[usrusr]

Pretty much what has long been my dream "make the world better" product (long as in from pre-genAI days), only that this one happens in image space: take an architectural model, look at the surface material specifications, analyze it for where rainwater would run down etc and generate weathering texture, how would this look when it's not new anymore.

Because as I see it, a lot of aesthetic decisions in architecture, pretty much anything that goes in the direction of minimalism, is just putting "newness" in the center of perception. And thus absence of "newness" will be in the center of perception when it stops being new. All these clear geometric shapes? They look awesome at the opening ceremony, but two years down the line they are like magnifying glasses for uneven changes in color and the like. Whereas for a more playful surface full of ornaments, those same years would be hardly more than a blink and they can age gracefully, on the aesthetic level (and on the technical level, required maintenance intervals are much longer anyways). Architects who claim to care for sustainability should demonstrate that they consider how the building will look like later in life.

[larusso]

I see this as well with huge modern buildings with wood parts. They look great the first year. The wood shines red’ish. After a winter the wood part starts to grey out. I understand that this is sometimes a look they strife for but all the preview renders show it in the prestige condition. Nobody is doing a yearly training. And don’t get me started on all the glass survives for elevators, roofs, bus stops, divider panels next to tram stops (I’m mainly meaning Berlin here) which nobody cares to clean or is so difficult to clean that after 2 or 3 years it looks very run down.

[SilasX]

Reminds me of how the Statue of Liberty went from being brownish gold to green:

https://old.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/u22v09/t...

[Joel_Mckay]

Some see a patina with weathered surfaces as desirable.

The beauty of Kintsugi can also be difficult for people to understand. =3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9LMKGte0UU

[ReptileMan]

Most of the mega projects are in authoritarian states. So in a way it is about the photo op at opening. And then the next mega project.

[amelius]

That's maybe nice for prestige projects but imho the main problem in architecture is projects on a budget and how money is allocated. There should be a law that says that X% of the building costs should be in the facade, the part that everybody sees. That alone should help a lot in making cities look nicer.

[Aurornis]

> There should be a law that says that X% of the building costs should be in the facade

Cities solve this with design requirements and through the approval process. Specifying a minimum spend isn’t going to make the buildings look nice by itself. You’d just get weird budget games being played.

Cities with restrictive planning commissions can push buildings toward certain looks. People get angry about it, though, because it gets harder and more expensive to build things in an era where it’s already too expensive to build.

[dahart]

That sounds like a recipe for skimping on safety and design systemically. No thank you. You can’t legislate aesthetics, and there’s already a huge incentive to make buildings look great. People already spend a lopsided amount on the facade making it look better than it is, rather than spending on where they should: foundation, structure, good design, and longevity. In my city, apartment buildings used to require steel structures and lawmakers relaxed the requirement so they went back to wood because it’s cheaper. Now the new ones look great but they’re burning down and falling apart at higher rates than before.

[fnord77]

this is what gets me about brutalism. Concrete looks nice when brand new, but a few years of acid rain makes it look like dog shit

[usrusr]

Some of my favorite examples of graceful aging in architecture are concrete - but those are never the ones that celebrate efficiency, they always have some playful element that will still be playful when the newness has faded. Ribbed concrete (if you don't know what that means: worth googling!) alternating with smooth surface for example. But sure, once the structure reaches a certain size threshold, you better play the "glass & steel" card a lot, it has been dominant for almost a century for a reason. But even that can be overdone and concrete exposing aging can be a nice contrast.

[Analemma_]

You can do regular maintenance on concrete to keep it looking nice, but nobody wants to spend the money. Everyone understands that a wooden house exterior has to be repainted now and then, but thinks "concrete = no upkeep costs". Architects have complained bitterly about this for a while; I don't love brutalism but I can sort of see their point.