PROJECTiONE.com has finally decided to ignore our paper free habits and take the dot com to print! This analog version of our thesis work details selected projects both in thinking and making, and includes papers that support the foundation of PROJECTiONE. Please add us to your library/coffee table, we appreciate your support.

We are publishing with Lulu.com. The download version is available for free and the hard copy for $40.

BUY ME HERE !

This year was PROJECTiONE.

PROJECTiONE has been a collective focused on the relationships between digital and analog processes in design and fabrication. The individual has been removed from the collective in a pursuit for true collaboration, but as our thesis year ends we recognize the importance of our individual interests after graduation. We have determined separate paths after PROJECTiONE, but look forward to potential future collaborations. Elizabeth Boone has been focused on the pedagogical potentials of PROJECTiONE for new students. She is seeking employment as an architecture instructor and is interested in working professionally to become licensed in the near future. Eric Brockmeyer has further developed an interest in interaction design and physical computing and will be attending Carnegie Mellon University in the fall for a Masters of Tangible Interaction Design. Adam Buente and Kyle Perry intend to continue pursuing the focus of PROJECTiONE through a new venture, starting up a design company based around the potentials investigated this year. They hope to keep up the momentum of PROJECTiONE, pushing towards an interesting new practice and future projects.

For general information about PROJECTiONE, contact us at info@projectione.com.

Feel free to contact us individually:
Elizabeth Boone: elizabethboone@projectione.com
Eric Brockmeyer: ericbrockmeyer@projectione.com
Adam Buente: adambuente@projectione.com
Kyle Perry: kyleperry@projectione.com

PROJECTiONE was recently invited to be a part of a marketing piece for Ball State University. The 90 second video story will be featured on the Ball State University website. It includes interviews from the four of us paired with a handful of expertly shot B roll of the 3 axis mill, laser cutter, 3d powder printer, and our projects. There is potential that the footage will also be used to produce a longer more detailed video for the Department of Architecture.

In addition to the attention within the University our work has been shared on a number of design blogs,
notcot – bitMAPS, CNC pen, Morpholuminescence
Core77 – bitMAPS
Archinect – Morpholuminescence
Dwell – Lightforms
Moco Loco – Lightforms
Rhino – Morpholuminescence
Thermwood – CNC pen
Fast Company – bitMAPS
Schweppes – bitMAPS
Trends Now Magazine – bitMAPS
Device – bitMAPS
fubiz – bitMAPS
Cardonizer – Business Cards
__________

After several inquiries we are making the soundtrack to our videos public. The songs featured in our videos are chosen after hours of careful consideration. We would like to credit the featured artists listed above.

We would like to invite everyone to attend our final thesis presentation this Thursday April 15th at 1:45 – 4:00pm in the College of Architecture and Planning’s first floor gallery. The presentation will cover our entire body of thesis work / research, and will be followed by an open discussion. The exhibit of our work will remain on display in the gallery until May 10th.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

What is PROJECTiONE: We are a collective of four designers/fabricators/students pursuing a common question. Our project is based on a shared love of making, a pull towards new understandings of technology and a unique and uncommon design aesthetic.

We have reached outside of the University through our website PROJECTiONE.com creating a network of readers who have followed our project as it has developed. The website has helped to brand PROJECTiONE as its own entity. PROJECTiONE.com is a reflection of our process. We take pride in highlighting our details, methods and finished work. We feel that our design is strengthened through the bold and strong communication of its history.

Logistics: We work as a collective. Our design/fabrication/branding decisions are based on argumentation and compromise as any good partnership must be. However we have narrowed down our decision-making to three types: logical argumentation, passionate pursuit, and collective gut reaction. There are times when a reasoned argument is necessary to establish why a certain decision should be made and it takes a reasoned ear to hear it. At other times a member of the collective will pursue a course on his/her own to a point which the collective may latch on to or pull against. And finally but most infrequently a member will make a suggestion which is immediately agreed upon by all members of PROJECTiONE. There is no one way to document all the decisions that go into any one project and we therefore share all credit for each design detail and interactive experience. Though we have various strengths approaches to design, we are partners in the pursuit of our common goal.

Status: There is a failure in modern theory and practice to address the increasing availability of digital tools. The current theory of digital fabrication is focused predominantly on the new tools of making, CNC machines, rapid prototyping technology and BIM and parametric modeling software. We believe that these tools allow for a shift in the methods of an informed practice but do not and cannot exist without a tangible relation to the human aspect of design and making, what we call the analog. Secondly there is a growing recognition by schools and theorists that interactive architecture is inevitable and though slow to adapt, architecture will need to address the proliferation of augmented reality and reactive systems. These have become accepted across our society and the expectation is clear that our buildings must respond to environmental (background/ambient) and human (foreground/direct) stimuli.

Many projects highlighted in periodicals and in academic journals are based on intangible software tools rather than the tangible constraints of making. It has been argued that CNC equipment has allowed for the development of unique components such as contoured blobs and therefore these projects do consider the realities of fabrication. We feel that such an approach is limited and forces the irrelevant digital form into a wasteful object, and is ignorant to the details which are essential to architecture’s success.

Our project is engaged in the question of how digital and analog methods reinforce one another in support of a practice constrained by the realities of making.

Arc: Through a series of projects, explorations and interventions PROJECTiONE investigated this question. This broad spectrum of approaches enabled a varied and diverse understanding. We started the year with an intervention in an exhibition space, performed a series of interviews with top designers and fabricators in New York City, developed product scale designs and pursued full-scale client based products. Each project can be viewed uniquely but collectively it defines the arc of our searching.

Our first project Projection was an opportunity to reflect on how we worked with the digital and analog tools at our disposal. This was an introspective process allowing us to focus very specifically on how and why we made design decisions using a laser cut, three-axis CNC mill and steel fabrication equipment. In order to gain a broader perspective of how practitioners address these issues we met with a group of designers and fabricators in New York City. The interviews that we undertook during that trip reinforced our understanding of how small digitally savvy practices address making. In reflection it became clear that our approach required us to be serious fabricators and serious designers, a feat few of the firms have achieved.

We discovered that a practice grounded in making must straddle the threshold between design and fabrication but also between analog and digital. Based on internal reflection and an understanding of our contemporaries’ position, we moved forward with several small-scale products. Each of these projects highlights a unique understanding of the boundaries between analog and digital and was also an exploration into how our practice can and must embrace material explorations and research.

Finally we moved into the realm of large scale client based projects. This set of projects gave us some insight into the challenges of adapting our methods and practices to the needs and requirements created by a client. Again each project addresses our question on multiple scales. How can a large scale project become aesthetically unique using the analog and digital tools available? How can a client’s design and performance requirements align with our own interests in the conversation between analog and digital? And how can this project become a serious attempt at creating a sustainable practice that addresses these pressing issues?

In educating our clients we were able to reflect on these questions. We have learned the value of clearly conveying our ideals to the clients through these projects. The evidence of our success and failure in answering these questions is in the documentation of our process through video, images, models, and contracts.

Reflect: This project has been most valuable not because we have seen these projects in their completion but we see ourselves in each detail. We committed ourselves to each decision and process from design to fabrication and understand that our value does not lie in the sum of our projects but the sum of our experiences.

This is PROJECTiONE.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

A special thanks to our thesis studio professor Josh Coggeshall for his enthusiasm and support throughout this process, and the Institute of Digital Fabrication for providing us access to the tools and space required to accomplish these types of projects. We would also like to thank our advisors, Bob Koester – Director of Center for Energy Research, Education and Service, Sonne Palmer – Professor of Architecture, Paul Puzzello – Instructor of Architecture, Donna Sink – Instructor of Architecture, Mahesh Senagala – Chairperson of the Department of Architecture, and Dr. Carol Tiernan.

PROJECTiONE has developed a position on how we would like to practice through self reflection and trial by fire execution of client-based work. As seen in our client-based strategy post, we have developed more appropriate definitions and descriptors of our processes. These descriptions have evolved over time and through reflecting on our experiences with actual clients. We used this process as the basis for generating our contracts. It was immediately apparent to us that our work could not be contained within a single contract or practice structure and we therefore developed the following client relationships/contracts. They are: Product to Client, Process to Client, and Seed Money. These relationships are described in more detail in the following diagrams, but they allow for a greater degree of flexibility in dealing with clients with varying expectations. It is expected that our clients may be traditional owners, fellow designer, or manufacturers looking to invest into innovative usage of a material or process.

This comparison was developed as a means of best understanding the internal PROJECTiONE process. By reflecting on our process over the course of our work together we developed this set of descriptions which represent us. This thought experiment has served as the basis for the development of our client relationships and our own practice structures. The comparison is not intended as a critique of traditional practice structures but it is a standard against which our practice can be most clearly represented.

In this structure the client is interested in a sketch or prototype previously developed by PROJECTiONE. They realize the potential of the design and would like to adapt it to fit their needs. During the development of the design, the client approves the product after the Informed Design phase before moving into the Production, and Assembly and Installation phases.

PROJECTiONE is commissioned by the client to apply design thinking/processes to their unique problem. The client approves the design after the Critical Thinking phase and again after Investigation and Testing, and Informed Design.

PROJECTiONE partners with a Manufacturer/Designer/Venture Capitalist/Investor to provide seed money used to develop an initial concept. PROJECTiONE then interrogates the material/process/idea, investigating innovative technologies, methods, and applications. The deliverable of value is typically the knowledge generated.

Our Design Platform is a set of values and concepts that exist to further explain our thesis framework. They give insight into processes of working, designing, and thinking within our collective, providing a foundation to work from and consider throughout design and fabrication.

Value of Inefficiency
Craft and innovation often emerge from time and energy intensive processes. When this concept is applied to seemingly mundane materials the results can transform them into valued pieces. The care involved in this process is evident in the final product and exposes latent beauty and subtle characteristics. This goes beyond a monetary gain in value and elevates the product into something that carries emotional or psychological value for the user and for the designer.

Digital Hangover
In response to the certain digital fabrication movements, we are interested in addressing the notion that designers are able to seamlessly translate a digital model into a physical form with very little effort. It is a rare occurrence that entire assemblies “snap together” without complications, that wood which is fresh off the mill doesn’t need hand finishing, and that tectonics are developed without extensive testing. Instead we acknowledge these processes and embrace them as part of the digital analog exchange. Furthermore, digital manufacturing tools are no longer the avante garde of design. They exist at a level equal with analog fabrication processes and the understanding of their relation must now be explored.

Loosening Precision
Materials often directly inform designs and the processes involved in production. We aim to allow for circumstantial results, loosening precision. While tectonics and details are often tied to materiality, a greater understanding of the material is developed by closley working with it and the resulting knowledge informs design. This approach also applies to the processes involved, as methods play just as an important role in developing design.

Post-Design Design
Because we design, fabricate, and assemble there is an understanding that the design will develop as it is produced. We can anticipate certain results, but the process of making often reveals unforeseen challenges and opportunities. Post-design design is more than just troubleshooting, it is the understanding that the initial idea is flexible and will most definitely adapt. Often in our early design process unknowns are understood and expected, anticipating that a solution will later be inserted into these gaps.

High Intensity/Low Duration- Throughout the next two weeks we will be rigorously designing and creating. The purpose of this quick set of crafted objects is to take the Design Platform and embody those within a physical format. Each project, though highly different from the next, carries the same platform as the next.

woodScan
popPanel
plyLight

To frame PROJECTiONE’s [n. proj-ekt wuhn] position in the fields of digital design and fabrication we are examining our projects relative to current theories and the critical positions of digital designers and fabricators. We have followed trends in digital theory and executed a series of interviews in New York City to understand what current leaders consider to be relevant to their practice.

We find design potential in the areas of overlap and creative use of analog and digital design and fabrication methods. PROJECTiONE was created within this framework. New understandings of design and fabrication tools, through iterative use, reveal potential in materials and processes providing innovative solutions to design problems and expressions of craft. PROJECTiONE resides in the space between digital and analog.

Over the past two years we have collaborated on a variety of projects, from exhibition installations to reactive architecture. Our work has been displayed in various print, web, and built forms, all remaining within an academic setting. This collaborative history was based on a shared love for internal dialogue and critique parallel to making and experimentation, driving each of our projects. PROJECTiONE is our collective thesis. We have chosen to examine our similarities and past methods of collaboration in order to reposition ourselves within the design and fabrication communities this year and into practice.

“It is a collective which exhibits emergent behavioral patterns that are unpredictable by examining the behavioral patterns of its parts. Beyond simple collaboration, which is the result of an alignment of interests, an emergent network can create new and complex coherences out of divergent interests.” (Wiscombe 2006)

We do not intend to define specialists within our group. We are not a group of individuals that coexist to form a collaborative. While we have different backgrounds that affect our perspectives, we are not completely separate parts under the label of a whole. As Wiscombe explains, this has allowed for unpredictable and unforeseen results in the synthesis of our ideas and interests. However, unlike these clear definitions of collaboration and collective, our interests fluctuate between divergent and aligned. Our ideas, skills, and interests may differ, but they also overlap toward a common goal. We do not formulate individual ideas that the group supports, rather the group reformulates individual ideas to a point where the individual is indistinguishable from the group. This is our collective. This is PROJECTiONE.

Our opportunities to work together in the past have focused on using digital and analog design and fabrication tools. To frame our position in this field, we contrast that experience against current theories and the critical positions of digital designers and fabricators. We have followed trends in digital theory and executed a series of interviews in New York City to understand what current designers and fabricators consider to be relevant to their practice. Our questions highlighted their perspective on the relationship between digital and analog tools and processes.

Two significant theories that have informed digital practice are concepts of versioning (parametric design) and its implications in a new industrial or manufacturing approach, neither of which accurately describes our position. Sharples, Holden, and Pasquarelli’s (SHoP) Introduction to the series of essays in the Architectural Design (AD) issue titled Versioning (Sharples, Holden, Pasquarelli 2002, 7) set the framework for this parametric theory. They describe the shift away from representational design towards a form of design that embeds information through the use of parametric modeling and versioning which, “can be characterised by a set of conditions organised into a menu or nomenclature capable of being configured to address particular design criteria”. There was an emerging understanding of the model becoming rapidly adaptable and flexible based on contextual and formal criteria. This model could directly integrate with fabrication techniques, as defined in Manufacturing and Material Effects (Kolarevic and Klinger 2008, 28). Kolarevic and Klinger’s approach takes on industrial models as guidelines for a shift in practice. They claim that digital and computational technology has allowed architecture to move towards a systemized, accurately calculated method of assembly. While this can be true, it is most often not realized in products of architecture. The validity of this manufacturing mentality is in question, as this attitude is incongruent with practices of craftsmanship and the development of truly unique components, (not necessarily mass-customizable components) incorporating digital tools, hand craft, regional materials, and labor.

In our New York interviews, we sought individuals who are recognized for their contributions to digital design and architecture, yet many of their responses indicated sensitivity towards the human involvement in these practices. For example, Chris Lasch of Aranda/Lasch spoke of a Native American weaver suturing two scripted components together. However, when questioned about the weaver’s involvement in creating the suture hole spacing, a parameter of the script, Lasch said that he made the decision without thought of involving the weaver. While he was sharing information with the weaver in development of the scripted components, he missed, what we find, a critical step in the process that could have been explored with a specialist’s expertise. This is not a criticism of the idea or the outcome, but of the specific relationships and process of this collaboration. A direct connection between the digital parameters of the script and the analog methods of the weaver was missing; instead the design was “handed-off” to the maker, exhibiting two skill-sets within an idea, rather than a truly informed idea created through collaboration.

In an interview with John Nastasi of Nastasi Architects, he described a master plasterer who skim coated a CNC milled wall for one of his projects. What was important to Nastasi was the way in which the digital methods allowed for a streamlined process, and most importantly, a result that was “absolutely beautiful”. While this integration allowed for great results, the process remained linear. We are interested in how the plasterer’s expertise could feed back into the formal development of the model. How could the analog process change the way that the wall is developed digitally? How can this relationship and dialogue take on within a more integrated and cyclical model? Can the techniques of the artisan be implemented in conjunction with the CNC operations, not simply in preparation for finishing?

The existing relationship between digital and analog tools is linear and an extension of traditional processes. The designer defines the parameters (materials and methods) while the craftsman, contractor, or assembler is charged with working within the confines of those rules. Arguments have been made for integrated project delivery which involves these people in design decisions early on, but we are not focusing on that idea. What is critical to us is how those interactions take place, not whether they take place.

When asked, some of the [digital] fabricators described analog tools as finishing tools, mainly relying on digital tools for precise shaping and surfacing. Jefferey Taras of Associated Fabrication told us, “[E]verything gets sanded on some level. It’s perfect when it comes off the mill and then it’s never that way again.” This is an attitude towards fabrication and finishing which is commonly held within the digital design community. There is little appreciation for the abilities of analog tools, yet an unyielding reverence for digital tools. Taras went on to say, “The drill press rarely gets used. We use the chop saw, we use the table saw. They’re all used for select processes, maybe to make a jig but not really as a final piece. We might use it to make stock.” We are in opposition to this perspective, reducing analog tools to a diminished status. However, Associated Fabrication recognizes their specialization in CNC tools and will send out work which requires analog tooling to traditional fabricators (e.g. large panel saw cutting).

Analyzing and critiquing these firms’ view of their tools and processes has brought PROJECTiONE closer to an understanding of our own values and position on these issues. The differences have been highlighted in order to define ourselves through negation.

Some groups we interviewed, such as Tietz-Baccon, find value in the relationships of digital and analog, often using CNC machinery to create jigs for crafted analog fabrication. They exhibit their craft through the use of all tools, recognizing that creativity and precision can still occur within the analog. Others, like Gramazio and Kohler at the ETH in Zurich are exploring this relationship in a different way. Though they are experimenting with a seven-axis robot, they have no intent of eliminating the human, remaining largely integrated into the process. [West Fest Pavilion in Switzerland] In this process, the robot picks up a piece of wood and places it on a table, where a student cuts it to a CNC-specified length with a miter saw. After cutting, the robot positions that same piece of wood in a specific place, while another student secures it with a nail gun. It is a mutually constructive machine-human relationship and an integrated use of this technology.

Similar to these groups, we completed a quick design/fabrication project entitled Projection that we used to analyze our internal methodologies and help define our position. Critical relationships existed throughout the project between the analog design (measurement of Cartesian coordinates) and the digital model (insertion of coordinates in digital space). This was made possible by our understanding of the required digital inputs that informed how we modeled and measured using analog tools. During fabrication, our analog techniques (steel cutting, and welding) informed the shape and information embedded in templates (laser-cut cardboard). These templates were designed to wrap around steel angles so that they could easily be held in place while marking and cutting, but also carried with them information regarding the steel pieces’ length and orientation. An interrogation of analog and digital space in this project allowed a unique and continuous transfer of information between the two.

This example highlights the thinking that is intrinsic to our process, relying on an intimate understanding of a variety of tools, both analog and digital. This knowledge can then be applied in developing innovative relationships (coordinate mapping, and laser-cutting templates). Unlike some of the designers and fabricators interviewed, we remain open to new uses of both analog and digital tools. We don’t place any undue importance on either new technologies or traditional means, and we rethink the relationships that exist between them.

Software and hardware should not just make designing or fabricating easier, streamlining the design process. They should not exist separate from the human. They should provide opportunities to change the way designers think. They should allow us to design differently; more precisely, more creatively, and with greater intent. This can be done through an interrogation of the tool’s purpose. Every tool has a purpose or material associated with it, but that purpose should be continually challenged. PROJECTiONE was created within this framework. We find design potential in the areas of overlap and creative use of analog and digital design and fabrication methods. In every project we intend to innovate. We develop new techniques. We rethink traditional techniques. We creatively force tools to do what they weren’t intended to do. Our ideas and methodologies are based on an interrogation of relationships between the individuals of PROJECTiONE and the tools of our craft. This concept is not unique to us, but its execution and results highlight our position in digital practice. PROJECTiONE resides in the space between digital and analog.

Within the framework of our thesis, we are presenting our position at multiple scales and levels of complexity. This first semester has been research based, relying on a few small scale projects to convey our ideas. Our research has helped to iteratively define PROJECTiONE’s position within design and fabrication. We have looked back at previous projects and developed new projects ranging in scale from our own business cards, to a graphic representation of our trip to New York and a system that can receive projection of our work, each exhibiting our position in a different way.

The next stage for us will be examining the marketing and development possibilities of PROJECTiONE in the field of product design. This will introduce new parameters to influence our methods, specifically a program that is developed for several users and the physical production of multiple products that retain the processes we value. This product should embody the cooperative integration of analog and digital throughout its design and production. Our intention is that this methodology becomes transparent and easily understood to a market and specific users. Our secondary goal for this product is the development of supplemental income generating research funding for our work next semester.

PROJECTiONE is currently developing a “Call for Work” in order to begin networking with potential clients and partners. By expanding the scope of our thesis work to include a full scale client based design problem, we will provide a demonstration project within our critical position. We have presented the invitation to those interested in our work to contact us with their unique design problems and opportunities. This project will primarily take place next semester and is intended to explore the development of an external program-based architectural application that frames our thesis work. Previously, our project development has been internally driven, based on our own interests and generated programs, and we realize that for our position to be understood outside of an academic context we must connect with and design for others. Additionally, we are looking towards manufacturers and material suppliers that could benefit from our skill-set in rebranding themselves and rethinking their methods or purpose. Our processes are often influenced by the integration of materials and industry early on, creating the potential to drastically change the way established techniques or materials are used in design and construction. We look forward to engaging this scale of work and interacting with clients with an aligned interest.

Next semester we plan to expand the scope of our thesis work to include a full scale client based design problem, we will provide a demonstration project within our critical position. We invite those interested in our work to contact us with their unique design problems and opportunities. This potential project will primarily take place next semester and is intended to explore the development of an external program-based architectural application that frames our thesis work.

Previously, our project development has been internally driven, based on our own interests and generated programs, and we realize that for our position to be understood outside of an academic context we must connect with and design for others. Additionally, we are looking towards manufacturers and material suppliers that could benefit from our skill-set in rebranding themselves and rethinking their methods or purpose. Our processes are often influenced by the integration of materials and industry early on, creating the potential to drastically change the way established techniques or materials are used in design and construction.

Please contact Elizabeth Boone if you are interested in working with PROJECTiONE.

__________

Past Industry Partners

A. Zahner Metals
Arrowhead Plastic Engineering
Indiana Limestone Fabricators, Inc.
Midwest Metal Products

Past Sponsors

Buente | Buente Architects
Capstone Real Realty
LHI Lighting
The Estopinal Group
VPS Architecture

Past Material Donations

David R Webb Co
Laird Plastics

This represents a presentation given at a Pecha Kucha style afternoon. We consider it a first manifesto. The objects below were created out of folded laser-cut acrylic and a hand-cut printed graphic composition of PROJECTiONE’s manifesto. They were handed out to the audience as an artifact in order to reflect on the fast-paced presentation. They can function as a stencil, bookmark, or simply become a visual representation of the event.
__________

Over the past two years we have collaborated on a variety of projects from exhibition installations to reactive architecture. Our work has been displayed in various print, web, and built forms. We have a shared love of making that drives each of our projects and have thus chosen to pursue a collaborative thesis which we have dubbed PROJECTiONE.

PROJECTiONE aims to examine and prototype an innovative start up firm, through research of existing firm structures, documentation of the process of our internal collaboration as well as with industry and clients, resulting in built projects, subsidiary publications, and an expanded network that represents a culmination of the ideas and work our group has produced together.

We realize some of the challenges of creating a successful practice within the academic world and are excited by them, as each of our past projects has challenged our understanding of architecture. In order to begin framing our process for this endeavor, we have developed a few key goals: These goals are not checkpoints as much as principle to work under.

PROJECTiONE aims to be a self sustaining venture. The documentation of this process will be highly rigorous, not involving a singular project, attempting to understand how processes and testing can add value. We will investigate how material research in design impact design, how we understand the value of an idea as opposed to the value of an object, how our theory of practice impacts the product, and where we fit as specialists in a generalists profession.

Elizabeth Boone is a recent graduate architect and holds a Bachelor of Science in Architecture and a Master of Architecture with a Concentration in Fabrication from Ball State University’s College of Architecture and Planning. She has worked as a graduate assistant for CAP, aiding in the instruction of digital design courses. Since the summer of 2009 she has worked for the Institute for Digital Fabrication in a management position. Her varied experience with architectural practice comes from internships with firms such as Lucien Lagrange Architects, GBBN Architects, Studio A Architecture, The Estopinal Group, and AML General Contractors.

Elizabeth Boone was one of the four original members of PROJECTiONE as an architectural thesis. Currently, she is working at SOM New York with the intention of becoming licensed in the near future. She is also interested in the future pedagogical potentials of PROJECTiONE for new students, and aims to eventually balance her professional work with contributions as an instructor.

elizabethboone@projectione.com
502.240.2032

project list
resume
undergraduate portfolio

Adam Buente is a recent graduate architect and holds a Bachelor of Science in Architecture and a Master of Architecture with a Concentration in Fabrication from Ball State University’s College of Architecture and Planning. He has maintained a strong interest in full scale design/fabrication, focused on innovative assemblies and techniques. Much of this has come out of a partnership with the Institute for Digital Fabrication and previous experience in design and construction with firms including Browning Day Mullins Dierdorf Architects and VPS Architecture.

Currently, he and Kyle Perry are pursuing the focus of PROJECTiONE through a new venture, starting up a design company based around the potentials investigated this year. They hope to keep up the momentum of PROJECTiONE, pushing towards an interesting new practice and future projects. Look for more to come!

adambuente@projectione.com
812.480.6006

resume

Eric Brockmeyer is a recent graduate architect and holds a BA in Physics and Fine Arts from Colby College, and a Master of Architecture with a Concentration in Fabrication from Ball State University’s College of Architecture and Planning. He previously worked for an orthopedics device manufacturer before returning to school for his masters. Eric has worked as a fellow with the Institute for Digital Fabrication since the summer of 2008. His interests are in learning and applying technologies such as parametric modeling software, CAM software, and physical computing to built work.

Eric Brockmeyer was one of the four original members of PROJECTiONE as an architectural thesis. Currently, he has further developed an interest in interaction design and physical computing and is attending Carnegie Mellon University for a Masters of Tangible Interaction Design. Check out more of his work at ericbrockmeyer.com

ericbrockmeyer@projectione.com

project list
resume

Kyle Perry is a recent graduate architect and holds a Bachelor of Science in Architecture and a Master of Architecture with a Concentration in Fabrication from Ball State University’s College of Architecture and Planning. His previous work experience was completely outside the realm of architecture as a raft guide for many of his undergraduate summers. He has worked for a number of years for the Institute for Digital Fabrication as a Research Fellow. He is interested in changing education/practices of architecture, the processes of design to fabrication, and is interested in graphic design.

Currently, he and Adam Buente are pursuing the focus of PROJECTiONE through a new venture, starting up a design company based around the potentials investigated this year. They hope to keep up the momentum of PROJECTiONE, pushing towards an interesting new practice and future projects. Look for more to come!

kyleperry@projectione.com
317.698.8593

resume