Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 12/03/2013 07:28 (12/03/2013 07:28) |
| Message-ID | <slrnl9quj5.vnb.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
| Followups | Eric Stevens (2h & 41m) > Sandman |
In article <bvnp99lo1vkt5begnnlvj17nfhhv4frqj3@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:
Indeed. Not understand programming, however.Eric StevensSandmanEric StevensSandmanEric StevensEric Stevens
Would you like to consider that you have a narrow view of the application of the computer?There is much more to it than 'apps'.nospam
why does an architect need to know how to program?
He has to understand what programming is all about.
Why?
Because the proper use of computer tools is now an essential part of a designers skill set.
Agreed. But "proper use" of a computer does not mean that one has to understand programming, however.
But proper use of computers as design tools requires that you understand how to work them.
I would not describe the training required as programming (although that is part of it) so much as applied computing.But the topic is your claim that an architect need to understand programming.
Nah, automatically as is done in most larger firms.Eric StevensNo one tool will look after the entire needs of a project and they have have to be woven together to function as a whole.Sandman
Also agreed. But few architects handle the computing task for every part of the project anyway.
You seem to be envisaging a chain of computation with each part being handled sepately with the results being passed on manually to the next stage.
People work that way but the best projects chain tasks in such a way that they flow through the computer from beginning to end.I don't know what you mean by the statement "flow through the computer" so I can't comment on this sentence.
Of course not. You don't have to understand car mechanics in order to understand that you need to put gas in the tank and can't drive cross country with your Prius.Eric StevensThe designer has to know what can be done and most importantly what can't.Sandman
To some extent, sure. This has nothing to do with programming though. As a programmer, I can tell the architext what the limitations of our environemtn is and he would just have to take them into account. He doesn't need to know the first thing about programming to do so.
He has to know something to understand what you are telling him.
At the same time you have to understand his problem to enable you to evaluate the possible solutions.This is a lot more true - the programmer would do well to understand the basics of arhitecture (instead of the otehr way around) to better build solutions for hus collegues. And, interestingly, this is usually how it's done.
It was just meant to illustrate a scenario.SandmanEric Stevens
For instance, if I have a DWG plotter routine then I could tell him that he can't use truetype fonts since my program doesn't support truetype. That's all the information he needs.
But that's a trivial problem.
I can't really speak for architects but I can for engineers. How about processing the design of an object defined by Solid Works http://www.solidtec.co.nz/products/solidworks-3d-cad/?gclid=CNnbzu7AkrsCFQTnpAodXhQARQ with elements of the Catia suite http://www.3ds.com/products-services/catia/portfolio/catia-v5/ with MSC non linear stress analysis package http://www.mscsoftware.com/application/nonlinear-analysis with the result output in a Fanuc M-code for use in suitable CNC machine tools?
You have interface and data transform problems at every stage.But why change the topic to engineering though? Engineers would most likely highly benefit from a greater understanding of programming when it comes to their tools and workflows - at least to a much gresater degree than architects.
Mayhaps. Also happens to be reality. Not only are few people savvy to both creative design/aesthetics and the more surreal and abstract thinking required for programming, it's also a matter of education and time. If you want to be a great architect, you'd do well to focus less on the tools and especially programming and more on your visions and creative work.Eric StevensThe more the task can be automated, the more the designer can concentrate on the design.Sandman
The designer should always concentrate on the design, it's the programmer's task to enable the next step, and communicate whatever limitations there is in that step.
THat's the pessimist's view.
This is also true for photography as you probably know.
I wouldn't be concerned about knowing the limitations so much as I would be about how to get around them. This entails knowledge of much more than programming.Actually, it requires no knowledge about programming at all. Programming is how you create a program, but all your examples is about how you USE a program.
Sure they are. Just like the paint bucket in photoshop is a "design tool" in that it makes tedious work faster and more precise. Scripting for CAD/3D apps on the most basic level does things like create trees on a hill, uniform material chioces in a house, calculate material costs for a bridge and so on. Things that obviously can be done by hand but freeing up that hand with an automated task means you can focus more on the creative process.Sandman
I bet there are architects that are also programmers, but that's hardly the norm, and would be a very niche case.Now, some CAD software has programming languages built in, like MEL scripts and LISP (even VBA and .NET) which would greatly help the architect in his work, but those aren't native programming languages (except .NET I suppose) and still - few architexts employ them in their daily work, and there is no real "need" for them to do so.Eric Stevens
Nor are they really design tools.
And he can; without understanding programming. People who don't understand programming have talked to programmers for decades :)SandmanEric Stevens
AppleScript on the Mac is a really simple language for automating tasks, yet few use it because well, the tools work just fine for them as they are. And MEL/LISP is a LOT more complicated than AppleScript, so the threshold is even higher. And C/C++ is even MORE complicated.
An architect hires people to do this kind of thing. The point is that the architect has to be able to talk to them.
SandmanEric Stevens
Point is - if you're an architect, or a designer, or a photographer, you want to spend your time doing what you like doing - not spend your time writing small utilities and learning how to program C++.
Quite true.
Not from a script :)SandmanEric Stevens
Now, if you're like me and you already know how to script stuff, then it's a great help! But this isn't true - or needed - for most, including architects.
How do you think these images came to be? http://www.architecturaldigest.com/architecture/2012-01/best-architectural-projects-slideshow
-- Sandman[.net]
11/30/2013-
-
