Really grateful, whenever it happens:
Happy to connect with you Robert!
I saw you joined the BIM developer master course at That open company. I’m curious what are your motives or plan for such a step?
Likewise.
Motives:
To learn. And to meet people who want to partner in making real my proposal here: https://tangerinefocus.com
Great, I had a quick look it seems like it needs a good read!
Thanks. It’s this:
What would ‘technical drawing’ look like if it were invented today rather than centuries ago? What if it did for digital models what it’s done for mental models?
If it were developed IN digital models, what would it look and feel like?
I show that on the website.
As usual, it helps to think of purpose. So the purpose of technical drawing, is visual close study (VCS) of models mental, physical, and digital.
Seems like an interesting point 🤔, It feels too broad too. Did you start by categorizing it?
I started by building an automatic fusion of drawings and models:
Before that I worked in architecture firms building digital models and automated technical drawings.
Yes, I wrote for years about categorization, on my blog: https://tangerinefocus.com/blog-tangerine/
- Models are (spatial visual) environments.
- Drawings are acts and expressions of narrowed attentive focus, visual close study (VCS) for interpretation and affirmation purposes.
Those are two entirely different categories, mutually interconnected/dependent.
How do you differentiate between this and BIM models?
Between drawing and BIM models?
And between the future evolution in form of drawing and BIM models?
I differentiate the same way:
- BIMs are models. Wide, expansive, whole environments.
- TGNs are acts of narrowed attentive focus WITHIN BIMs (or within mechanical models, or medical models, GIS models, or any other kind of digital spatial visual model)
Their purpose is visual close study, for interpretive purposes, and for affirmation. I discuss it here:
I’ll give it a good read and come back if I have questions! Thanks for sharing 🙏
There are demo videos on the proposal page. Thanks. I appreciate you asking.
In case you want more general discussion, here’s something on the relation to just walking around in everyday experience, on the distinction between the spatial visual environment (the world around us) and some specifics in our act of perception of that. There’s a parallel there to the distinction between drawing and modeling.
The proposal is here:
Awesome Thanks!
I don’t presume you’ll find my writing interesting. But I hope you do.
The autonomic/somatic article is summed up here near the top of the piece:
Now it should be clear already that as digital environments these days become ever more “realistic”, they become stand-ins for the real world and thus are subject to the same fundamental constraints. That is, if we are going to immerse ourselves in them and perceive them, our perception operates according to the same gradient ranging from autonomic to somatic visual processing.
In video games, autonomic visual processing is usually adequate. But for more complex tasks, it isn’t. Where it isn’t, effort, and equipment are needed.
TGN is that equipment, the future evolution of technical drawing.
By the way:
Future modelers (modeling softwares) should automate VCS rigs creation within them models for visual close study (for interpretation and affirmation reasons throughout model creation, to delivery, to usage lifespan), and also extend those rigs with ‘control rods’ functions built into them that enable human-in-the-loop guidance of Al-generated (or conventional computationally-generated) models:
OPEN VCS, a lens for looking at models 