ANGLES
Flying Garden Tower, COOP Himmelb(l)au
Below: Equator Tower, REX
Your studio works for some of the world's biggest and
most renowned architectural practices. And it is natural
for some clients to already have a vision they would like
to push that does not always coincide with the studio's
philosophy and direction. How do you respond?
LP: It is both unfortunate and necessary. Unfortunate
because often we are unable to demonstrate the knowledge we
have. Necessary because there are no better ways of learning
new practices.
LLA: It really comes down to respect and integrity. For some
of the big hitters to come to us in the first place when they
can choose any one of the thousands of rendering firms out
there, that already points to a type of silent, mutual agreement
between a client and supplier for the project’s execution (or
because it’s extremely last minute and everyone else is full).
But really, we like to be as upfront as possible with
everything—from camera selections to time of day and
lighting. And when we can tell that a certain project, or
that one or two images in that set, is going down the path
of failure, we try our hardest to remind the client why they
sought us out in the first place. In worst case scenarios, when
the decision for the final vision is not up to the Rem’s of the
world but rather to the client’s client, we politely suggest that
they find someone else who is willing to accommodate that
type of image. No hard feelings, but it’s better that someone
else comes up with a bad image and get praise by their client’s
client than us still doing it our way and not get paid.
20