Rendering of a building on Azun
- Thread starter Shonner
- Start date
Very cool. Is that a music school?
leo knight
SOC-12
Looks great! I remember that issue. I felt smug because I already knew what a 'arcology' was.
As a kid, one of my favorite finds at the library was "Urban Structures for the Future" by Justus Dahinden. It had a chapter on Paolo Soleri and arcologies. If you ever find a copy of this book, tons of inspiration for Traveller.
As a kid, one of my favorite finds at the library was "Urban Structures for the Future" by Justus Dahinden. It had a chapter on Paolo Soleri and arcologies. If you ever find a copy of this book, tons of inspiration for Traveller.
Very good work; well done.
About a year ago, I had that issue of JTAS lying on my desk and someone pointed out that the illo reminded him of the Mode-Gakuen Spiral Tower in Japan:
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/02/11/mode-gakuen-spiral-towers-by-nikken-sekkei/
There really isn't much similarity, except that they're both amazing towers. But we're getting there.
Steve
About a year ago, I had that issue of JTAS lying on my desk and someone pointed out that the illo reminded him of the Mode-Gakuen Spiral Tower in Japan:
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/02/11/mode-gakuen-spiral-towers-by-nikken-sekkei/
There really isn't much similarity, except that they're both amazing towers. But we're getting there.
Steve
I was always a Syd Mead fan back before Bladerunner. Superstructures and all that. I'll have to look up Justus Dahinden's book.
leo knight
SOC-12
Here's one of the megastructures I remember seeing in that book, Buckminster Fuller's 'Triton City':
http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2009/04/buckminster-fullers-40-year-old.html
And here's a link to Paolo Soleri's 'Arcosanti' site:
http://www.arcosanti.org/theory/arcology/main.html
Ideas galore. Enjoy!
http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2009/04/buckminster-fullers-40-year-old.html
And here's a link to Paolo Soleri's 'Arcosanti' site:
http://www.arcosanti.org/theory/arcology/main.html
Ideas galore. Enjoy!
leo knight
SOC-12
Even more arcology fun. A page of links:
http://www.arcology.com/
And a "real life" plan for a two mile high tower. Azun for real?
http://www.tdrinc.com/ultima.html
Enjoy!
http://www.arcology.com/
And a "real life" plan for a two mile high tower. Azun for real?
http://www.tdrinc.com/ultima.html
Enjoy!
Andrew Boulton
The Adminator
Excellent!
I'm sure one of the 'zines would like it as a cover.
Might look nice on the Calendar, too...
I'm sure one of the 'zines would like it as a cover.
Might look nice on the Calendar, too...
Shonner,
Fantastic, simply fantastic...
First the AHLs, then the Broadsword, and now this...
Every the greedy gray-haired fat man, I've squirreled everything away in my Vault of Traveller Goodnesstm.
The Azun arcologies raise so many interesting questions, not the least of which is where on a planet's surface can/should you build something so FREAKIN' HUGE!
When you look at a city's skyline, that outline is very much shaped by the rocks beneath the city in question. In Manhattan for example, the larger skyscrapers cluster around midtown and Wall Street, not because of human considerations, but because a huge mass of old tough rock called Manhattan schist is either on or near the surface in those two areas. That schist provides a very good footing for very large buildings.
Many cities who wish to copy Manhattan's skyline don't have Manhattan's geology. They must building vast underground footings for their skyscrapers spending as much or more on foundations below the ground as they do on the actual buildings above it. The skyscrapers of Houston, for example, which squat in 400 meters of montmorillonitic clay resemble bowling pins with as much as a third or half of their overall structure buried in order to provide support for the rest.
At 3km in height, the arcologies of Azun therefore must be placed atop old tough rock unless there's a 2 or 3 km foundation beneath them.
That need, plus critical seismic concerns, are going to limit the placement of these huge arcologies. They'll be placed on the relatively stable interior continental cratons. Shorelines will rarely fit the bill, same with conglomerate terrains. Fault lines, despite the Imperium's technology, are best avoided too.
Arcologies won't be in places like Bermuda, Florida, Los Angeles, Tokyo, or Shanghai. They'll be in places like Omaha or Mukden instead.
Regards,
Bill
Fantastic, simply fantastic...
First the AHLs, then the Broadsword, and now this...
Every the greedy gray-haired fat man, I've squirreled everything away in my Vault of Traveller Goodnesstm.
The Azun arcologies raise so many interesting questions, not the least of which is where on a planet's surface can/should you build something so FREAKIN' HUGE!
When you look at a city's skyline, that outline is very much shaped by the rocks beneath the city in question. In Manhattan for example, the larger skyscrapers cluster around midtown and Wall Street, not because of human considerations, but because a huge mass of old tough rock called Manhattan schist is either on or near the surface in those two areas. That schist provides a very good footing for very large buildings.
Many cities who wish to copy Manhattan's skyline don't have Manhattan's geology. They must building vast underground footings for their skyscrapers spending as much or more on foundations below the ground as they do on the actual buildings above it. The skyscrapers of Houston, for example, which squat in 400 meters of montmorillonitic clay resemble bowling pins with as much as a third or half of their overall structure buried in order to provide support for the rest.
At 3km in height, the arcologies of Azun therefore must be placed atop old tough rock unless there's a 2 or 3 km foundation beneath them.
That need, plus critical seismic concerns, are going to limit the placement of these huge arcologies. They'll be placed on the relatively stable interior continental cratons. Shorelines will rarely fit the bill, same with conglomerate terrains. Fault lines, despite the Imperium's technology, are best avoided too.
Arcologies won't be in places like Bermuda, Florida, Los Angeles, Tokyo, or Shanghai. They'll be in places like Omaha or Mukden instead.
Regards,
Bill
leo knight
SOC-12
Oh... my... God! That second render is fantastic!
Shonner, would you please email a copy of this one to freetrav@gmail.com for use as a cover for a future issue of Freelance Traveller? Along with contact info, and your real name for credit?
leo knight
SOC-12
The top of the megastructure has three parts: a central "paddle" and two side "prongs", like a mating between a tuning fork and a spatula. It looks ro me like the clouds are slipping between and around the paddle and prongs as they should.
Peter Schutze
SOC-12
both are extremely impressive
the second rendering is better IMHO because its not so obviously a building picture slapped over a terrain background. the first one needs some dead earth sort of effect right up near the base od the buildings
the second rendering is better IMHO because its not so obviously a building picture slapped over a terrain background. the first one needs some dead earth sort of effect right up near the base od the buildings
I tried adding detail near the base of the building. But it is nearly a mile wide. So any detail is just a pixel in size from this distance. I'm re-rendering the scene now without soft shadows so that the building doesn't look like its floating above the grass. I tried adding air rafts and vehicles to the scene. But they were just a few pixels in size. That's how big the Azun towers are. 1.5 million inhabitants in each afterall.
Last edited:
VERY well done render work. I dislike it intensely, but it's excellent work.
Why I dislike it:
It does show you know your tools well.
Why I dislike it:
- The cloud looks wrong; it should have far more indicative turbulence to indicate airflow, and at the altitudes implied, still air is bloody rare, and is what's indicated.
- The shape. Visually interesting, structurally a pair of tuning forks. Gonna literally hum in the wind. At a nauseating frequency.
- broader at the top. Not a good idea structurally. Doable, just not reasonable.
- cruciform base, rather than pyramidal or conical. Ground pressure issues.
- no visible transportation infrastructure
- no visible cultivation surrounding.
It does show you know your tools well.
Similar threads
