How would you accomplish something like this by Mark Gage Foster…
Thanks in advance!
How would you accomplish something like this by Mark Gage Foster…
Thanks in advance!
There is no parametric logic in the image you posted (and there doesn’t need to be) so Grasshopper doesn’t seem to be giving you any advantage here.
it could have a fancy “parametric” term though. 3d objects mirrored emesis.
This, except that you could use a basic volume/region, defining your desired “building” shape, and populate it with random points. After importing a collection of meshes you can randomly distribute them to the point population.
Once in place, you can transform the objects (scale, rotation, etc.) to your liking.
After that you can bake it and use ZBrush to dynamesh the whole mess.
In my opinion, this is a shitty design on many levels. To me it seems more like a parody, Russian constructivism paired with postmodern ideas AKA kitbashing everything!
I used to live in a building just like this and after a few drinks, I could never find my apartment.
Are you sure the drinks weren’t the reason the building “looked” like that to begin with?
I should have added, even if I was already in my apartment.
For instance, I would like to disassemble an object. And record it meticulously, then I would like to reassemble the parts according to the logic of a building/structure of any kind… you see where I’m going with this?
you see where I’m going with this?
You won’t be going anywhere unless you define some clear detailed rules on how said system should work in your opinion. Write it down in steps. Then tackle one step at a time. Your question is far too broad. At this point you will get the same results just googling something like “self assembly”, you will see you won’t get one thing. You need more of a goal.
I apologize @Michael_Pryor I can see how that can be confusing.
Is there anything you can say towards @diff-arch post? I believe he was onto something.