Core77

This illustrates the problem with concept design. Designers have an idea, create some renderings without regard to reality and the object's use. You are right, the letters are not that big, 45 ft, according to Wikipedia. They want a 300 room hotel in the space of a couple apartments? What were they thinking? In fact, they weren't thinking" Then, they tack on some buzz words like spa, wellness center, nightclub, and movie theater.

This is similar to a car designing drawing a pretty concept then saying, "let's put in a green engine that gets 500 mpg with a top speed of 300 mph," as if the engine is an after thought.

Concept design is an idea with no regards to feasibility. The concept is just that, the idea. This idea is good, using a land mark and, while preserving it, give it another use. So what if the letters aren't that big. For all i care they could be bigger in the event of a developpement.
See this illustrates the problem with Jason, he kills the idea and labels it with tacky and thoughtless over the simple fact that the letters arent big enough.

This is like saying to those who invented flight, nah man you cant fly you dont have wings.

The idea jason stick to the idea, this is how we create. When the idea as made its way and some people feel it could be good, THEN we measure the problems and enter feasibility studies.

In any case the idea, i find, is interessting even though it's not feasible in the current setting.

Dear Jason you may have noticed that not the original sign is used... i know this is the internet but please try to think about what you "write" because there are enough mindless people out there! i don't know why this bothers me that much. I guess because it is not the everyday youtube comment. *the written word has lost its power*

I agree with Ugo entirely. This is a delightful and fanciful idea and I'm sure the Danish designers know how to use wikipedia and are well aware of the restrictions.

Concept design is a fantastic exercise for flexing the creative muscles - reality has its own place and time.

"This is similar to a car designing drawing a pretty concept then saying, "let's put in a green engine that gets 500 mpg with a top speed of 300 mph," as if the engine is an after thought."

No, that would be designing a concept bicycle and saying, "let's put in a green engine that gets 500 mpg with a top speed of 300 mph"

If the 'letters' aren't as aligned in real life as those concept renders, surely it would have to be a totally different size & structure altogether? didn't need wikipedia to figure that out.

In other words, a totally pointless comment.. as if engaging brain is an after thought.

I have climbed the 'D'in the sign and it seemed
much higher that 45feet. The view is amazing as it is one of the few places you can see downtown and the valley behind.

I'm sure the plan would include building new letters fellas...

Well said Ugo...it seems imagination is something of a cuss word these days.

Although Jason poses a valid argument I have to agree with Ugo in the sense that during the conceptual process we have to give ideas a chance before we develop them towards a feasible outcome. It is true that the design itself would most likely fail on any practical basis considering the current setting most definitely, however the idea is quite hypothetical and could still be developed further. Again I think Jason is right in his analogy to comment on how conceptual design should consider realistic factors, but with most design working in stages it would be too early to dismiss an idea even with the slightest bit of potential.

Ugo is right. Whilst I don't like the idea myself, it's only a concept, and shouldn't be dismissed without thought to its possible advantages and disadvantages. Whether it's a good idea or not, to simply dismiss it instantly is far worse.

I agree with Ugo.

-----Imagine Jason's reaction to some contemporary architects saying: "Let's build a pyramid, 480 ft high and with a base length of 750 ft, that should be fun. Or let's move some stones, 2 tons each, into a wide circle with a 360 ft diameter and-now we think of it-wouldn't it look so much nicer if they stood erect? Or we could build a very long wall, from one end of China to the other, that's only 5,500 miles. And, didn't we mention it? All that without the use of electricity or any modern equipment like bulldozers or cranes!"

-----Without the power of imagination, without ideas, the Great Pyramid of Giza, Stonhenge, or the Great Wall of China would never have been built. Yet there they are, still around after thousands of years to give testimony to man's most wonderful gift: the ability to create.

I think this was probably a response to the recent intentions of the landowners to sell to developers who would have built housing and hotels. This concept shows how you can both 'keep' the historic landmark and have the hotels. Except it doesn't; the landmark would be destroyed in the process.

Ugo, welcoming larger letters after development is celebrating the failure of this concept, altering the landmark is out of the question because the concept's constraints are to
- create a hotel
- conserve the landmark.

This is just a company or person looking to get noticed with a fresh design, nothing more.

Ugo if you want interesting, infeasible concepts, I filled hundreds of sketch pads as a child, you're welcome to have a look.

not sure why anyone would waste their time taking an idea like this as far as they have, especially without evaluating the realistic challenges that would be presented. it's interesting and idealistic, but this land is protected and it will never happen.

definitely an interesting project if you're a student, but a bit far fetched for a design firm...

not sure why anyone would waste their time taking an idea like this as far as they have, especially without evaluating the realistic challenges that would be presented. it's interesting and idealistic, but this land is protected and it will never happen.

definitely an interesting project if you're a student, but a bit far fetched for a design firm...

Dude, let em be, if the words are tooo small, make them bigger! i think its an awesome idea...and hey! i love that they got leo dicaprio and tyler durden in the back, sweeeeet!

Boy that post generated some response.

I'd like to point to the essay "Why Apple Doesn't Do 'Concept Products'" in response. http://counternotions.com/2008/08/12/concept-products/

Perhaps my frustration is best summed up by, "Real artists ship, dabblers create concept products." I have no problem with concepts as concepts. It's great that designers stretch their imagination. That said, the article continues, "Constraints have a wonderful way of focusing the mind on the fundamentals, whereas concept products can often have the opposite affect." The Hollywood Sign Concept misses the fundamentals.

Most of the response imply that I don't understand the role of creativity and exploration in the design process. In fact, it's the exact opposite. Had the designers simply said, "what would happen if we crossed the Hollywood sign with a hotel?" and left it at that then I wouldn't have a problem. Instead of leaving the project to their imagination they had to create renderings and throw in buzz words.

Ugo gave an analogy to flight, to which I respond, I dismiss flying machines by whether or not the fly and not their appearance.