Collaborative and Virtual Architectural Design in Second Life: FINC-AV experiment Jean-Pierre Goulette1, Sandra Marques1, Jean-Baptiste Boulanger1, Pierre Côté1,2 1
Laboratoire d’informatique appliquée à l’architecture (Li2a), École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Toulouse, France (http://www.toulouse.archi.fr/li2a/),
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected] 2
École d’Architecture de la Faculté d’aménagement, d’architecture et des arts visuels de l’Université Laval, Québec, Canada ( http://www.arc.ulaval.ca/),
[email protected]
Abstract The use and evolution of information and communication technologies is widening not only the process of communicating architecture but also it is challenging what we design and also how we design. The focus of this paper is to present and discuss a collaborative and virtual architectural design studio jointly undertaken by the Schools of Architecture of Toulouse in France, and Laval University in Québec City, Canada, which was carried out during the Fall semester of 2007. In the context of our experiment, FINC-AV (Forme, Information, Novation, Conception – Architecture Virtuelle), activities are held by two geographically distant studios that communicate and coordinate design information and tasks using the multi-user networked 3D virtual world Second Life (SL). Keywords Virtual Architecture; Collaborative Work; Virtual Design Studio; Second Life.
1
Introduction
Design by collaboration has become a research paradigm in design studies [Simoff, Maher 2000], [Kvan 2000]. Furthermore, the progressive use and evolution of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) is provoking a challenge to cope with ever expanding scope of topics related to the “online collaborative spirit” (real time multi-user 3D virtual worlds, mass collaboration, social networking, wikis, open source, networked intelligence, etc.). Indeed, in the domain of architectural design, the essence of this “new sprit” is widening not only the idea of collaboration itself, but also, it is springing up new sharing concepts (vocabulary), processes and rules (grammar). Consequently, it is contributing to “re-build” the corpus of knowledge that will be transmitted to new generations. This paper exposes and discusses the pedagogical experiment FINC-AV (Forme, Information, Novation, Conception – Architecture Virtuelle). A virtual and collaborative architectural design studio, jointly undertook by the Schools of Architecture of Toulouse (France) and Laval University in Québec City (Canada), which activities, carried out during the Fall semester 2007, were based on the use of Second Life (SL) as a platform for design collaboration and critique reviews.
2
Background
The École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Toulouse, (ENSA Toulouse) and École d’Architecture de l’Université Laval (EAUL) have a long tradition of using Information and Communication Technologies in the teaching of architectural design. In this context, both institutions have signed in 2003 an agreement in order to develop a pedagogical experiment (FINC-AV) based on theoretical and pragmatic framework that combine knowledge, creativity and computer supported collaborative work (CSCW) as much as design of Virtual Architectures (VA) in the realm of Virtual Design Studios (VDS).
2.1
Virtual Design Studios
Virtual Design Studios are not new and the term “virtual” has been applied to a large variety of design studio activities that deals, more or less, with computers. Concerning our pedagogical experiment, the use of a VDS implies that: Design activities are hold by two geographically distant studios (Toulouse/Québec). Design studios communicate and coordinate architectural design information and tasks using collaborative, complementary cultural contexts. Digital technologies are considered beyond their instrumental role and become a catalyst during the design process. Design activity is considered a creative process (non linear process of structuring and communicating an idea) that proposes to do something (the project), and a technological activity that mobilizes different knowledge (ethical, aesthetic, scientific). Innovation as well as the dialogue about digital media, digital technology and architectural design process is at the forefront of our activities.
2.2
Virtual Architecture
The expression Virtual Architecture (VA) is often associated with use of any type of digital tool or information processing system carried out in an architectural production process. However, we believe that the expression Digital Architecture (DA) is more appropriate to grasp this general designation. According to [Maher et al. 2000] VA can be seen as a new architectural practice and curricular domain (particularly, when used in analogy with the architectural physical configuration to indicate a place, a room, a studio). Furthermore, VA can be employed as a space for architectural metaphors [Oxman 2003]. Precisely, in the context of FINC-AV experiment, Virtual Architecture is a medium in itself. A medium, that has important ontological implications linked to the concept of “virtual”. Indeed, because of its finality (do not be built physically) and its implicit abstract nature, VA can be used to support and develop at the same time the representation (figuration), interaction, transformation, communication and diffusion of architectural concepts and ideas, as much as the process of design, theoretical models and architectural theories. From a pedagogical point of view, VA can be seen as much as a design tool and a design context. However, it is far from having found its recognition and use on the teaching of architecture. Actually very few institutions offer theoretical courses and studios dedicated to its knowledge, training and practice [Côté et al. 2006a]. Our motivation for developing and adapting the specificities of VA as a teaching method can be explained by the possibilities it is opening: The notion of “creativity” in the teaching of design process [Léglise 1995] as well as in the interdisciplinary collaborations [Goulette, Léglise 2003], which characterizes the practice of VDS (Virtual Design Studios). The paradigm shift based on the “online collaborative spirit” and its implications on the way architecture is recasting its boundaries and its essential codes as well as its interaction with the technology. The epistemological framework related to the concepts of internal representations (mental images), external representations (drawings, drafts, models, etc.), subject-object interactions (“sensible objects”, “reflexive architecture”), subject-to-subject interactions (the use of avatars).
3
Designing within Second Life
Trying to develop a definition of what could be the “metaverse” called Second Life (SL) is a complex exercise. For sure it is part of the media system. But what makes this online virtual
world of peculiar interest is not only related to the opportunity for Internet users to access a new broadcast media but the overall creative, aesthetic and relationship possibilities it is imbedding. Launched in 2003 by Linden Lab based in San Francisco [http://www.secondlife.com], SL became one of the largest MMOE (Massive Multiplayer Online 3D Environment), a shared virtual environment accessed by users (called “lifers”) through 3D representations of themselves (avatars). But SL goes beyond the concept of “game” to become a “laboratory” for creation [Cayeux, Guibert 2007]. Different forms of creation exist within SL. “By creating a culture of shared creativity SL allows residents to learn from the examples of others, to situate their goals and desires within the contexts created by others (…) Creation within SL is accomplished through the use of atomistic creation, an approach granting residents both great freedom to explore design space and an interface allowing multiple builders to create together”[Ondrejeka 2007]. This approach, allows SL to reinforce the place (real-time), embodiment (avatars), and simultaneous (with-in share space) collaboration. SL came up with the idea that everything in this world should be created and owned by those residents (there is an in-world economy traded in “Linden Dollars” which can be cashed in for real US dollars). SL allows designers, residents, visitors in world to create and “build” whatever they want (e.g. theirs environments, avatars, clothes, vehicles, and of course, architecture). For this purpose, “lifers” use the Linden Scripting Language (LSL) to design and animate objects, define coding accesses, programming and customise interaction between objects and the world around it. In order to ensure that everything created in SL can be rendered by the average graphic card, Linden Lab included a building tools based on simple geometric primitives or “prims” (e.g. a cube, sphere, cone, etc.). All creations (even the design of complex objects as a building) are made from these in-world “prims” which are combined in a multitude of ways to build extremely complex creations and behaviours. SL became an online virtual platform for creation where the outcome has a tangible value, but also, a platform for collaboration and critiques. In this way, it is starting to transcend purely recreational use and has being adopted for professional and academic applications (e.g; SL Educators List, SLRL). Some of these applications, explores the possibilities between architectural design, tools, aesthetic and social codes of SL (a non exhaustive list: the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, The University of Texas at Austin, the Spatial Information Architecture Laboratory of the RMIT University in Australia, the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Versailles, etc.).
4
FINC-AV description
Prior to the fall semester mentioned on this paper (fall 2007), we have developed tree previous FINC-AV experiments that have been well documented in some publications over the last years [Côté et al. 2006a], [Côté et al. 2006b], [Côté et al. 2005], [Marques, Goulette 2005], [Marques et al. 2003]. During those previous experiments, the pedagogical framework was based on the use of ICT tools that could support the communication and a collaborative approach of design such as: text (eg. IRC, Internet relay Chat), graphic (2D and 3D), VRML (Virtual Reality Modelling Language), audio and video. Concerning the use of VNC protocols (Virtual Network Computing) between remote design students, it was partially well used. The main difference between those previous pedagogical experiments and the last one (Fall 2007) is: instead of using the VRML to describe geometry and space of our virtual architectures, we have used the multiuser networked 3D virtual world Second Life (SL) as design context as well as a collaborative and representational design tool. During the Fall semester 2007, design activities took place in the WUE (World University Exchange) land parcels situated in tree different SL islands (the “geography” of SL is composed of a series of islands). The WUE community that we have integrated was composed by teachers and students of communication from: (KGU) Kwansei Gakvin University, Japan; (LCCC)
Lehigh Carbon Community College, PA, USA; (DSU) DeSales University, PA, USA; (PUFS) Pusan University of Foreign Students, South Korea; (SUNY) State University of New York College, Cortland, USA; (IUP) Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA. The general goals of this SL community were: “to provide opportunities for students at various colleges and universities around the world to share and create learning experiences by collaborating in virtual space”; and “to promote cultural understanding through rich interaction, communication and global team building” [http://worlduniversityexchange.wikispaces.com/].
4.1
Aims and methodology
FINC-AV 2007 main purposes were: The Investigation of design ideas, tools and processes that have been put forward about the concept of Virtual Architecture and some other neologisms related to it (e.g. “reflexive architecture”) by experimenting the new cognitive and communicative tools, processes and environments of computer supported collaborative design work The design of VA using Second Life as design context as well as a collaborative and representational design tool. Students were asked to design VA for the virtual community WUE that can be experienced by an audience of avatars. Develop strategies for exhibiting information, objects, and consider how interaction and performance can alter experience of space. The methodology adopted was based on the following general characteristics: Architectural students work by binomials (one student from Toulouse and other from Québec). In order to collaborate with WUE students (their “clients”) they should compose international teams (to each binomial of students of architecture there were 4 to 6 students of communication). Activities should take in account the different time zones (6 hours between Toulouse and Québec city but also the different time zones between Toulouse, Québec and WUE community). Students are free of using different channels of communication: chat, mails, audio, video, graphic (drawings and images digitized) and different platforms (macOS and windows). Design teams work is done in the context of VDS and during 8 weeks of collaborative design work (outside this period, each course respects its own timetable, contents and assessments: seminar in Toulouse and studio in Québec). Activities are done in both synchronously and asynchronously mode (according the FINC-AV timetable students from Toulouse and Québec had at least 3 hours per week of synchronous design work by sharing computational and networking resources at school. In order to put forward their projects and communication with other WUE members (e.g. participate to “social hours” in SL), students were required to work outside this timetable). Students are encouraged to explore real-time, embodiment and simultaneous collaboration. Assessments are done in the context of VDS and take in account design ideation and conceptualization as well as design representation and communication (scripting and the ability to interact with objects in SL). In order to analyse the evolution of the design process, students were required to present online their projects twice during the collaboration timetable (middle and final critiques). These two critiques took place in world. Avatars (of pedagogical staff and students) follow the presentation using the SL possibilities of communication and moving.
5
Discussion
The whole architectural experience of FINC-AV 2007 was based on the epistemological framework embedded in the “online collaborative sprit”. From its complexity, emerged new phenomena, new situations, new questions concerning the contemporary architectural design pedagogy and a better understanding what it actually means to “make architecture”. In fact, using Second Life as a platform for design collaboration and critique, students were confronted to the design approach of “designing within the design” [Simoff, Maher 2000]. With the ability of linking distant partners and diverse bodies of students and faculty, VDS provide unique opportunities for examining cultural, contextual, and methodological differences in design collaboration. In this context, team coordination becomes one of the major tasks in collaborative design because it can affect design communication and performance. According the institutional agreement signed in 2003 (by ENSA Toulouse and EAUL), the two distant pedagogical teams taking part in the FINC-AV experiment have kept their different course objectives: studio in Québec and seminar in Toulouse. Pragmatically, this decision became a kind of “tension” concerning the continuity and quality of necessary exchanges between students and teachers (more explanations about this matter in [Côté et al. 2006a]. Bringing together students of architecture (Toulouse/Québec) and students from the six institutions of WUE community, the general problematic of designing virtual architectures shifted towards the specific preoccupation of designing VA in the context of “cultural interaction”. Messages and digital data exchanged between FINC-AV students and WUE community contributed to add a complementary conceptual layer in the exercise of designing virtual architectures (mainly, the exchange of images illustrating monuments that were representative of the different WUE members cultures). Consequently, the search for architectural places that could facilitate cultural interaction became one of priorities of each design team. In most of the cases, these places were spatially arranged according an "initiatory" path, allowing a progressive discovery of the representative elements of a given culture. Into this approach, architectural morphogenesis (the act of informing architecture) becomes a fundamental element of the design process and, the operator that better illustrates those possible spatial experiences. For example, certain buildings were conceived as new interpretations of Asian temples (emphasizing a vertical path based on principles of evolution, oneself discovery, etc.), or as horizontal path emphasizing particular elements of landscape through the use of different spatial frames. Design teams rejected the use of “realism” (replication of standard conventions and formal concerns of physical configuration of building units) as a criterion for their creations. Instead, they favoured more fluidity, exploring and visually engaging abstractions. The investigation scope of designing VA in the context of “cultural interaction” seemed to be too wide for the 8 weeks of collaborative design work. Besides, different time zones between participants became a problematic factor during synchronous collaborative work. Being confronted to a new “world” (SL), its practices and techniques, students of architecture should integrate to their projects, cultural elements that sometimes were little known or little mastered. Therefore, the results must be regarded as sketches, illustrations of first design ideations and conceptualizations, which, does not prevent to identify significant elements and principles of “reflexive architecture”. The concept of reflexive architecture is associated to the idea and technical possibilities (in real and virtual worlds) of breaking all conceptions of architecture as a static object. Within SL, it means the possibility of programming reactions/behaviours of spaces and volumes using the Linden Scripting Language: architecture becomes responsive and evolves according to avatar’s presence and movements. Based on the reflexive architecture principles, students projects proposed different environmental qualities: chaos/order, oppression/security, action/contemplation, aggression/protection, discomfort/comfort, etc.
Due to the receptive nature of SL technology and its application to architecture (as design context as well as collaborative and representational design tool), authors envisage to pursuit their investigations about critical understanding of cross-cultural design process and the significance of negotiations in design. It is important to precise that the only way to ensure a comprehensive view of student’s projects within SL is to visit them in action and in world. Constrained by paper size, authors present one image of FINC-AV Fall 2007 experiment in SL.
Figure 1: A general view of some FINC-AV’s projects located in the island “Present” References Cayeux, A., Guibert, C. 2007. Second Life - un monde possible, Paris, Les petits matins eds. Côté, P., Marques, S., Goulette, J.-P.2006a. « Virtual Architecture pedagogy a Mean for (Re)sketching Teaching Architectural Design » in ACSA Conference 2006 Imag(in)ing Worlds to Comme, Québec, Canada, 6-8 October 2006. Côté, P., Marques, S., Goulette, J.-P. 2006b. « Vers une Pédagogie de l'Architecture Virtuelle pour l'Enseignement du Projet d'Architecture » in TICE 06 -Technologies de l’Information et de la Communication dans l’Enseignement Supérieur et l’Entreprise, Toulouse, 25-27 October 2006 (cd-rom ISBN : 978-2-9527275-0-1) Côté, P., Léglise, M. 2005. “Remote Pedagogical Framework for Design Studio”in L. Riorden ed. Architecture That Isn’t There: Virtual Recreations of the Destroyed, the Altered and the Never Built, Symposium, Cincinnati, Ohio, pp.75-84. Goulette, J.P., Léglise, M. 2003. « Transfigurations et interopérabilités disciplinaires » in Les Cahiers de la Recherche Architecturale et Urbaine, Paris, Éditions du Patrimoine, 12, pp.76-77. Kvan, T. 2000. “Collaborative design: what is it?” in Automation in Construction, 9(2000), pp.409-415. Léglise, M. 1995, “Art under constraint – preserving the creative dimension in computer-aided architectural design”, in Languages of design : formalisms for word, image and sound, Elsevier Science, pp. 55-72. Maher, M.L., Simoff, S., Gu, N., Lau, K.H. 2000. “Designing virtual architecture” in CAADRIA 2000: The Fifth Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, Singapore , pp. 481-490. Marques, S., Goulette, J.-P. 2005. « Architectural visions and mediations of cyberspace » in Sigradi 2005 - 9th Iberoamerican Congress of Digital Graphics, Lima, Peru, pp. 314-319. Marques, S., Goulette, J.-P., Bonnal, D. 2003. «Exploring design in cyberspace: a teaching experience» in eCAADe - 21st International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, Graz, Austria, pp. 141-144. Ondrejeka, C. 2007. “Collapsing Geography: Second Life, Innovation, and the Future of National Power” in Innovation, 3 (2007), MIT Press, pp.27-54. Oxman, R. 2003. Being There: Architectural Metaphors in the Design of Virtual Place in eCAADe - 21st International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, Graz, Austria,pp.165-168. Simoff, S., M.L. Maher 2000. “Analysing participation in collaborative design environments” in Design Studies, 21(2), pp. 119-144.
