[00:01:08.20] I'm happy to start them and I'd like to say that that in the spirit of shape [00:01:15.01] [00:01:15.01] craft in this period of shape numbers is that [00:01:19.06] [00:01:19.06] better in the spirit of shape grammars I have [00:01:22.06] [00:01:22.06] no position that's that truly is the whole point of schemas and rules and [00:01:30.05] [00:01:30.05] shapes is that you can change your mind and move around [00:01:33.08] [00:01:33.08] I think that's what's most impressive about the demonstration we saw this [00:01:37.23] [00:01:37.23] morning is it Stannis and his group have finally put together a machine that [00:01:46.02] [00:01:46.02] actually allows you to put things together with reduction rules and then [00:01:51.05] [00:01:51.05] to embedding again and I thought that was very impressive and certainly the [00:01:55.01] [00:01:55.01] enthusiasm of his students and the researchers in the group only bodes well [00:01:59.16] [00:01:59.16] for the future and my basic position is that I'd like to encourage everybody to [00:02:06.04] [00:02:06.04] remain remain positioned las' not with respect to shape grammars but with [00:02:10.07] [00:02:10.07] respect to what you do when you apply them to design and it's that position [00:02:14.12] [00:02:14.12] --less ness that leads to creativity and imagination and certainly is the kind of [00:02:19.06] [00:02:19.06] thing that you pick up when you read people like us while they're SD college [00:02:25.14] [00:02:25.14] and people who are really trying to look at what imagination is in literature and [00:02:32.21] [00:02:32.21] pictures and the interesting thing out the thing is is that it also comes up in [00:02:37.09] [00:02:37.09] mathematics with people like von Neumann who were looking at the limits of [00:02:40.23] [00:02:40.23] calculating doing what you can't do so what again to [00:02:44.21] [00:02:44.21] position lessness I'm just trying to do a little report because there to the two [00:03:08.10] [00:03:08.10] sessions we had been very different very different so probably there was not a [00:03:13.19] [00:03:13.19] leader and the first one was really about I opened that with the cook I [00:03:19.03] [00:03:19.03] thought it was a very important question I have what a shape and how does shape [00:03:25.06] [00:03:25.06] differ from form thing entity or the figure obviously so there's a whole [00:03:33.11] [00:03:33.11] range of like entities that we know that are also philosophic I'm from I'm from [00:03:38.23] [00:03:38.23] theory so so focal point of view thing is I need to find right form has an [00:03:45.18] [00:03:45.18] enormous history but shape partly right so I was asking the question what make [00:03:53.03] [00:03:53.03] what makes a shake and that's where the trouble starts and because I've got a [00:04:00.07] [00:04:00.07] lot of answer saying shape is what you see in just right it was like a [00:04:06.20] [00:04:06.20] Stalinist ideas of shape but that meant the multiplicity so the question then is [00:04:12.05] [00:04:12.05] if that's multiple multiple entity then it's a question about how does that [00:04:17.19] [00:04:17.19] thing exist by itself right is it really dependent on our precision on our [00:04:23.17] [00:04:23.17] perception or or does it shape it is by itself then we ask the question of parts [00:04:29.06] [00:04:29.06] and hold is our shapes made of elements right because if there's a grammar there [00:04:33.12] [00:04:33.12] must be a grammar of elements that then make up shape and then obviously these [00:04:38.08] [00:04:38.08] elements are shapes - right so you get two levels of shape [00:04:41.19] [00:04:41.19] it's like a mini shapes and a maxi shape and then the question is really how does [00:04:49.07] [00:04:49.07] that thing exist because it's really an ontological question not not just a [00:04:53.06] [00:04:53.06] photo more logical question in the sense that we perceive that thing that's how [00:04:56.20] [00:04:56.20] does it exist by itself so there was a little conclusion in the sense that okay [00:05:02.03] [00:05:02.03] each thing or each shape exists on two levels one is its geometry the other is [00:05:06.23] [00:05:06.23] its organization and that that brings brought us to the question of ok how are [00:05:13.10] [00:05:13.10] didn't things organized and of course there's a lot of topological answers [00:05:17.16] [00:05:17.16] that among geometrical or parametric answers to compete right so there must [00:05:23.04] [00:05:23.04] be some kind of system see that allows elements to combine in this elements if [00:05:27.22] [00:05:27.22] they're like continuous lines like we draw them and they must be somehow [00:05:31.07] [00:05:31.07] related by a not continuous lines there's lines so they relate to one [00:05:35.16] [00:05:35.16] another to actually make shapes so that I have an I have an issue with it with [00:05:41.14] [00:05:41.14] the notion of shape that's that's it I mean also how it relates to thing and [00:05:46.02] [00:05:46.02] form and entity of all those sort of issues of those era what what is shit [00:05:53.11] [00:05:53.11] because it seems like a very innocent term but that's I don't think it's very [00:05:57.14] [00:05:57.14] innocent the other the other discussion was very interesting in the sense that [00:06:02.03] [00:06:02.03] it's touched that started with the question of a sketch what is a sketch [00:06:05.18] [00:06:05.18] and how does a sketch differ from a drawing from a doodle so there was like [00:06:12.01] [00:06:12.01] ok sketches Paul's doodling right so it's more than dueling it's more than [00:06:17.00] [00:06:17.00] automatic drawing but it's not a drawing yet right so it's the way of a hawkish a [00:06:22.10] [00:06:22.10] grammar help reading sketches to become drawings right to find directions and if [00:06:28.18] [00:06:28.18] there's not an issue let's say between possibility and potential right because [00:06:33.06] [00:06:33.06] of your sketch you try to find a direction and it might be that if your [00:06:38.02] [00:06:38.02] shape grammar software is reading your sketch it gives you all the [00:06:41.06] [00:06:41.06] possibilities I'd like with your triangles to get 500 [00:06:46.01] [00:06:46.01] and maybe I'm only interested in five of them there's a whole range of [00:06:51.04] [00:06:51.04] possibilities so it's the question of really what is possibility for this [00:06:54.11] [00:06:54.11] potential or tendency that's death to somebody that's good listen let's go [00:07:01.05] [00:07:01.05] through the first two numbers here probably like how you can begin to [00:07:05.10] [00:07:05.10] discuss it I didn't really take notes so you can forget something important or [00:07:19.12] [00:07:19.12] misrepresent something that was discussed please I encourage the [00:07:25.03] [00:07:25.03] remembers of the two workshops to not be shy and speed up but I remember his [00:07:33.17] [00:07:33.17] first of all at the compliment to the interpreter is that we have seen in [00:07:39.09] [00:07:39.09] terms of the interface how old intuitiveness can be combined at the [00:07:45.01] [00:07:45.01] same time with position by defining the left hand side immediately headed out of [00:07:51.11] [00:07:51.11] the existing shape and files the right hand side by manipulating it always [00:07:59.04] [00:07:59.04] related to the clear point of reference I might also add in the to shake my [00:08:06.17] [00:08:06.17] mentor as I have entered and admittedly extremely widget time [00:08:11.19] [00:08:11.19] constraints did not have the important characteristic that to me every shaker [00:08:19.04] [00:08:19.04] my interpreter in principle should have namely that the left and right hand [00:08:24.16] [00:08:24.16] sides are syntactically identical such that you can apply each roll backwards [00:08:30.23] [00:08:30.23] and forwards in the extreme you have a finished shape and you can test if it is [00:08:36.10] [00:08:36.10] canonical if by applying enough fluids backwards direction and with the initial [00:08:42.05] [00:08:42.05] shape or not just as a general how physically this is I don't know but just [00:08:47.21] [00:08:47.21] to give you idea about backwards the wound application means whereas the [00:08:53.23] [00:08:53.23] sacrum infers that I implemented had to use some existing shells particularly in [00:09:02.16] [00:09:02.16] order if that had an a matching wheel in it because we did not have enough time [00:09:07.09] [00:09:07.09] to my matching from scratch and it always turned out that there's no [00:09:12.12] [00:09:12.12] syntactical equivalents between the left and right hand side the left hand side [00:09:16.18] [00:09:16.18] typically is a collection of predicates that has to be satisfied and at the same [00:09:21.04] [00:09:21.04] time help fill in the parameters with real values given the current shape and [00:09:27.12] [00:09:27.12] the right hand side of the procedure just that tells you what the rules of [00:09:31.15] [00:09:31.15] parameters that you have collected so I am very pleased to see the cherem [00:09:36.15] [00:09:36.15] interpreter that is really a white one in this aspect we got very interested in [00:09:43.20] [00:09:43.20] the question how signatures are used in the interpreter for a matching but [00:09:50.20] [00:09:50.20] apparently this is work in progress and we did not get a definite answer on that [00:09:59.01] [00:09:59.01] but it seems to be very interesting having beautiful [00:10:03.14] [00:10:03.14] what wanted to also bring in the discussion of a manifest design style [00:10:13.10] [00:10:13.10] stop if that gives the designer will uses the system some some idea of where [00:10:19.22] [00:10:19.22] where he or she actually is rather than always even just the existing state of [00:10:26.15] [00:10:26.15] the design but as I said we we never got into that and I leave it was that and [00:10:32.04] [00:10:32.04] hand to my friend Chris thank you I'll just make a couple of very I think quite [00:10:41.12] [00:10:41.12] brief remarks and apologize to my colleagues beforehand fit in the gaps [00:10:50.17] [00:10:50.17] later one of the one of the things that has sort of intrigued me is the the [00:10:59.03] [00:10:59.03] client or almost the kind of categories of application designed that might and [00:11:12.02] [00:11:12.02] it seems one category which is essentially about exploration which [00:11:18.20] [00:11:18.20] takes it rules and you look at what might happen [00:11:22.08] [00:11:22.08] now you might constrain that and in all sorts of ways but essentially that's a [00:11:28.02] [00:11:28.02] explore exploratory exploratory mode it's not fundamentally very interesting [00:11:35.23] [00:11:35.23] but certainly the tool we've shown this morning does that very well the second [00:11:42.16] [00:11:42.16] sort of stage which is rather more probable difficult and probably seen [00:11:49.14] [00:11:49.14] from the discussion around sort of engineering mechanical engineering [00:11:55.22] [00:11:55.22] building second area is where you have a number say list let's say two sets of [00:12:07.15] [00:12:07.15] rules which are mate making of steps of Li the same the same object the same [00:12:14.20] [00:12:14.20] design two descriptions to separate descriptions rule set of rules which [00:12:19.21] [00:12:19.21] make the same thing and then you then you end up with wither with a sort of an [00:12:28.03] [00:12:28.03] activity that isn't really addressed by the interpreter which is around [00:12:35.08] [00:12:35.08] resolving the differences between those descriptions so that's a motto roof [00:12:42.06] [00:12:42.06] that's a matter of the meeting more to two sets of two sets of rules ostensibly [00:12:50.06] [00:12:50.06] describing the same the same thing and the third way in design that you might [00:12:57.02] [00:12:57.02] use the rules but the but the way one set of rules to make something is [00:13:17.13] [00:13:17.13] transformed into and that is a a sort of a kind of signature creative act seems [00:13:28.07] [00:13:28.07] to be quite important in design so one set of rules secondly two sets of rules [00:13:36.05] [00:13:36.05] generating difference requiring resolution and third one set of rules [00:13:42.18] [00:13:42.18] transformed into another in a panel you like to creatively though seem to be [00:13:48.02] [00:13:48.02] just a reflection the categories of activity that might be or Catterick ways [00:13:55.19] [00:13:55.19] that the grammar or sets of rules might be [00:14:00.23] [00:14:00.23] in design I think it's those things which this shape machine needs to [00:14:08.18] [00:14:08.18] address to see how it addresses each of those three okay so okay I'll talk [00:14:22.23] [00:14:22.23] loudly before I say anything about our task to talk about the shake machine and [00:14:29.17] [00:14:29.17] education I would like to publicly thank fellows who are bringing all these [00:14:34.11] [00:14:34.11] people together today it is really overwhelming I've told a number of [00:14:39.00] [00:14:39.00] people that is Oh personally overwhelming for me to see over 30 years [00:14:43.21] [00:14:43.21] of my students here in one place and thank you very much for putting this [00:14:48.21] [00:14:48.21] together you deserve a round of applause [00:14:53.00] [00:14:56.05] this was one of our first students at UCLA congratulations okay so we were [00:15:04.13] [00:15:04.13] tasked with talking about the shake machine and education and about 10 [00:15:10.06] [00:15:10.06] minutes after a second session concluded we discovered that we had in fact not [00:15:14.06] [00:15:14.06] talked about the shake machine at all I'm sorry but we did talk about software [00:15:24.14] [00:15:24.14] we did have some interesting discussions first about using shape grammar software [00:15:29.09] [00:15:29.09] in education and we talked about the benefits and the drawbacks of doing [00:15:37.05] [00:15:37.05] things of working with shape grammars through software versus working with [00:15:43.13] [00:15:43.13] shape grammars by hand and those of you who know me know that I teach when I [00:15:48.23] [00:15:48.23] teach my classes I insist that students do everything by hand because my [00:15:54.03] [00:15:54.03] position is that in order to really understand how shape routers work and [00:15:58.10] [00:15:58.10] the benefits of shape grammars you need to apply rules by hand and [00:16:03.07] [00:16:03.07] you to do it slowly okay so that was my position that was quickly countered by [00:16:06.17] [00:16:06.17] other people at the table who talked about the benefits of the software so we [00:16:11.02] [00:16:11.02] had some interesting discussions about when and how and where to introduce [00:16:15.19] [00:16:15.19] shape grammars software in an educational process and Angele was [00:16:22.07] [00:16:22.07] looking at antenna and who is at our table and n who's had a lot of [00:16:25.08] [00:16:25.08] experience teaching shape grammars with software and being very aware of the [00:16:30.21] [00:16:30.21] need to have software interfaces that are designer friendly so we often [00:16:36.14] [00:16:36.14] talking we talked about in limitations we talked about the back end and the [00:16:39.18] [00:16:39.18] stuff that you can't see the technical parts but none of that actually becomes [00:16:43.23] [00:16:43.23] usable unless we have various interfaces and I was impressed with what you very [00:16:49.11] [00:16:49.11] impressed with what you showed this morning in terms of the interface and we [00:16:53.01] [00:16:53.01] had real-time demonstrations of how the shape was she worked in that and that [00:16:57.12] [00:16:57.12] was very impressive so we talked about analog versus digital [00:17:00.23] [00:17:00.23] and doing things fast and doing things slowly and what would you know the [00:17:04.15] [00:17:04.15] benefits again and the weaknesses of those two approaches from their [00:17:10.17] [00:17:10.17] conversations were pretty free ranging we had some discussion about generative [00:17:20.03] [00:17:20.03] design and the idea of being able to generate multiple possibilities and very [00:17:25.08] [00:17:25.08] large design spaces and implications of that in terms of teaching you know if [00:17:31.10] [00:17:31.10] you have really huge design spaces generated by your rule-based approach [00:17:34.21] [00:17:34.21] how is that presented to students and what do they learn from that and again [00:17:40.11] [00:17:40.11] we had discussion you know different different ways of searching through a [00:17:44.08] [00:17:44.08] design space generated by rule-based design from there we talked about [00:17:48.07] [00:17:48.07] differences between generative design parametric design which is very popular [00:17:52.14] [00:17:52.14] and has helped actually the shape grammar community in advocating for [00:17:56.20] [00:17:56.20] rule-based design when I first started teaching parametric design was not [00:18:01.08] [00:18:01.08] popular at all and we introduced rule-based design in this notion of [00:18:06.09] [00:18:06.09] variational with who his we don't want to know about [00:18:11.15] [00:18:11.15] multiple possibilities there's only one good possibility and that's it you know [00:18:16.13] [00:18:16.13] but since parametric design has been on the rise that's kind of helped boost the [00:18:20.15] [00:18:20.15] kind of shape grammar community indirectly but of course we know that [00:18:24.04] [00:18:24.04] shape grammars are much much more powerful than parametric design and it [00:18:29.02] [00:18:29.02] calls for more powerful software we also talked about the kind of trade-offs are [00:18:38.12] [00:18:38.12] the balance between when you're using generative designer paper browsers do [00:18:42.03] [00:18:42.03] either software that analog or digital the balance between predictability and [00:18:47.11] [00:18:47.11] unpredictability when you're using shape grammars so you want to not get anything [00:18:53.04] [00:18:53.04] and everything you want to get a certain vein a range of possibilities that are [00:18:56.23] [00:18:56.23] meaningful what's now not totally predictable and that totally [00:19:01.19] [00:19:01.19] unpredictable so we had some interesting discussions around around that and then [00:19:06.16] [00:19:06.16] we talked about how one introduces shape grammars to different levels of [00:19:10.22] [00:19:10.22] architectural design students from undergraduate to graduate and the notion [00:19:18.19] [00:19:18.19] of at least at an undergraduate level of introducing rule-based design implicitly [00:19:23.01] [00:19:23.01] and I haven't mentioning shaped parameters don't even use the word shape [00:19:26.08] [00:19:26.08] rule with just the notion of you know possibly general rules and what have you [00:19:31.07] [00:19:31.07] seen a design how does repeat and can you replicate this can you communicate [00:19:35.07] [00:19:35.07] the idea to your neighbor through some means so so the idea of rules is [00:19:40.22] [00:19:40.22] introduced implicit Lee versus explicitly we talked about benefits of [00:19:45.19] [00:19:45.19] explicit instruction and shape grammars and how one might might do that and what [00:19:51.03] [00:19:51.03] happens at the graduate level as well we also talked of getting back to what lars [00:19:57.15] [00:19:57.15] was was talking about we change shapes and things we had some [00:20:02.09] [00:20:02.09] discussion of that but from quite a different angle we talked about grammars [00:20:08.18] [00:20:08.18] that work with shapes but in the process of shape computation material [00:20:16.15] [00:20:16.15] manifestations of the shapes are made and reflecting on the material [00:20:20.23] [00:20:20.23] manifestations of the shapes and using that then to go back and guide the kind [00:20:26.15] [00:20:26.15] of transformation or regeneration of designs with shapes and kept going back [00:20:31.07] [00:20:31.07] and forth between abstract shapes and material men you know real physical [00:20:36.13] [00:20:36.13] material manifestations of the shapes and the world and the benefits of doing [00:20:41.01] [00:20:41.01] that again in terms of teaching shape grammars we actually see the physical [00:20:45.11] [00:20:45.11] results of shape computations as opposed to just having them on paper or on the [00:20:50.10] [00:20:50.10] screens with software ok I'll leave it at that I'm sure I'd left out a lot I'm [00:20:58.00] [00:20:58.00] gonna hand it over [00:21:00.12] [00:21:01.15] so I understood our question was how does this technology affect design [00:21:07.14] [00:21:07.14] synthesis so the first thing we started to talk about was how the interface [00:21:12.15] [00:21:12.15] allowed you to sketch so in a way it it showed us a cut a tool for doing design [00:21:21.07] [00:21:21.07] that accommodated human behavior and preferences rather than having a tool [00:21:25.20] [00:21:25.20] that has preferred to use because it does expense it's one and and from that [00:21:31.15] [00:21:31.15] we were talking about how we might pitch it to design it so the viewers designers [00:21:36.19] [00:21:36.19] want to feel like they're designing so turning up and say we've got something [00:21:40.15] [00:21:40.15] that which of you in autumn eight years of [00:21:42.13] [00:21:42.13] learning to succeed so really it was around pitching is people that can [00:21:47.09] [00:21:47.09] improve people's creativity because it needs it don't waste time doing things [00:21:51.06] [00:21:51.06] but machine do so though in terms of design synthesis we asked what kinds of [00:21:56.23] [00:21:56.23] things can we design so it could be shapes rules designs we went through [00:22:02.01] [00:22:02.01] solution spaces so you're great this morning had that was a solution space in [00:22:07.03] [00:22:07.03] the UK mobile were doing some stuff with those materials which is another kind of [00:22:12.09] [00:22:12.09] solution space and then we went on to think about things aren't shaped so [00:22:16.18] [00:22:16.18] things that are represented by shades but actually aren't shades a map took us [00:22:21.11] [00:22:21.11] took through this of new ways of analyzing interpreting which I think [00:22:25.04] [00:22:25.04] Chris mentioned around you know but being able to take this design and then [00:22:30.02] [00:22:30.02] using rules to superimpose on it say different manufacturing processes which [00:22:35.12] [00:22:35.12] she did that which again companies spend a lot of money doing but if you can [00:22:40.15] [00:22:40.15] automate that it sort of would save a lot of time the speed of development [00:22:44.08] [00:22:44.08] process and then in terms of the technology well it seemed that there was [00:22:52.05] [00:22:52.05] sort of there were parts of it that we thought were could be used and exploited [00:22:58.00] [00:22:58.00] by quickly so there's such method and being able to find subjects could be [00:23:02.12] [00:23:02.12] applied in all kinds of places and the other thing was the cleaning of the [00:23:06.08] [00:23:06.08] Excel files quite a few people were quite excited not be able to do that and [00:23:14.00] [00:23:14.00] then that the idea you could have a design system where designers didn't [00:23:19.07] [00:23:19.07] need to know or care about what the representation was because the [00:23:21.21] [00:23:21.21] I'm just working with our sketches and then another thing that was of interest [00:23:26.09] [00:23:26.09] people was his idea of using AI in design synthesis and maybe applying it [00:23:32.20] [00:23:32.20] to designs but also applying it to rules and grandmas and a sort of metadata [00:23:36.16] [00:23:36.16] behind and what people are designing with and then we were talking about the [00:23:42.13] [00:23:42.13] sort of you know he had the bitmap sort of like a visual computing so the [00:23:48.03] [00:23:48.03] sorting of numbers and items so it seemed to us that that really gives a [00:23:53.01] [00:23:53.01] lot of potential so you could imagine ending up with a visual something doing [00:23:57.06] [00:23:57.06] visual computation where actually people can't see what's being computed but just [00:24:01.16] [00:24:01.16] that idea of having something visual would work and then that would lead to a [00:24:06.19] [00:24:06.19] need for new kinds of computation infrastructures which would run the [00:24:11.01] [00:24:11.01] visual computation processes more efficiently and then finally if I look [00:24:16.02] [00:24:16.02] at the whole questions of what this technology and design things synthesis [00:24:20.07] [00:24:20.07] bring together we have some conversations we show that we win he [00:24:23.17] [00:24:23.17] took response we could do around capturing design intent functionality [00:24:29.11] [00:24:29.11] sort of a different and aspects of design that go with shape but we another [00:24:37.21] [00:24:47.22] person great words about AI about materiality about all sorts of different [00:24:53.20] [00:24:53.20] things so I would welcome now to jump into discussion and it started out with [00:25:01.01] [00:25:01.01] I agree so who would like to start first so we start to begin but [00:25:11.04] [00:25:19.12] okay it's always where the stock is always hard this was not a service I [00:25:25.05] [00:25:25.05] mean I would have to say because it's sitting here with David he's really like [00:25:28.23] [00:25:28.23] it goes only way the weight is on this side and Lars was generous enough to [00:25:36.00] [00:25:36.00] come out of the blue but just because we enjoy what he saw in my apartment like [00:25:42.03] [00:25:42.03] two weeks ago of course the question that you asked us [00:25:45.17] [00:25:45.17] was a generation of visual computation limits and amorous adventure you just [00:25:51.13] [00:25:51.13] I'm just like in the dark how that works your Studios are all about finding these [00:25:59.02] [00:25:59.02] bits and pieces and what do they mean what kind of amazing okay basically I [00:26:16.02] [00:26:16.02] don't use the word shape I use the word figure which is slightly different i I [00:26:23.08] [00:26:23.08] think but I'm not sure I should make that argument but a figure is like your [00:26:30.03] [00:26:30.03] stuff al I'm very happy line seven and it comes close to another line and it [00:26:36.03] [00:26:36.03] responds not just by moving but also by changing its form so it's it's very [00:26:42.00] [00:26:42.00] rough skin Ian as a very Hogarth it's like s lines see lines J lines [00:26:46.10] [00:26:46.10] whatever you're called is there's a range of figures very gothic you know [00:26:49.09] [00:26:49.09] and these lines snip at each other so they they have behavior like bulls in a [00:26:55.10] [00:26:55.10] panic and how they have behavior and then they team up so that's a shape [00:26:58.22] [00:26:58.22] that's configuring but they do that because they have [00:27:02.07] [00:27:02.07] themselves also - so we shape grammar I'm never sure that is not the element [00:27:12.13] [00:27:12.13] that is moved by grammar is not that grammar on the outside of you is it not [00:27:20.02] [00:27:20.02] an internal movement the element but it's like the triangle [00:27:23.12] [00:27:23.12] you notice there's this triangle in heaven that tells these three lines that [00:27:28.12] [00:27:28.12] they're actually part of a secret time I'd like to say this Greek as I can this [00:27:37.12] [00:27:37.12] is heavenly triangle that tells these three lines you've got their second [00:27:41.14] [00:27:41.14] lines you know they don't know that they're you know they're just there [00:27:44.23] [00:27:44.23] they don't sniffing each other it isn't just told by this heavenly thing that [00:27:48.22] [00:27:48.22] they're part of the secret thing all the time and that's why my issue starts like [00:27:54.17] [00:27:54.17] okay it's that's a reading it's not an internal behavior of those elements [00:27:58.18] [00:27:58.18] that's an external do you mythical not very parametric or think I'm trying to [00:28:08.19] [00:28:08.19] be so I'm trying to think like okay what is shaped different from from patterns [00:28:14.08] [00:28:14.08] and four can you guys switch positions oh yeah so can I jump in I think you're [00:28:21.15] [00:28:21.15] overthinking it well the sort of poncho [00:28:27.16] [00:28:29.20] yeah so I think it's so not that what you're thinking is uninteresting I'm [00:28:35.00] [00:28:35.00] that's kind of critique of what you're saying [00:28:36.18] [00:28:36.18] but in terms of visual computation I think it's all that you're overthinking [00:28:42.01] [00:28:42.01] and if a visual visual computing is computing it's algorithmic it's kind of [00:28:48.05] [00:28:48.05] process or in role - yeah but it's using visual spatial entities [00:28:53.05] [00:28:53.05] opposed to texts or lines of code you know we've all know the physio spec [00:28:58.14] [00:28:58.14] 'test one looking at the screen it's not necessarily on screen like I said you [00:29:03.19] [00:29:03.19] can do it's originally it's on paper it's just drawings on paper yeah but you [00:29:08.09] [00:29:08.09] need a second agent to see the zero component is with the agent if the agent [00:29:13.22] [00:29:13.22] is the user of the designer that's what I mean so an agency is not any elements [00:29:18.16] [00:29:18.16] it's in and the person looking yeah absolutely so you have some visual space [00:29:23.16] [00:29:23.16] entities and the user is the designer working with it like you do in the [00:29:28.08] [00:29:28.08] studio looking at things and saying oh I see this I want to do that with it the [00:29:38.16] [00:29:38.16] argument is really that like when these elements would have internal behavior to [00:29:42.23] [00:29:42.23] actually see each other without me seeing them no yeah well there is [00:29:53.04] [00:29:53.04] nothing without the human human foresee perceiving now we are on earth were like [00:30:01.02] [00:30:01.02] force at five to 15 million years so the earth is at least well but I don't know [00:30:07.06] [00:30:07.06] that I'd want to get into a philosophical yeah well there was [00:30:12.08] [00:30:12.08] perception before us [00:30:15.12] [00:30:17.00] and mountains head shapes kept saying the students talk to you you've got to [00:30:41.18] [00:30:41.18] have a conversation and what he was saying was he got would look at what [00:30:47.11] [00:30:47.11] you've done with fresh knives every time you look at because you've got a much [00:30:51.17] [00:30:51.17] better I suggest new things and that's exactly what she follows the system [00:31:00.18] [00:31:00.18] tries I totally get that Reinhardt is anybody's super interesting but I'm just [00:31:12.20] [00:31:12.20] wondering like my point is it is not in wanna know I'm just wondering if there's [00:31:18.16] [00:31:18.16] so much multiplicity in that shade how do you then draw it as such right so [00:31:26.02] [00:31:26.02] there's probably five million ways of looking at the square but if there's [00:31:29.18] [00:31:29.18] multiplicity in that thing maybe you could draw it differently [00:31:33.07] [00:31:33.07] so then there's a loop between the multiplicity of you seeing and and one [00:31:38.18] [00:31:38.18] generates it wouldn't that be the argument so the argument is that there [00:31:43.13] [00:31:43.13] is a if there's variability in the perception of it how does that [00:31:48.23] [00:31:48.23] variability become generative and actually creates a generate a sense of [00:31:54.19] [00:31:54.19] show or set of shape otherwise [00:32:00.21] [00:32:03.02] why I think it needs something [00:32:08.10] [00:32:08.14] well that variability I think it has to do also look I was I was there's this [00:32:14.16] [00:32:14.16] beautiful diagram of Ruskin way it's called abstract lines and they're lines [00:32:20.15] [00:32:20.15] of my belief margins or ballistics or the contour of a glaze here [00:32:28.04] [00:32:28.04] basically there's are all shapes made by movements that's how we see these are [00:32:34.13] [00:32:34.13] action lines not so much abstract lines and action lines and that's how he [00:32:39.13] [00:32:39.13] analyzes those lines not as they rest but they're still active all right so I [00:32:44.11] [00:32:44.11] think that what's interesting there is that the variability is actually part of [00:32:48.06] [00:32:48.06] of the element so it's not just his reading of it his perception but it's [00:32:53.12] [00:32:53.12] actually the line itself that's variable of course appears right-sided oh and [00:32:58.20] [00:32:58.20] there's like curse of the church but the curves I said they're very good at [00:33:03.14] [00:33:03.14] variability Kurt said that there's a there's a there's an issue of how [00:33:14.05] [00:33:14.05] variability itself becomes generative in design do that you can do that with a [00:33:20.06] [00:33:20.06] rule no no it's really it's rule base so you whatever it is you see in that [00:33:25.03] [00:33:25.03] Square and that line then you can turn that into a rule and say I see this and [00:33:29.15] [00:33:29.15] I'm gonna do that with it because I see it this particular way [00:33:34.19] [00:33:35.17] I just want to have something about the styles it would be complete [00:33:40.20] [00:33:40.20] misunderstanding to think shape connoisseur something that a hand it's [00:33:45.13] [00:33:45.13] pure desire I think they're ultimately I designed by the designer him or herself [00:33:52.23] [00:33:52.23] because he has some of the agreements to explore the implications of the idea is [00:33:59.17] [00:33:59.17] either for fun or in the context of a given project i but it's all in the name [00:34:05.01] [00:34:05.01] which to my surprise I have never heard mentioned in any piece of literature on [00:34:10.18] [00:34:10.18] shared promise and that is how the cold who wrote a decades ago the little [00:34:18.17] [00:34:18.17] production system that produces drawings like like he would do by hand and I [00:34:25.00] [00:34:25.00] actually bought one of his bones for ten bucks when he had an exhibition and you [00:34:31.10] [00:34:31.10] know there was a big birthday for this times very primitive of a nowadays very [00:34:37.20] [00:34:37.20] primitive printer that would create these and I have a drawing [00:34:41.23] [00:34:41.23] yes that has the typical handle cone-shaped movies organic illiterate [00:34:48.04] [00:34:48.04] review areas for America Karen but in this particular drawing his [00:34:57.03] [00:34:57.03] program suddenly takes off the leader of the upper left upper right corner and [00:35:04.00] [00:35:04.00] draw us a little little cloud into the middle of nowhere and then it takes [00:35:10.20] [00:35:10.20] often draw something else I'm sure Cohen was totally surprised why [00:35:17.00] [00:35:17.00] this happened and as it happens and of course it was extremely interesting and [00:35:22.06] [00:35:22.06] he saw it it as a drawing to me sigh I think you still [00:35:27.16] [00:35:27.16] I have to look it up so it should not as I say it should be see him as a tool [00:35:36.18] [00:35:36.18] that is under the designers control not something handed to him or her you know [00:35:43.06] [00:35:43.06] from some higher authority no it was that the one of the places I used shake [00:35:57.06] [00:35:57.06] remedies in the teachers unions and what I'd say is they say they've got trouble [00:36:03.08] [00:36:03.08] using a cat system and the problem isn't that they can't use the cat system is [00:36:07.07] [00:36:07.07] that they don't actually know what they want to define and you can't design for [00:36:12.05] [00:36:12.05] the cat system because you've got the entities you've typed into it so from a [00:36:17.11] [00:36:17.11] four four suits if you want to think well how do I teach students to do [00:36:21.20] [00:36:21.20] design synthesis god alone knows you just go from gates fired or something so [00:36:26.16] [00:36:26.16] actually having a shape grammar what were you can actually compute some [00:36:31.01] [00:36:31.01] designs just helps inspire them but to me the things that the shape I was [00:36:35.21] [00:36:35.21] operating are just passive things that are just a few C and having anything to [00:36:43.04] [00:36:43.04] the place is good and it just sort of takes people off in packs and that [00:36:49.05] [00:36:49.05] certainly to feedback I've had from students that just having anything that [00:36:53.22] [00:36:53.22] acts as a scene to set them off and it's what they need to sort of create new [00:37:00.18] [00:37:00.18] things I've never thought of the things that [00:37:04.16] [00:37:04.16] are looking at being things that have the behavior themselves that there's [00:37:08.08] [00:37:08.08] stuff that people see because he believes suggesting the thing of the [00:37:15.14] [00:37:15.14] things have got me hating so they might have but that could just be an [00:37:18.11] [00:37:18.11] interpretation we were discussing how requires one the sienna lightly and [00:37:25.05] [00:37:25.05] there was a little competition for the clients that I wanted to see how to [00:37:29.00] [00:37:29.00] architect he started with a large piece of paper I guess he knew it was doing [00:37:34.03] [00:37:34.03] but so he's like cutting this piece and falling it is ninety cents falling but [00:37:42.12] [00:37:42.12] the trick was of course the declined seats Wars because he's holding up she's [00:37:47.16] [00:37:47.16] like explores gets the better now the Bendix and the phobics for free because [00:37:52.13] [00:37:52.13] it's paper so that's what the paper wants and it smelled wrong it's like [00:37:58.09] [00:37:58.09] he's like acting holding those levels of paper separate by the material that's [00:38:09.13] [00:38:09.13] what I expect from a machinist something I do and the Machine giving me more adds [00:38:16.06] [00:38:16.06] something to it puts me on the wrong foot I don't want to be in control I [00:38:22.12] [00:38:22.12] want to be a bit in control like like when I'm cooking but when I know so you [00:38:30.00] [00:38:30.00] never do the elements you warm em up and they then they take your own direction [00:38:37.05] [00:38:37.05] what if members are just like cooking it's like yes spatial spatial cookery [00:38:43.07] [00:38:43.07] okay the same amount of sort of control and unpredictability and magic and [00:38:52.11] [00:38:52.11] bringing things to life the ingredients for some recipe or but we're dead as far [00:39:00.09] [00:39:00.09] as um it's the cook that brings the stuff [00:39:02.22] [00:39:02.22] tonight and it's the same with shapes their passive until someone looks at [00:39:07.23] [00:39:07.23] them and brings them to life so that is not it's not the end product but its [00:39:12.11] [00:39:12.11] directive for you it's the no it's the computational process it's there starts [00:39:16.15] [00:39:16.15] with the rules and like like a recipe and then the cook brings it to life the [00:39:20.18] [00:39:20.18] user the designer takes those shapes and just you know make makes magic out of [00:39:25.10] [00:39:25.10] them visually and especially what are they're all tomorrow because it doesn't [00:39:29.09] [00:39:29.09] really conceptual and the tactile part comes into play the way that you [00:39:35.06] [00:39:35.06] actually talked about it for working now remind me when we were all trained these [00:39:41.03] [00:39:41.03] architects back then and get my first day we can there's a basis here is the [00:39:47.07] [00:39:47.07] eight-six it's the time and Ribisi so theory inhibitor stunts out that the [00:39:53.23] [00:39:53.23] line is thrown differently if they made six six and I think that's what you're [00:40:00.21] [00:40:00.21] referring to whether about a connection between the discussion and being with [00:40:06.21] [00:40:06.21] the later here is that it is the line because I guess many people be able to [00:40:13.21] [00:40:13.21] call it the line the line is done by a man and they call it the line with a - [00:40:19.07] [00:40:19.07] that with the beef video every 60 you say no and said what the same lines [00:40:22.16] [00:40:22.16] because there's a materiality the way that the dependence of resist or not the [00:40:32.08] [00:40:32.08] paper that you're working on if I understand correctly the technology that [00:40:36.21] [00:40:36.21] we'll be using to draft something predicates the line character tune is a [00:40:42.23] [00:40:42.23] correct if did I get it right this is really good complains about [00:40:46.04] [00:40:46.04] where these are the revenues or surface like complaints [00:40:50.14] [00:40:50.14] to know and figure out what's going wrong no I totally believe in grammar [00:40:56.07] [00:40:56.07] I'm just wondering if shape is not a sort of defensive term in this and sort [00:41:02.05] [00:41:02.05] of purposely on purpose left library undefined that could be fine but it's [00:41:09.03] [00:41:09.03] still important than to say what is in fact form and what is pattern what is [00:41:13.11] [00:41:13.11] the thing and what is object so how does it differ from all those because I think [00:41:18.12] [00:41:18.12] it does need definition now I do understand that shape in that sense is [00:41:22.11] [00:41:22.11] unfinished right so it's it's somehow there's an incompleteness to the shape [00:41:27.14] [00:41:27.14] and it and it opens up and it allows for multiple reading so it's not a finished [00:41:31.20] [00:41:31.20] thing but it doesn't mean that if there's a range of readings of each [00:41:37.05] [00:41:37.05] thing that those readings don't go by 1500 directions but actually sort of [00:41:42.14] [00:41:42.14] team up and and become family right that there's some direction to that thing [00:41:48.11] [00:41:48.11] okay I mean I'm also thinking about life and [00:41:52.00] [00:41:52.00] Tory's contradiction you know they get multiple shapes and these shapes have [00:41:56.12] [00:41:56.12] and Vicki was reading to one another but then they don't exclude one I said they [00:42:03.09] [00:42:03.09] overlap that's why it's ambiguous right it's it's at one house or two houses for [00:42:08.02] [00:42:08.02] instance or like I'm thinking of the wall and house Mueller from how closely [00:42:13.12] [00:42:13.12] we see a wall and there's a hole and anything is it a window or is it two [00:42:18.03] [00:42:18.03] columns right so that's very specific playing with the size of those things [00:42:23.01] [00:42:23.01] but these two are family so it's not like okay that's our reading announcer [00:42:28.19] [00:42:28.19] reading it means that these this multiplicity somehow mixed makes the [00:42:34.09] [00:42:34.09] thing Richard not just self contradictory I think that's quite [00:42:39.16] [00:42:39.16] important that there's a when there's a incompleteness that opens up a thing [00:42:42.23] [00:42:42.23] perceptually that makes it rich that all these variations actually still [00:42:50.04] [00:42:50.04] your mind somehow combine a ball and not exclude looking negatives with one [00:42:58.04] [00:42:58.04] another I want to take a vote and I think another way of phrasing you're [00:43:10.20] [00:43:10.20] asking is you're asking for a shake oriented ontology and that's a kind of [00:43:15.06] [00:43:15.06] abstract we just say shape but before that one that's more commonly understood [00:43:19.21] [00:43:19.21] maybe a material oriented ontology which we may say as a bottom-up approach in [00:43:24.02] [00:43:24.02] architecture or design restate here's a material appears would [00:43:27.18] [00:43:27.18] what does would want to be so instead of just scold people maybe I can bend it [00:43:31.09] [00:43:31.09] and I understand that as a constraint that it will say a chain design but then [00:43:34.19] [00:43:34.19] so I step into a framework and then I can do shape grammars within that [00:43:37.22] [00:43:37.22] framework to exploit on the other end of people to look at shapes [00:43:42.20] [00:43:42.20] it has a broad term but I'll use the example of your subtle house when I [00:43:47.18] [00:43:47.18] analyze that through mathematics issues very familiar with this I looked at and [00:43:53.06] [00:43:53.06] I said well that's my house actually the cylinder and by combining parts of the [00:43:56.13] [00:43:56.13] cylinders you know you can create your son's through a series of combinatorics [00:44:00.14] [00:44:00.14] of combining parts of shapes of mathematical DNA inside and cosine it [00:44:05.13] [00:44:05.13] was actually this type of shape language but that's how much more confident [00:44:09.12] [00:44:09.12] tutorial type of shakers shakers to me again is much more coffee [00:44:13.06] [00:44:13.06] constantly searching for new opportunities but also being aware of [00:44:18.02] [00:44:18.02] only step into it to show the anymore embedding is done by the designer they [00:44:21.15] [00:44:21.15] get that like yeah man against the design but it's also about being [00:44:24.15] [00:44:24.15] consciously aware what framework we choose to step in at what time because [00:44:28.18] [00:44:28.18] each framework we step in whether it's the mathematical forever the ecology [00:44:32.03] [00:44:32.03] friend with shapes of material framework whether to here by hand using a software [00:44:36.05] [00:44:36.05] or major they have the strengths the locations of bias that doesn't mean [00:44:40.11] [00:44:40.11] we're not to shake reference it just means that we have to be conscious of [00:44:43.15] [00:44:43.15] what flavors are stepping into it so we can step out of it and do other things [00:44:47.12] [00:44:47.12] but I think as an example the silos yes we can look at things to just an object [00:44:52.19] [00:44:52.19] or a shape or a manner but yeah they have to specify what kind of shapes are [00:44:58.01] [00:44:58.01] the cans I just think you have to specify what materials are we gonna just [00:45:02.03] [00:45:02.03] we don't just say really get all the tiers [00:45:05.13] [00:45:51.15] today is coming back to your comment about what is Latinas giving me back so [00:46:17.22] [00:46:17.22] try to answer that and this my interpretation is a well we real-time [00:46:26.15] [00:46:28.14] history [00:46:31.14] [00:46:33.14] away every time you change something we treat an automatic update right so the [00:46:39.18] [00:46:39.18] latest form of chain reaction is this if you do so it means that we can [00:46:45.20] [00:46:45.20] constantly after every single step of the design development and that would be [00:46:50.04] [00:46:50.04] very fundamental to get feedback from root is not just talking to you and this [00:47:26.10] [00:47:26.10] meaning of them so you can can you I mean there is an implicit but a [00:47:34.12] [00:47:34.12] potential said subject millions of possible combinations but I mean just [00:47:40.04] [00:47:40.04] follow me tables but no so there is a number there right [00:47:49.01] [00:47:49.01] a big number from you but to suffer resultant and 10400 mediums and so on so [00:47:57.07] [00:47:57.07] because I've seen designers basic like eggs of the middle option I mean simple [00:48:01.20] [00:48:01.20] simple assignment then for viable three or four okay so changes there you easily [00:48:09.02] [00:48:09.02] create 3 X 4 X 5 X 7 and so on so [00:48:14.20] [00:48:28.06] I know [00:49:19.17] [00:51:34.01] okay [00:51:37.01] [00:52:28.07] I think Robert the search to discuss two questions you said if the first one I [00:52:37.12] [00:52:37.12] would behind I don't I will agree potentially but meaningfully you know [00:52:42.02] [00:52:42.02] what is meaningful but you know like even the examples to do so today this is [00:52:47.21] [00:52:47.21] something that to me and this speaks whether we use the machine in below is [00:52:52.13] [00:52:52.13] that the things that we try to find by themselves are quite meaningless in the [00:52:58.07] [00:52:58.07] past the kind of fixity want to search they have to look good they had to be [00:53:04.03] [00:53:04.03] meaningful in a publication somewhat or they have to be meaningful is in action [00:53:08.07] [00:53:08.07] but now together so nicely and we had other example is that if you want once [00:53:13.21] [00:53:13.21] it is a better than drawing it is quite important but if you saw drop if you [00:53:18.11] [00:53:18.11] take it out it looks like you don't know what to get what you are looking at me [00:53:22.05] [00:53:22.05] the corner detail when we will answering the wall and miss but their own they [00:53:27.20] [00:53:27.20] were saying find me on corners and click the map which is like a like a drafting [00:53:33.23] [00:53:33.23] exercise if you could put it outside it looks like a letter P or lacks a you say [00:53:39.02] [00:53:39.02] with an e going back to George's a plus equal as a favor [00:53:43.08] [00:53:43.08] this will be [00:53:47.06] [00:53:55.09] the a and B via state it's become something else so point is is that this [00:54:00.08] [00:54:00.08] thing it is like what is that but once it wouldn't be drawing then it becomes [00:54:06.08] [00:54:06.08] absolutely meaningful so that part what you said I am not sure how to define [00:54:11.09] [00:54:11.09] meaningfulness but with meaning these designs internal context however the [00:54:15.09] [00:54:15.09] other part the notion of having a world wide web of of drawings that their their [00:54:22.10] [00:54:22.10] faith that your cells can be absolutely precise but my throwing cut [00:54:27.11] [00:54:27.11] cinematographer in Google pixel a sort of things but by throwing the details [00:54:31.23] [00:54:31.23] about the resolutions of wars you know meaningful architectural design acts [00:54:37.22] [00:54:37.22] that you can see them how they applying a variety of different scales I could do [00:54:44.02] [00:54:44.02] I had a discussion with George on the circling the tsubame block which I kept [00:54:50.05] [00:54:50.05] hearing this happened nice city for those of you don't know without - my [00:54:54.11] [00:54:54.11] advice and then it was really one of the times ornament one of the Chinese like [00:55:02.22] [00:55:03.14] the isolate you know it was one of the isolate buttons it happened to be the [00:55:08.17] [00:55:08.17] division of the pace of division of discipline [00:55:11.09] [00:55:11.09] city I mean that was a delightful to the discussion to get that day about saying [00:55:16.19] [00:55:16.19] look at this little thing and then in different scales becomes yeah so that [00:55:22.05] [00:55:22.05] brings form is not enough I guess designing its own driving on [00:55:27.02] [00:55:27.02] this these stunts Leslie were to be black at [00:55:30.19] [00:55:30.19] UCLA and to define my understanding so anyhow this was two different angles [00:55:36.10] [00:55:36.10] in value as you might others in zombies do you remember this discussion - okay [00:55:49.14] [00:55:49.14] I'm innocent [00:55:58.10] [00:55:58.10] what's go wild I was reading your paper the critic isn't smartest and I'm really [00:56:08.09] [00:56:08.09] interested say it comes from Ross King so Ross case countries yeah oh yeah I [00:56:18.16] [00:56:18.16] mean yeah yeah he was one of the few teachers that made wild [00:56:24.00] [00:56:24.00] sweat was actually doing the wheelbarrow thing anyway so it comes from Ruskin the [00:56:33.05] [00:56:33.05] Ruskin comes from earlier picturesque Hogarth so there's this notion of a [00:56:38.19] [00:56:38.19] perfection right that slowly comes into aesthetic sights at the 1750 sixties [00:56:44.07] [00:56:44.07] there's this notion of cracking breaking imperfect but not the ruin but the [00:56:50.01] [00:56:50.01] cottage later becomes that that becomes the cottage and Ruskin stopped using [00:56:53.19] [00:56:53.19] that to read the Gothic and and then teach it but of course with wild [00:56:59.14] [00:56:59.14] something happens with that imperfection it becomes far more extreme in the sense [00:57:06.05] [00:57:06.05] that it's you go some aesthetic to decadence just like it gets this [00:57:11.08] [00:57:11.08] obsession with death invitation well yeah it's not as though there's no [00:57:16.22] [00:57:16.22] difference another that's where I wanted [00:57:21.12] [00:57:21.12] that's that's pretty extreme so then first he's like Oh what you called Anna [00:57:26.18] [00:57:26.18] statuses right it's all beautiful and it's China and it's like peacocks and [00:57:31.18] [00:57:31.18] it's all beautiful blue velvet or purple velvet anyway and then he switches like [00:57:38.04] [00:57:38.04] with Dorian Gray to all this obsession with death and it's like these things [00:57:44.03] [00:57:44.03] are in how coexistent writes thinks falling apart to put in a shape [00:57:48.23] [00:57:48.23] everything terms shapes falling apart and shapes coming together are almost [00:57:54.09] [00:57:54.09] like the same thing at that point and I think that's maybe where this this whole [00:58:01.05] [00:58:01.05] thing becomes really interesting because it's this so it's not I don't mean [00:58:05.19] [00:58:05.19] decadent in the sense of oh it smells like death or the sublime but it's [00:58:09.18] [00:58:09.18] really this this that you don't know of a thing is falling apart [00:58:13.21] [00:58:13.21] or things are actually coming together and I thought that was really the point [00:58:18.04] [00:58:18.04] where I hoped I was actually understanding what you wrote like okay [00:58:21.23] [00:58:21.23] there's this point that's what a shape is it's really not sure if it's a shame [00:58:30.03] [00:58:30.03] if it's like falling apart or a common spirit and I thought that's where I [00:58:35.23] [00:58:35.23] think that's where a wild wanted to be as well the only issue is of how the [00:58:40.05] [00:58:40.05] hell do your design with that so to actually enjoy things like that to be a [00:58:46.13] [00:58:46.13] rule to be Ruskin and look at it sort of grew in or cracking wall and then say [00:58:50.18] [00:58:50.18] wow you know that's something that's different than actually designing it [00:58:55.02] [00:58:55.02] right to be getting a bit so that's my question to all shape grammarians how do [00:59:00.01] [00:59:00.01] you actually design with it so it it starts to topple or you get this I think [00:59:08.08] [00:59:08.08] for a while this was really the sense of beauty right is that its own sort of [00:59:13.03] [00:59:13.03] demise or sort of built-in give an instantly yeah [00:59:19.16] [00:59:21.22] IIIi think I would well let me say that I like Coleridge and I'm like while I [00:59:28.05] [00:59:28.05] especially like Coleridge when he talks about imagination and he makes a [00:59:32.15] [00:59:32.15] distinction between fancy and imagination and fancy is very much [00:59:36.18] [00:59:36.18] combinatorial design and imagination things fuse and we divide and if you [00:59:42.22] [00:59:42.22] look at Coleridge on imagination it sounds exactly like shape reverence the [00:59:47.11] [00:59:47.11] reason I bring coverage in is that wild wouldn't have been possible without [00:59:50.17] [00:59:50.17] coverage because wild has a aesthetic principle called well he calls it the [00:59:55.13] [00:59:55.13] aesthetic spirit and it's essentially the critic is artist and the idea is to [01:00:00.18] [01:00:00.18] see things as in themselves they really aren't and I think one nice example of [01:00:06.10] [01:00:06.10] that is Dorian Gray and I don't my take on Dorian Gray isn't so much that it's [01:00:11.01] [01:00:11.01] about death and decadence and dying and perversions funny Victorian [01:00:16.18] [01:00:16.18] sensibilities about different social issues but it's about change and I think [01:00:22.09] [01:00:22.09] that's a while it's all about us that things are never the same you look at [01:00:26.00] [01:00:26.00] them again and a sense of beauty is not so much that it's blue velvet or [01:00:31.04] [01:00:31.04] porcelain or that wallpaper or whatever while talked about in this humorous way [01:00:36.03] [01:00:36.03] but it was realizing that beauty is the symbol symbols and by that he meant [01:00:42.23] [01:00:42.23] beauty was something that you could put anything into and from a shape grammar [01:00:48.09] [01:00:48.09] community that's especially interesting because while talks about a beautiful [01:00:52.23] [01:00:52.23] form as being something you can put anything into and then you go 100 years [01:00:58.02] [01:00:58.02] later more than a hundred years later and you listen to a john von neumann [01:01:01.06] [01:01:01.06] talking calculating and he essentially says well [01:01:04.20] [01:01:04.20] you know there are limits to calculating and it ends up in the workshop test [01:01:08.15] [01:01:08.15] which is just a picture that you could put anything you want into it and the [01:01:13.10] [01:01:13.10] shape grammar it says wow this is really cool I get to put wild and modern women [01:01:18.05] [01:01:18.05] together and say well their shape grammars which are a generalization a [01:01:21.16] [01:01:21.16] standard discrete combinatorial calculated sorting machines and once you [01:01:28.12] [01:01:28.12] do that you're off and running you get cold you get wild you get deployment you [01:01:33.08] [01:01:33.08] get all the things that come up and design in really exciting ways but it's [01:01:40.03] [01:01:40.03] not anything you cannot put anything in it there's a range of thing well you can [01:01:44.16] [01:01:44.16] put anything in it that fits and that me honey of its pieces any of its parts and [01:01:48.22] [01:01:48.22] most design prevents you from doing that if I typically there's an example I like [01:01:53.18] [01:01:53.18] to use there's this guy who started out as a [01:01:56.19] [01:01:56.19] computer scientist and then became a philosopher and then a Dean and I like [01:02:00.12] [01:02:00.12] to call that the slippery slope you can imagine what the top is what the bottom [01:02:05.16] [01:02:05.16] is and it definitely is low but anyway he gives this example from option Orion [01:02:11.07] [01:02:11.07] programming he says well I take two squares something together and I get a [01:02:14.20] [01:02:14.20] little shape it looks like a rectangle and he says well we don't know how to do [01:02:17.21] [01:02:17.21] that and we don't know how to do that because two squares of two objects and [01:02:22.22] [01:02:22.22] objects combine and they keep their objectivity they're their objects and of [01:02:28.03] [01:02:28.03] course the shape grammar says well you know pail we solved that problem 25 [01:02:31.17] [01:02:31.17] years before you even knew it was a problem and that's because shapes fuse [01:02:35.23] [01:02:35.23] and the minute they fuse you can do what people like Coleridge say you can we [01:02:40.06] [01:02:40.06] divide them and that's where imagination is Coleridge took the idea I think [01:02:44.18] [01:02:44.18] probably from cotton we thought imagination was the soul organ I like [01:02:50.07] [01:02:50.07] that it is your soul and to realize that you can handle that with calculating [01:02:56.12] [01:02:56.12] with shape grammars I think is terribly exciting so I agree with you but I'm as [01:03:04.04] [01:03:04.04] enthusiastic about while the coverages you are I think our takes are slightly [01:03:09.02] [01:03:09.02] different I'm not so worried about the depth and decadence but I do like the [01:03:12.23] [01:03:12.23] change and seeing things that's in themselves they really aren't that's why [01:03:20.06] [01:03:20.06] I was positioned was to begin [01:03:23.14] [01:04:12.18] well this sort of comment as a general climate again give us more so said this [01:04:18.03] [01:04:18.03] fantastic work after watching this work develop over the last three years I [01:04:22.04] [01:04:22.04] think but you know one of the things that I think is really interesting it's [01:04:28.09] [01:04:28.09] just to address some of the issues talking about it's like figuring its [01:04:32.23] [01:04:32.23] shape well maybe there's think what you're doing is allowing the intuition [01:04:37.12] [01:04:37.12] of the designer to have access to the kind of computational world a little [01:04:41.09] [01:04:41.09] carrot right so so you know large is figuring the world good designs [01:04:45.14] [01:04:45.14] typically mark that could the best designers that may be controversial it's [01:04:54.19] [01:04:54.19] there but what you've done here you go allow a kind of interface to the world [01:05:00.19] [01:05:00.19] of the folks on the right to the world of the folks of electrical arcing yeah [01:05:06.17] [01:05:06.17] that's actually what we're just talking about relative to imagination right [01:05:11.07] [01:05:11.07] advanced because you're allowing that kind of thinking to have access to this [01:05:15.12] [01:05:15.12] world [01:05:17.19] [01:05:40.01] was shape but is sort of the concrete feature 15 smooth shape and also when I [01:05:58.11] [01:05:58.11] was doing a lot of shapes up myself the question I post like what's the next [01:06:04.04] [01:06:04.04] tone [01:06:06.13] [01:06:45.13] what is cuz I see everybody working with shapes and like having a ball and seeing [01:06:54.17] [01:06:54.17] this bigger process but at this point everyone can make a good shape every [01:07:00.13] [01:07:00.13] building is fairly not interesting but shape is growing more complex so the [01:07:09.13] [01:07:09.13] nice big glob separate words but like one one thing that comes in with his [01:07:22.23] [01:07:22.23] time I looked in our discussions the last three to three months really [01:07:27.23] [01:07:27.23] discussed with community the whether it was a big it is that these technology [01:07:34.16] [01:07:34.16] neighbors they because unit says well we do it what we do here fantastic [01:07:41.22] [01:07:41.22] multiverse I mean once you get like grasshopper that can make all these six [01:07:47.01] [01:07:47.01] hundred thousand lines we're actually not one [01:07:51.21] [01:07:51.21] like I said you can Morgan if beaten but you can find all this stuff [01:07:56.12] [01:07:56.12] I mean what's up with that but what is this really squares or what is it with [01:08:01.05] [01:08:01.05] these elementary things or even this elegant things that we saw they a bit [01:08:06.07] [01:08:06.07] but they're the best you know like rudimentary versus the [01:08:10.05] [01:08:10.05] incredible richness complexity meditation and apps and there's [01:08:16.12] [01:08:16.12] something to be said I mean in a in a rudimentary way we were trying to [01:08:24.04] [01:08:24.04] express every door in the morning this has not subsided to be sell to different [01:08:28.01] [01:08:28.01] people I say that but the technology but this but in the same commerce of the [01:08:36.00] [01:08:36.00] world we can see these two parts they see and doing with ease they they're [01:08:43.14] [01:08:43.14] very much but nevertheless we can somehow distinct and the ability of [01:08:50.20] [01:08:50.20] having moderates that can be passed in the variety of ways that it would not be [01:08:57.02] [01:08:57.02] in advance that that in the surface giving authenticity exam says it found [01:09:02.07] [01:09:02.07] resolve at state of mind to be able to require negativity it may be way like [01:09:08.11] [01:09:08.11] and what so I mean it's kind of like the word [01:09:14.17] [01:09:14.17] processing just be used an ounce of the used a typography typography I think [01:09:26.07] [01:09:26.13] that I - the bleeding's Plato complaining about writing that did I [01:09:32.14] [01:09:32.14] think we sort of make us forget that doesn't mean for exactly that but what [01:09:40.08] [01:09:40.08] idiot was follows or the Odyssey they were right [01:09:46.12] [01:09:48.19] spits it was good enough to order the technologically of the lines and [01:09:53.16] [01:09:53.16] everything else allow the toy thing to have that kind of [01:09:56.19] [01:09:56.19] product if I could be the bracketing not meaning to get more politics but more [01:10:02.10] [01:10:02.10] idiots in fact someone might complain that you know Tony Harris mastered [01:10:08.14] [01:10:08.14] quarters clever or even the Gutenberg likely the invention of the book is a [01:10:16.13] [01:10:16.13] possibly book with it doesn't make us better writers I should speak because [01:10:20.16] [01:10:20.16] you can actually type now is that the better right or the invention of the [01:10:25.15] [01:10:25.15] word processing doesn't make better writers so the ability when you see [01:10:31.23] [01:10:31.23] through the actually the first part say pussy [01:10:36.12] [01:10:36.12] certainly suggests to me but to answer the law like that kind of game changer [01:10:44.09] [01:10:44.09] retention fee or profound understatement the definition of how to address this [01:10:49.11] [01:10:49.11] geometry will it make us better drivers whether creators with the designers but [01:10:55.02] [01:10:55.02] I doubt that's really what we try to do and not only me but the whole community [01:11:01.04] [01:11:01.04] that's what we are really just darkness from our own experience I would like to [01:11:10.06] [01:11:10.06] contradict you a little bit about word processing and quality of writing my [01:11:14.21] [01:11:14.21] writing has absolutely improved with the advent of word processing in the oil [01:11:22.22] [01:11:22.22] dailies I bought the first draft of my paper in in longhand gave it to the [01:11:29.21] [01:11:29.21] secretary she typed it had one round of collector Corrections and then I had to [01:11:36.06] [01:11:36.06] turn it in with my word processor I'm not kidding you sometimes a massage a [01:11:42.16] [01:11:42.16] sentence five six seven times I hear it in my head until it sounds really right [01:11:49.17] [01:11:49.17] so to me word processing is a wonderful tool for writers per tick [01:11:56.19] [01:11:56.19] writers who believe in revising their own world but the book and I believe in [01:12:03.15] [01:12:03.15] too and silver like shake grandmas that make it much easier to revise and real [01:12:09.14] [01:12:09.14] and we revise and discover things [01:12:15.02] [01:12:16.00] I'm not saying so this is [01:13:13.23] [01:13:23.02] why because we keep on using pearl balance mr. specialist a derivation [01:13:30.17] [01:13:30.17] sequence is a container for a portal member laural chips gave remembered by [01:13:37.19] [01:13:37.19] the language of the grammar is a plural to computer burglar we are resolute to [01:13:45.11] [01:13:45.11] develop a single single around 50 faces we look at this one shape and shape in [01:13:52.06] [01:13:52.06] rules operating over lunch it and we saw references for header today's it and you [01:13:58.08] [01:13:58.08] would derive for bite here and I derived a bunch my family ever so much for me [01:14:08.09] [01:14:08.09] there's the Flint of an eighth one middle did not be but little missing [01:14:12.15] [01:14:12.15] here is the ability to do this in very the ability to fly under multiple [01:14:17.10] [01:14:17.10] objects at the same time the head to control back through selection of [01:14:24.08] [01:14:24.08] multiples you want to apply it to do the past few rules rule sets to multiple [01:14:32.02] [01:14:32.02] shapes to take them away for some shapes it's working with multiple designs [01:14:36.15] [01:14:36.15] because once you design of its kitchen that's what you're doing it's not a [01:14:42.09] [01:14:42.09] single sequence of sketches rather it is a pattern of sketches in next references [01:14:50.21] [01:14:50.21] might convenient sketches on the page [01:14:54.22] [01:15:00.21] we talked about that basilica's there was something in quiet what you were [01:15:07.10] [01:15:07.10] saying and that's it because it gives information in anabolism [01:15:12.04] [01:15:12.04] it's a history here is a adoration and I think would be limiting ourselves to [01:15:19.20] [01:15:19.20] that kind of thinking it hides the real profits we need interfaces that allow us [01:15:26.23] [01:15:26.23] very very flexible ways [01:15:31.01] [01:15:42.15] in the same year right so just an example absolutely working on automation [01:15:54.10] [01:15:54.16] planning particularly great work still have issues with the coroner by the way [01:16:13.23] [01:16:13.23] you have to say the the control of the site then set back the shape of the [01:16:22.16] [01:16:22.16] building so the shape of the building could be either literally pocket [01:16:26.19] [01:16:26.19] setbacks or later shape or any shape that fits in that new perimeter right so [01:16:33.04] [01:16:33.04] let's publish this data set is one of the problem in quantum density there is [01:16:38.19] [01:16:38.19] another level of complexity and this in that particular example two departments [01:16:43.06] [01:16:43.06] the tradition of the so that the distribution of those in the context of [01:16:55.21] [01:16:55.21] that complexity is their distribution of the group's that's right and as many of [01:17:03.13] [01:17:03.13] them and they some of them they want to be together some of them don't want to [01:17:11.09] [01:17:11.09] so the basic thing is immediately actually the Jason C can be applied [01:17:17.16] [01:17:50.22] so if you can do this try that question from the perspective let's say from an [01:18:10.03] [01:18:10.03] historical current historical perspective because nowadays everybody [01:18:15.11] [01:18:15.11] everybody the loss of young designers are very familiar with the petitioner [01:18:19.19] [01:18:19.19] statements people is trying to use in machine learning to optimize and start [01:18:27.18] [01:18:31.08] with population [01:18:36.12] [01:19:01.15] so this point which correctly said but clearly this technology hits junglers [01:19:42.05] [01:19:42.05] enabled us to write better yeah but that was not exactly my point before that not [01:19:47.12] [01:19:47.12] clarify that very well and that's how I hit my second super takeaways to say [01:19:52.10] [01:19:52.10] that the proposers architects designers but I thought the thinkers they always [01:20:02.13] [01:20:02.13] do incredible work no matter what their media their disposition the Dolphins - [01:20:09.21] [01:20:09.21] tricked it is you can see or see throughout this struggle yet with the [01:20:15.14] [01:20:15.14] manager running his musical device device advisor as opposed to possible to [01:20:20.22] [01:20:20.22] say like even got me directly that I don't think acetylated twenties with [01:20:26.19] [01:20:26.19] specific notation allowed we didn't have any music [01:20:32.10] [01:20:32.10] rotational system right and they see ya [01:20:37.19] [01:20:37.19] nevertheless masterpieces were written so the issue here is that I guess [01:20:44.01] [01:20:44.01] whether it is kind of time irritability discussion before this whether we're [01:20:51.14] [01:20:51.14] talking about not really about the individuals of this recipe to be sort of [01:20:54.14] [01:20:54.14] like a mark like this masterminds but about etc sort of educational school and [01:21:00.08] [01:21:00.08] people it just this is good in general for any raising up a level of how do we [01:21:05.11] [01:21:05.11] teach keep helping teach students or how all of us become about because you [01:21:25.06] [01:21:25.06] always have yeah it's really about how do you raise the average step but I [01:21:36.08] [01:21:36.08] think it's also you know empirically very plausible that the towards and [01:21:41.18] [01:21:41.18] medium design influenced the design itself [01:21:46.00] [01:21:46.00] I mean without computers you know the use of these fully free form curves [01:21:51.14] [01:21:51.14] would not have been seen the current Emilia have represented them and you [01:21:56.08] [01:21:56.08] could not have beautiful that doesn't mean you know cause Billy's [01:22:00.09] [01:22:00.09] a better or worse them they're just different and they are different in the [01:22:05.03] [01:22:05.03] in Russia because ever designed with different tools and we have to accept [01:22:10.05] [01:22:10.05] that and I think that is exactly so exciting about it I'm pretty much [01:22:16.11] [01:22:16.11] convinced that you know the oral tradition is represented by Homer [01:22:21.07] [01:22:21.07] produced the work that really differs fundamentally with work that was written [01:22:28.17] [01:22:28.17] down I'm not an expert I cannot really explain it - I think the [01:22:33.15] [01:22:33.15] same stool for music I definitely believe it's social architecture which I [01:22:38.15] [01:22:38.15] know a little better as basically megaliths argument right because he came [01:22:45.04] [01:22:45.04] to study with like with a half walking north of fry and all these people from [01:22:50.06] [01:22:50.06] studying World Cup Travolta on students basic any quest like reading the whole [01:22:55.11] [01:22:55.11] thing like the changes [01:23:07.13] [01:24:16.22] not education it's a mainly to cut down on the space of possible solutions so [01:24:23.13] [01:24:23.13] lots of the other hand this is offering a method how to make shapes to States so [01:24:28.23] [01:24:28.23] it's already come on it's a three methodologies but it is more constraint [01:24:35.17] [01:24:35.17] but it also suggests you it's usually two things you could do things that [01:24:39.06] [01:24:39.06] would happen and so right so in that sense I would say it is more generated [01:24:44.23] [01:24:44.23] by in the visual computation come in I can do everything but I say be to do [01:24:50.03] [01:24:50.03] something and I would say it is not enough on that topic like yes you can do [01:24:58.04] [01:24:58.04] anything but should do and they might come from but you can do but if I [01:25:03.12] [01:25:03.12] example if you if you look at it's not something you would just write down that [01:25:10.01] [01:25:10.01] comes to you so it's much easier to to look at the design and debug the rules [01:25:16.08] [01:25:16.08] but the other way to go [01:25:21.07] [01:25:26.13] I just wanted to say one thing that Alberti in a little book on sculpture [01:25:32.12] [01:25:32.12] talked about where artistic ideas came from and you've suggested that they come [01:25:38.20] [01:25:38.20] from the artists head or wherever they come from that takes some thinking about [01:25:45.11] [01:25:45.11] but Alberta was more practically said well you know where they come from our [01:25:48.13] [01:25:48.13] clods of Earth and the tree trunks and this whole idea was that you looked at [01:25:53.09] [01:25:53.09] the clod of Earth and you saw hamburger or you looked at a tree trunk and you [01:25:56.11] [01:25:56.11] saw a picture of God or whatever was and you traced the outline we got a design [01:26:00.23] [01:26:00.23] well the shape grammars view is where the designs come from well they come [01:26:04.20] [01:26:04.20] from looking at other buildings and other designs that depict the spit-up we [01:26:07.20] [01:26:07.20] pick that that out you bet things in ways that the original architect didn't [01:26:13.05] [01:26:13.05] know we're having thought about and it makes for a very rich kind of [01:26:17.04] [01:26:17.04] interaction between designs in history and designs over time and how we make [01:26:22.22] [01:26:22.22] them and how we do it it's also the kind of thing that someone my Carol bloom [01:26:28.03] [01:26:28.03] talks about when he talks about what's he call it as revisionary ratios in [01:26:33.17] [01:26:33.17] poetry poets have arguments with each others not face-to-face but in their [01:26:40.08] [01:26:40.08] poems in poetry and it's the same kind of thing you look at something and you [01:26:45.14] [01:26:45.14] see in a different way than the original author get it and you either generalize [01:26:49.09] [01:26:49.09] it or you do something with it that leads to the poetry and new art and I [01:26:53.22] [01:26:53.22] think that's the way buildings will look I think that's what paintings work it's [01:26:56.20] [01:26:56.20] a really rich way of doing it and it takes the burden of having to do things [01:27:03.13] [01:27:03.13] de novo from absolute first principles that make no sense they hug me and puts [01:27:10.18] [01:27:10.18] them in the culture and puts them in the art and puts them in the architecture [01:27:13.23] [01:27:13.23] puts the poetry and that's where imagination comes in that's why colored [01:27:17.22] [01:27:17.22] music you can Rican see things and that's [01:27:20.15] [01:27:20.15] where while is important saying that you see things as in themselves they Romina [01:27:25.10] [01:27:25.10] their reading mark that's where the the new art comes from that's a nice way of [01:27:30.13] [01:27:30.13] thinking about originality and creativity that gets away from this lone [01:27:34.23] [01:27:34.23] genius who operates in vacuum and does stuff without knowing anything to see [01:27:39.10] [01:27:39.10] anything I guess anyway I just wanted to say in your list you know what how [01:27:47.19] [01:27:47.19] artists build on other art it's extremely understanding I have a [01:28:19.02] [01:28:19.02] question about any generations so we're not gonna teach in the studio but [01:28:27.18] [01:28:27.18] there's always a discussion around how to describe and design intervention [01:28:32.11] [01:28:32.11] I was curious how you would describe in a textbook shake machine and potential [01:28:38.19] [01:28:38.19] we have never could speculate about it both were the sets of rules and designs [01:28:45.21] [01:28:50.23] gracious he said she's asking about the shake machine you see the distribution [01:29:09.20] [01:29:09.20] this would be only for small exercises in the same economic class so they're [01:29:23.13] [01:29:23.13] very controlled expected so because we we had this series of successive [01:29:32.23] [01:29:32.23] experiments we'll do X and then we would ask that the requirement was to look [01:29:39.02] [01:29:39.02] alike started from something ask you something the same saying something more [01:29:45.00] [01:29:45.00] to sleep or do something else and then figure four stages you know so we care [01:29:50.09] [01:29:50.09] about but this was something very cool to all almost like character [01:29:55.19] [01:30:06.17] what is an iteration [01:30:10.11] [01:30:41.13] what wild wild has a nice answer to that it's when you get hungry and need to go [01:30:47.13] [01:30:47.13] have dinner I'm serious that's exactly what he says the way we teach it you can [01:31:01.01] [01:31:01.01] basically see after like six weeks all screens of students look like parking [01:31:07.04] [01:31:07.04] lots they have like hundreds of variations so [01:31:13.06] [01:31:13.06] I think variation isn't really to answer it to iteration in the sense that you [01:31:17.15] [01:31:17.15] have to find something that's variable then change the variator then change the [01:31:22.23] [01:31:22.23] numbers in the variables and then see how far you can push this it's basically [01:31:27.14] [01:31:27.14] a breathing technique right so we also talked about reading you know I was like [01:31:32.16] [01:31:32.16] long eared rabbits and short eating rabbits and you put those together then [01:31:36.09] [01:31:36.09] you put those together you get those together or tulips kind of Dutch right [01:31:40.09] [01:31:40.09] so you have to like talk about tulips and you get these variations so [01:31:44.08] [01:31:44.08] iteration really means it's a stepwise generative procedure right so it's you [01:31:49.20] [01:31:49.20] get rows and columns right so you get first variation and then you bring them [01:31:53.16] [01:31:53.16] together you get in the next row in the next row and then you see them be [01:31:57.11] [01:31:57.11] selected out so you can you can't do that it's iteration but you do need a [01:32:02.18] [01:32:02.18] double mechanism so again the argument of like you see both the four and [01:32:08.18] [01:32:08.18] organization of the four right say you see what the parameters are [01:32:13.06] [01:32:13.06] and they could change the forms and and very little those my clients that [01:32:19.10] [01:32:19.10] annuity because but it said to me if you're using people in that city so the [01:32:25.18] [01:32:25.18] sketchbook things some things and some things winter [01:32:28.18] [01:32:28.18] it makes replication whole rather difficult because it takes time whereas [01:32:34.17] [01:32:34.17] the parametric modeling system makes variations for the structure you've [01:32:39.21] [01:32:39.21] already built absolutely too trivial but you pause to rebuild the structure shake [01:32:48.03] [01:32:48.03] remembers have a very different logic they're very different since how how [01:32:53.20] [01:32:53.20] they produced with iteration so the answer is tied up somehow every medium [01:32:59.01] [01:32:59.01] is different for different audiences [01:33:02.11] [01:33:41.22] you know we hit with him coming up with he's five for five 35 other stunts and [01:34:08.20] [01:34:08.20] do need to be at 6 o'clock suspected some people respectively we have the [01:34:19.03] [01:34:19.03] exception that sparks at 6 o'clock and I did find out the caterers and everyone [01:34:26.21] [01:34:26.21] they really want us to be there at 6 o'clock so they can be proper and [01:34:30.22] [01:34:30.22] professional they are taking care of us the exception is sponsored as I said [01:34:38.12] [01:34:38.12] Associates and things are about foods or promising all these in the context of [01:34:45.17] [01:34:45.17] the the final act of this day the same machines exhibition which we so the work [01:34:53.15] [01:34:53.15] that will be done on the work that we [01:34:57.21] [01:35:00.18] did we receive four pieces there all of them I durations in the yesterday's [01:35:07.23] [01:35:07.23] ation of these fragments of lines there is the piece for how our harvest a [01:35:21.23] [01:35:21.23] function that we've been created name's sake ups there by how much it is it's [01:35:29.03] [01:35:29.03] meant to be a big concert we have all these steps as you can hear from the one [01:35:32.21] [01:35:32.21] for formal shapes and before the formula specification we will be having babies [01:35:41.21] [01:35:41.21] we will see that you know this is you BT produced this is the company how many [01:35:49.09] [01:35:49.09] could she be getting 496 books this is a production of the of the lab is you see [01:35:59.03] [01:35:59.03] 100 496 I waistline would have seen that they have 496 because it's less is a [01:36:10.02] [01:36:10.02] particular region this is only it's all because you can do with four things they [01:36:14.07] [01:36:14.07] are putting media department a better number so they have six books [01:36:20.22]