, dispute resolution, finances, VAT, and real life that I hadn't expected to see

I wonder why?

Maybe Architects are crap business people.

41 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

The maths and ethics parts were really easy..

In all fairness it is pretty easy at most degree level, just arithmetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

Maybe Architects are crap business people.

To be fair, this is for people 3 or so years out of uni. In a big practice they mat have no involvement in the business side, so this has to be a good idea.

 

5 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

fairness it is pretty easy at most degree level, just arithmetic.

Says someone who is good at maths?

A large proportion of our industry don't have an inherent feeling for quantities. And even more  couldn't  put an invoice together with retentions and VAT worked properly.

 

Then there is 'setting out'.  I wonder how people find it difficult. They think I'm being lucky or finnicky. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

Says someone who is good at maths?

Only because I work at it.

Really comes down to how good the teaching is and how motivated the students are.

One of my old colleagues could easily take renewable energy students from the number line to calculus in 4 months, so about 60 hours.

He could not do that with the Social Science students.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, saveasteading said:

That is the different way our brains work isn't it? Not motivation.

I am not sure, I am not a social scientist.

Motivation usually comes about by connecting one skill, in another field, to your interest.  I would have thought that knowing how many people were likely to have x-syndrome would have been useful, knowing how much power an hand dryer takes is useful when putting PV on a cafe roof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 23/07/2023 at 20:37, ToughButterCup said:

So back to the question: architect or technologist?

 

There is a place for each. 

 

Would members who ask this question in future please spend just a few minutes reading the many posts on the subject. 

 

 

 

Nice quiet fireside reading.

Just did. :D

 

We are in this phase and having spoken to some architechts, they have ruled themselves out saying things like: oh it will be around 20k or reading articles saying it is £4000 per square meter!

 

So when we are looking at a simple design, why would i want an expensive architect plus a structural engineer and someone else drawing all the required drawings .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Markuz said:

why would i want an expensive architect plus a structural engineer

Because you want novelty and a statement.

Or because there are challenges or opportunities on your plot.

 

If you want none of that, buy a standard kit house, with no changes. Rooms may be small, but it may be just right for you.

Also it will be a proven design and everything should simply slot into place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came across this thread and found it interesting.

 

For the record, I retrained as an Architectural Technologist from 2009 to 2012 at UWE having spent a long time in IT.  I had always had an interest in Architecture (having wanted to be an Architect from a young age only to be dissuaded by the careers teacher in the 70's) and we had always worked to varying degrees on our own houses.

 

I stopped working in IT in 2005 and spent the next 4 years renovating a couple of houses (until the recession hit).   When I say renovating I did nearly all the work, only the dark art of plastering and large scale brickwork was left to someone else.  It was at that point I decided to scratch the itch that had been with me since I was about 8 and went back to Uni to study AT.  I really enjoyed the course, and being in my 50's meant that I didn't have the callowness of youth and was happy to take full part in my course.

 

I then spent 10 years or so working as an AT, working on relatively small scale extensions in our locality in Wiltshire.  I had been self employed in most of my IT years and so the thought of going to work for someone else didn't appeal.

 

So to the question in hand!  I am of the view that you just cannot generalise in this arena.  Titles play a part, education is not the same for AT as for Architectural courses, and as in any profession there are good and bad.  What I would say is that my experience at UWE taught me that once the basics were taught in the first year (where the AT and Architectural degree students were taught together) that the courses diverged somewhat.  There was a degree of pragmatism and practicality that was taught to us as AT students that gradually began to fall away in the Architecture courses, to the point that when looking at the Part II and III degree shows at the end of the course I was actually angry at what I saw.

 

I suppose that there is no right or wrong in this discussion, its buyer beware in reality.  Take your time in assessing the professional that you are going to use, look for and ask for examples of their work.  The actual relationship with the designer is very important and like someone further up the thread said, one of the first things I said to anyone that took me on is that we wont necessarily agree on designs, it is an iterative process and as much as anything else I was there to guide people through the minefield of design to reach something that was as close to their desires as possible but was also possible both from a financial and technical standpoint.  Some would come with plenty of ideas and others had no idea and simply left it up to me.

 

One other thing to add is regarding titles!  I spent so much time trying to disabuse clients that I was an architect, I was always very upfront about what I was qualified to do.  On a scale of importance titles rank low, and as long as someone is not trying to pull the wool over their eyes with regard their qualifications then I think is low down the priority list of things to look for.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>> why would i want an expensive architect plus a structural engineer and someone else drawing all the required drawings

 

IMO you want an architect for ‘magic’, SE to make the judgements and calcs on construction methods and techniques and a detail person to worry the insulation, damp, ventilation, rain screen, BC regs etc. Anyone can do the drawings if they understand what they need to draw. That could be one person or four, or more. Maybe a planning consultant too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...