What drives me

With our culture forming a segmentation of content, architecture as an artifact represents or contradicts the semantic field - to strengthen or rearrange it, consciously and subconsciously. Its underlying code is a manifold of cultural ideas and their conventionalizations. The exploration of this complexity on a multitude of scales fascinates me about the subject. Moreover, investigating on the possibilities of accessing and installing communicative depth in architectural processes by a deliberated use of traditional and digital means is something I strive for. Having Studied at a technical university as well as at an art school engages me to comprehensively negotiate these interests under careful consideration of aesthetics and spatial qualities as well as construction, ecologics and economics.
Competencies

Always aspiring a self-conscious intuitive design process I continously attempt to extend my tool palette. In a rapidly developing professional environment I consider high perceptive faculty a core property which I try to maintain not only in the digital field but also in sharing and absorbing knowledge in team work and academic political contexts, as well as in actively exposing myself to differentiated opinions with an appropriate degree of humility.


Lang.: German (native), Englisch (fluent), French (fundamental)
CAD/BIM: ArchiCad, Rhinoceros3D/Grasshopper, 3ds Max
Visualization: Vray, CineRender, UnrealEngine/VR, Maxwell, Photoshop, Illustrator, Substance Suite, ndo
3D Scanning: Agisoft Photoscan
Programming: Python, HTML/CSS/Javascript, nodejs
Text/Layout: InDesign, Office
Photography: Canon APSC & Fullframe, Lightroom



Motivation | CV | Competencies
Project Focus: intelligent support structures, parametric design, transparent circulation
Project Start: April 2018
Project Duration: 5M
Total GFA: 7.500 sqm
Framing Weight: 6.250 t
Garage Structure: 8,50 m Concrete Column Grid
Tower Structure : 2,30 m load bearing diamond grid Steel fassade
Tower Stories: 6
Socket Stories: 2
Garage Stories: 2
Max. Beam Deformation: 3.70 cm
Max. Slab Deformation: 5.50 cm
Max. Beam Utilization: 30 %
Max. Slab Utilization: 25 %
Project Keywords: intelligent support, parametric form finding, garage pragmatism, transparency, connections, confrontation, rethinking paradigms, digitalization, flexibility, office layouts, mediation, maximization
New pragmatism
Office architecture today is a portrait of garage architecture. The typical 2,50m parking lot dimension projects itself onto a ~8m concrete skeleton defining the layout of the following stories. Floor areas are best fitted to maximize rental revenue; architects become fassade artists. In our study we attempt to renegotiate the conditions of office buildings. The normally incomprehensable interface of the garage grid and an entirely different office grid is emulated by the use of computation: while the garage follows vehicle measures, the tower exhausts the lot dimensions set in the development plan with a load bearing steel fassade and traversing hollow slabs. The socket converts from one grid system to another; enabling the maximized tower floor plans. Additionally, the load bearing stiffening fassade relieves the circulation from its core responsibilities; enabling a transparent flexible accessibility of the building with even the elevator communicating traffic to the different stories. The new pragmatism of spatial maximization without compromise and a careful level of redundancy in the building services creates a new kind of communicative office space.
Project Focus: industry, construction, corporate design
Project Start: November 2014
Project Duration: 4M
Total GFA: 2.500 sqm
GFA Production: 4.700 sqm
GFA Office: 300 sqm
GFA Visitor Area: 1800 sqm
Employees: 40
Construction type: Timber (girders), Timber-Concrete Hybrid (Administration), Steel (85m Truss, Hall)
Fassade Materials: Wood Waste Planks
Project Keywords: team project, industrial architecture, piet hein eek, waste wood, upcycling, furniture, sustainability, construction, corporate design, architecture landmark, process design, functionality, visitor integration, workshop rooms
Preface
The work of Christopher Alexander has become one of architecture’s most diversely and most contentiously discussed theories. Marking the beginning of scientific architectural design research and the design method movement A Pattern Language1 has introduced a new way of discussing architecture. Its linguistic approach provides means of designation and communication. It exposes itself to debate by design – because it creates a paradigm for debate, a Meta language for architecture. As a language it contains semantic and syntactic means that form a code based on societal conventions . It’s a twofold theory: A general review paper on the entirety of architectural and urban elements and policies; as well as a manual to combine those elements syntactically, for complex cultural configurations materialized as buildings. Beyond that however, it is also a deeply settled display of the authors’ political beliefs, specifically in decentralization, self-governance and anti-professionalism, paired with a very selective use of subject literature, self-made epistemic justification and a broad neglect of the craftsmanship of scientific writing. The omnipresent overlapping and rubbing of these layers with the readers’ very own architectural vernacular makes it a very intense task to grasp the philosophy of the authors in its entirety and without bias. On the contrary however, it is just an equally intense task to overlay or mask out facets to judge the named efforts individually. What remains in the public critique is a wide variety of receptions, ranging from the establishment of object oriented programming , over self-sufficient misinterpretations for parametric design, to the attestation of creating a religious, esoteric architectural cult rejecting pluralism. Many of the central criticisms have been collected, labeled and evaluated by Dawes and Oswald whose research emphasizes the centrality of “Alexander’s ontological and epistemological positions” as well as the books lacking scientific persistency among the public critiques. These subjects are however not going to be subject of this book. Instead we will try to play purely with its structural and contentual aspects related to the act of context designation and design. Prior to the this investigation a preliminary study was conducted by Julius Fischötter, Mascha Fehse, Ferdinand List and Albane de la Villegeorges overlaying four individually motivated illuminations in order to create a broad entry into the examination of the authors’ complex architectural manifest. Observing Alexander’s early work and contrasting it with the photographic space of A Pattern Language as well as its subjective content layers and statistics we are attempting to decipher the Book’s implicit tone and structure. The aim of this study was to arrange a specific and purposeful method for a continued investigation on entangled architectural strategy behind the framework of patterns. As a continuation of said research, this paper aims to playfully explore A Pattern Language as a tool to designate and communicate architectural decisions. By examining its classifications and subtextual structures looking for the elementary components that form the language. This investigation attempts to go beyond the level of patterns and look out for unfulfilled elementary discoveries amalgamated with Alexander’s complex architectural clusters. The playfulness is an important aspect that we want to emphasize. The contributions in this book do not seamlessly add up to form a deductive derivation but act instead as a net thrown over Alexander’s work trying to capture his influences and implications. It is not the case that conclusions made in this book enqueue in the pattern language narrative but instead take advantage of some of the Author’s thinking paradigms to project them onto design methods and pragmatics in the future.
Reference Peaks
Apart from the analysis of terminology, the Authors’ syntactic schemes allow to analyze the quantity of pattern references and to map their quantitative importance for the whole language. The diagram reorders the contents and displays a wild mix of the original classifications, showing the importance of patterns like (129) Common Areas at the Heart or making us wonder about the role of (219) Floor-Ceilling Vaults. Generally, an alternative hierarchy is created as opposed to the top-down scale ordering that the book initially suggests. It is unclear whether the authors “designed” this distribution of references. Considering that the book was written before the time of consumer computers, it might have been a complex task already to keep track of the graph visualization of the language. The act of linking patterns is itself a task of classification in terms of what is a direct link wand what is mediated by another pattern. The patterns and links also imply different degrees of importance and may introduce a certain redundancy by taking different paths to go to the same pattern. These are important concepts that can also be found in spoken language where they are used to create explicit distinctions. As opposed to spoken language though, the pattern language does not make a distinction of syntactic means. It does not reveal reoccuring particles but only provides us with complete semantic units in the form of patterns.
Remapping, Visualizing structures
Next to the categorization chosen by the author there is also nondescript nomenclatures the reader could conceive, such as “policies”, “spaces”, “entities” or “social constructs”. Additionally, the quantities of connection as well as the range in scale provide implicit information on the individual patterns as well as on the subsets constituted in A Pattern Language. In order for us to get a better grasp on the reality of those aspects of order, we remapped the book to an interactive web interface that can display said meta structures. A PDF scan is submitted to a text recognition to then be unraveled according to the book’s pattern structure. Images are extracted and allocated to their corresponding digital patterns. Connections between patterns are evaluated programmatically using those digital text files by making use of Alexander’s syntactical use of pattern numbers. That way the explicit connections are obtained as well as the connection quantities of each pattern, the number of times each pattern is referenced and the absolute range the connections of each pattern cover. The newly generated data is then assigned to the digital text files using comma separated value files (.csv). They also hold page numbers, significance as set by the Authors, initial categorization and a self-conceived subjective tagging independent from the Authors’. This dataset forms the basis for the remapping, that visualizes as a grid of the pattern archetype images with filters for major categories, subcategories, significance, tagging, photographers, quoted authors and maps to visualize meta structures. Admittedly, this approach of meta layer filtering is a rather conspirative one. This book does not pretend to be able to deduce any on point revelations from those investigations. Instead we understand the process as a playful deep dive into the pattern language concept allowing us to see how it differs from our own perception of design tasks. This process also helps us to delimit what a pattern language is and what it is not by decrypting some of its inherent definitions.
Project Focus: hillside construction, venue architecture
Project Start: January 2015
Project Duration: 1 week design, 1 week intensive construction workshop, 1 week presentation retouch
GFA: 2.540 sqm
Volume: 14.600 qbm
Annual Heat Demand: 50.850 kwH
a
Annual Wood Pellets Demand: 12 t
Annual Heating Costs: 2.162 €
Construction type: reinforced concrete
Wood (girders)
Fassade Materials: Cedar Wood (burnt)
Project Keywords: team project, restaurant, venue, low energy use, architecture in context, hillside, interleaving, form follows function
Project Focus: Leveling Urban Thresholds, Local Supply
Project Start: October 2017
Project Duration: 4M
Total GFA: tbd
Appartments: tbd
Beds: tbd
Highest Density: tbd
Lowest Density: tbd
Building Stock: Alottment gardens, Supermarket Hall, Former Amunition Storage
Project Keywords: social preservation, urban thresholds, connecting, reusing, low density compensation, terretorial balance, gradient, gardens, local supply, digitalization, flexibility, redundancy
Project Focus: communal living
urban planning
Project Start: October 2015
Project Duration: 2M city planning
1M design research
2.5M design
Total GFA: 7.500 sqm
GFA/Inhabitant: 54.8 sqm
Avg. NFA/Inhabitant: 27.7 sqm
Commercial units: 6
Appartments: 23
Beds total: 137
Construction type: reinforced Concrete (socket)
Wood (solid)
Fassade Materials: Cement-Lime Plaster (socket)
Douglas-fir
Project Keywords: student housing, communal living, compact city, density, privat public, solid wood construction, natural ventilation, common areas, laundrette bar, short stay staircases, interrelation, views, density, quality living , bachelor
Architecture Manifold
Architecture as a cultural artifact emerged from a utilitarian need. By communicating a particular use, articulation becomes as much part of an architecture's function as the utility itself. In a complex pluralistic society, the number of distinctive uses an architecture can serve is immense. The field of function grows along with culture and language, forming new semantic oppositions, exceeding utilitarian or economic pragmatism. In a direct relationship, architectural function portraits our culture and its manifold connotations and thus forms a language itself, referencing comprehensive semantic fields. These semantic fields consist of nodes of physical, economical, juridical, ecological, political, aesthetical, historical and emotional nature. They provide us with affordances to interact with them. An architecture can only be defined in a context if it reacts to that context's affordances and therefore becomes a part of its complexity in a sign relationship. The presented installation is a metaphoric representation of this particular amalgamation. The abstract object's form is determined by its function to simultanuously shadow project four simple geometric planes that represent different semantic fields. An evolutionary algorithm continuously negotiates the geometry to best react to the requirements set by the planes.
The Object
In order to reach an as exact as possible projection of the four shapes, the evolutionary grasshopper algorithm continuously reorientates the position of the planes in space by manipulating their center points' x, y and z values. During this reorientation the shape surfaces' normal vectors are always oriented towards the object center (0,0,0).The object itself is created by the extrusion of the shape surfaces which are then intersected. The process is driven by a fitness function which compares the individual shapes' perimeters to the perimeters of parallel slices cut through the current object state. If the difference between the perimeters is zero, the projection is acurate. The resulting object is cut out of a hard foam block using a five axis CNC milling machine. This piece is then used to produce a five parts gipsum formwork for founding the porcelain object seen in the photograph. Porcelain is the material of choice because of its intangibility, comparatively free of emotional burden, leaving the center of attention to its emergence rather than to its being.
The Image
The images are aestheticized diagrams representing the evolutionary process. The diagrams are divided into 50 concentric circles with ascending diameter which repreent different generations of the evolutionary process. They are sorted by fitness with the best fitness of 100% projection forming the cirtual center point - and the worst fitness being the outer ring of the diagram. The circles are partitioned into nine segments, one for each x, y and z value of the shape surfaces' center points. Each of the segments is again divided into 41 subsegmentes which represent the domain of the values (-20 to +20) the x, y and z values of the surfaces are able to assume. The diagrams were laser printed on transparencies which were then used to create square format photograms. The photogram as a technique reestablishes the coherence to the porcelain object, making light and shadow the tools of representation.
Project Focus: Reuse, Flexibility, Sustainable Living
Project Start: April 2018
Project Duration: Work in Progress
Total GFA: 270 sqm
Netto Floor Area: 190 sqm
Building Stock Year: ca. 1900
Location: Brandenburg
Beds total: 137
Stock Materials: 2 Layers Brick Construction with rear Ventilation, Wood Framework, gabled purlin roof
New Materials: Wood Framework
Project Keywords: Building Stock, Flexible Living, Sustainable Living, Recycling, Rural Country, Quality transfer, building economics, buiding law, living, celebrating, local supply, seperating, connecting, accessible living, premises
The tiny Lobotomy
What is the life expectation of an architecture today? Living conditions and routines have changed so rapidly in the past decade that any presumptions about our future way of living is nothing more than pretentious. Every so often we stumble upon the typologies that leave us free to adapt; to make our environment designate our life in new ways over and over again. With the traditional typology of the barn, we find a building type that acts economically smart for a maximum multitude of agricultural uses. It is this non deterministic pragmatism that make the typology sustainable and exemplaric for a contemporary attitude towards culture that rejects routine and embraces change.
title Ferdinand List

hallo@ferdinandlist.de