Campus: Traditional buildings, non-traditional buildings, no
ian at alwaysblack.com
Fri Nov 4 11:57:36 PST 2005
I agree with that, but we have to figure out particular purposes before
we can figure out a configuration that suits the purpose.
The theatre at our _blacklibrary uses the old 'skybox' method, an idea
stolen from game engines, to re-texture the walls, floor, ceiling etc
with 'sets' or 3D backdrops to suit the programme being shown. This came
about after first creating a regular theatre screen and then thinking,
'Hey, what if...'
So if the answer to the question "What can I have?" is "What do you
want?" and then the answer to that is "What can I have?" again, then
maybe we need to look at the question of buildings in the context of
The _blacklibrary also has a social area that was originally intended to
be an analogy of the forum on the website that it sprang from, it's
styled as a bar but I often muse about certain facilities that it lacks
that other computer-based discussion methods have. There's no obvious
'notice board' functionality, for example, for communicating with
members that are separated by time zones etc.
Chet Braun wrote:
>I still think we're thinking too rigidly in terms of architecture. In SL
>architecture can be scripted to be quite variable.
>Take an amphitheatre for example. With a single voice command it can become
>an enclosed space for a planetarium...or a garden setting with multiple
>small work areas...or a traditional lecture hall...or a previously mentioned
>high-tech spherical presentation room.
>Choose the style that fits the moment. In RL that's impossible. In SL it is
>From: educators-bounces at lindenlab.com
>[mailto:educators-bounces at lindenlab.com] On Behalf Of Pete Border
>Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 11:29 AM
>To: Educators interested in using Second Life as a teaching platform.
>Subject: Re: Campus: Traditional buildings, non-traditional buildings, no
>Yes, I think the amphitheatre suits my needs for a meeting space too.
>It's formal enough, but not too much so. And the sightlines are good;
>people understand what it does, and fly-in access is easy. Talking to
>neighbors is straightforward.
>I'm more interested in project-based learning than lectures and regular
>classes. To me, the big advantages of SL are 24/7 collaboration and
>simple, cheap fabrication. Its biggest flaw is the lack of an importer
>from Maya/S3D/Blender. (does anybody how to get around that?) Oh yeah,
>and the SL physics engine is -ahem!- limited.
>Ian Shanahan wrote:
>>I should add that I really liked the amphitheatre idea as an example
>>of something practical and with enough familiar characteristics to be
>>recognisable. Conjures up a mental image of white-bearded, old Greek
>>scholars arguing over what to call part of a plant before the Tragedy
>>I think Blueman's Prim College uses such an arrangement.
>>Joesph DeLappe wrote:
>>>Been a quiet reader of these emails. We held an advanced digital media,
>>>studio art class in SL last year with mixed results. We tried to
>>>our entire bit of land as an open studio space - no architecture,
>>>like a sculpture park I suppose.
>>>At any rate, I share the questioning posed by the architects in
>>>virtual worlds. What they were complaining about is actually quite
>>>There has been a similar trajectory in terms of what artists have
>>>the short history of media based art - the first attempts are nearly
>>>emulations of what have previously been considered "art" prior to the
>>>emergence of the new media tools (ie - loads of "computer paintings"
>>>1980's) It takes a while for new forms to emerge that truly utilize
>>>technologies in a new way. That said, if one creates a simulation
>>>environment like SL, that is really based on RL, it seems only
>>>logical, to a
>>>certain extent, that the spaces created will reflect RL.
>>>Just some further thoughts. Enjoy reading these emails!
More information about the Educators