matrix - perception
We live in an Age when everything changes in the blink of an eye.
Our conception of reality has ceased to be a physical reality to become a possible unreality.
Things may not be and be and Man reinvents himself as BEING.
The virtual ceases to be a virtuosity of the past towards the future, and begins to be a tool of the new realities in which we live.
The dimensions are now different, inserted in the new world with new realities that may come to be, exist, almost complete, but totally
“Have you ever had a dream, Neo, in which you were so sure it was real?
What if you were unable to wake up from this dream?
How would you know the difference between the dream world and the real world? “
Buddha said, “Everything is illusion” and did not say it to make us believe that nothing is real, but rather to emphasize that all we see are mere mental projections created by ourselves. All forms, whether solid, liquid, gaseous, or plasma, seen at the subatomic level, do not exist as we thought they existed, as rigid “physical matter.” Everyone we perceive is an event generated within us.
Physical reality (Height, width and depth) is perceived by our 5 senses, which are nothing more than electrical signals sent to the brain. Not an illusion by the lies, but an non absolute truth. Everything is a game.
The reality of our eyes play with our sense and all that we think it is, for not being. What this Matrix allows us is to play in as many realities as the illusions that our consciousness has space.
Based on the idea that all we see are mere projections created within us, the perception of reality varies from person to person depending on the individual
experiences of each. At some point in our life we have to choose a path, make a choice, follow the instinct: blue or red, reality or illusion.
You’re in Times Square, what you see may not be what you think it is. Influenced by light, time, or space, follow your instinct and draw your perception of reality.
Define the program and justify your choice.
- Localization: not defined
- Areas: not defined
The panel must have a descriptive text of the proposal (English), concept, idea, etc.
Scale – Appropriate to the submitted elements.
Team: Arnaud Charoy
Team:Akshita Sabarwal, Aditi Vyas, Manushi Shah, Shreya Chheda,
Team: Ruoting Wang, Ziling Yan
City: New York
Country: United States
Team: Pasquale Giordano, Luca Naso, Matteo Murat, Roberto Gallo
Team: Jonathan Wong, Samuel Essess
Country: United Kingdom
Team:Sebastian Mella, Raimundo Maldonado, Nicolás Vidal,
Team: Mariana Henriques, Diogo Almeida
Team: Alina Tamciuc
Country: United Kingdom
Team: Anderson Beuting, Débora Mikulski
City: Balneário Camboriú
Team: Krishna Jani, Devangi Kansagra, Shikha Patel,
Kshitij Mahashabde, Rakshita Jain
1st place – ID000130 - Team: Arnaud Charoy; City: Aachen; Country: Germany
“A clear winner. Proposal was imaginative, well structured and clearly set out. The writing was intelligent, considered and informative. All presented beautifully with strong and compelling graphics, including 3D drawings, diagrams and rendered images.” Alan Dunlop, arq.
“Excellent layout and graphics with clear and intriguing concept makes this proposal stand out from the crowd.” Martin Wesley, arq.
“The proposal has been properly conceptualizad in a clear and direct way. The graphic piece has got different visual resources, in one hand the sketches and in the other the image with different visual importance.The background picture containes tours by Times Square with elements linked to each other and information of the colective imaginary that estimulate the observer.The box outstands in the composition through its shape and color reinforcing the message of this new look of the place motivating the spectator to experiment the new perception of it.” Sebastian Martinez, arq.
“Analyzing the complex condition of Times Square, the design cleverly offers a very small intervention. Visualization of the data and narration of the proposal are also successful.” Duygu Tuntas, arq.
“As a temporary installation, Blackout proposes a different perception of the Times Square with reference to the analysis of the surroundings. It also helps discovering hidden features of Manhattan and provides multiple and complex forms of perceptions. Superposition of the physical (real) and the digital (virtual) and the duality of crowd and isolation are appreciated.” Heves Baseli, arq.
2nd Place – ID000750 - Team:Akshita Sabarwal, Aditi Vyas, Manushi Shah, Shreya Chheda, Ruta Mehta; City: Mumbai; Country: India
“Excellent submission. Strong graphic content with accompanying narrative that was clear and read well. Great use of colour, very legible and an attractive diagram. Thoughtful and provoking.” Alan Dunlop, arq.
“A highly detailed drawing defines the proposal as an interesting take on the competition subject.” Martin Wesley, arq.
“The graphic and narrated representation are very well fused. One reflects the other. The image transmits flow and dynamism, representing the multiple situations and perceptions that are experienced in Manhatann, almost surrealistic. An artificial stage represented with geometric forms, like a machine with layers that light up and others that are turned off activating diverse routes that give individual and collective identity.” Sebastian Martinez, arq.
“By designing a fourth dimension, the proposal provides alternative event spaces as extensions to the real space. The design idea and the graphic quality deserve appreciation.” Duygu Tuntas, arq.
“TimeScape provides an alternative reality for the Times Square. As a mutant form of the original Times Square, it makes infills to reality and triggers shifts of perception at specific points of interaction. The play with rules of gravity and notion of scale is appreciated.” Heves Baseli, arq.
3rd PLace – ID000600 - Team: Ruoting Wang, Ziling Yan; City: New York; Country: United States
“A burst of colour, which was immediately attractive and supported by clear narrative and text. Strong graphics and well structured submission, indicating both an architectural and artistic sensibility . ” Alan Dunlop, arq.
“An abstract submission with nice graphics and a good concept.” Martin Wesley, arq.
“The narrative induces to reflection. The image impacts with its complex composition. Each piece of its components fusions despite the fact that it do not lose its individual characteristic.Intricate elements generate visual distortion that cause optical illusion which turns the decodification of the image became complex. Geometric shapes with bright colors into different directions produce optical illution of movements making random ways into several directions that reinforce the laberintic discourse.” Sebastian Martinez, arq.
“The project proposes a series of altered individual experiences that are juxtaposed in the form of a labyrinth. It is conceptually coherent and the implementation of the idea on a concentric 3D space is inspiring. ” Duygu Tuntas, arq.
“The idea of labyrinth as a space of possibilities and a platform of memories is the outstanding feature of the proposal. The labyrinth is full of options. It is endless and provides no escape. Therefore it provides a shift of perception at each junction. Perception is already a notion that is unique to an individual. It is not static but dynamic because it changes in time. In this sense the labyrinth as a metaphor for multiplicity and complexity of perceptions is appreciated.” Heves Baseli, arq.