The materials that were used were glass, wood, steel, and rammed earth. I'm not sure what rammed earth means but it sounds natural.
You can see right into their living room from the outside, but they don't exactly have close neighbors. I like how the angle of the roof is a mirror reflection of the jutting angles of the mountains behind it.
From the magazine: "We took our cues from the rock formations and their varied colors,” says Ryker. “The exterior forms were shaped by our thinking about the interiors, and we strove to make them an integral part of this wild and beautiful landscape." I think this choice is quite apparent. Well done.
Like the other house, the decor feels a tad stark for my taste, but I know that must reflect the style of the home. The window to the right looks like a framed landscape picture and can you imagine waking up to that view?
What do you all think? Better? Worse? Same? I feel like this home looks like a string of old miners huts on the side of a hill. I like how they respected the old style of the area but brought a little of their modern personality to the site.
Alicia B.
8 comments:
better. but both have such killer views that I would have to toss a coin to choose.
Beautiful house. I love that second to last shot in particular -- the house just seems to blend into the horizon so seamlessly.
So much better than the cinder block prison. I like the "string of miners huts" look.
I love the concept and the forms but it does bother me that there are so many different finishes on the exterior. I think two or three materials would have done the trick, whereas this reads like five/six. Beautiful house, though. (Though I did like the hideous concrete mess in Idaho--I'd rather see stark concrete popping up out of a snowy desert than a French Country wannabe wedged onto a half acre lot in suburbia.)
Have you ever noticed that extraordinary architecture and superlative interior design rarely meet?
Rather than embracing a beautiful marriage of the two, it seems like owners of such houses pull back on the interiors wanting the building's bones to shine.
It's too bad. Good architecture and good interiors can coexist.
Raina, You blow me away. That's such a good point. It's like they gave up because they didn't want to "take away" from the design of the house itself but if they did it the right way the two would enhance each other.
This one is a big improvement over the other, and I think the home's exterior silhouette more closely resembles and complements its surroundings. The interior is too plain, not homey at all.
Interestingly, Metropolitan Homes features a rammed earth house on this month's cover. I don't know what rammed earth is either, the mag is sitting in a pile of mail on the dining room table since Saturday...
Thanks for the comments. This is Brett Nave writing (the architect for the home you were discussing.) The house was designed to work with the colors, shade and shadow of the rock outcroppings and native landscape. We collected rocks and soil and hundreds of photos to try to make things blend. The clients asked for "edgy" and they actually said they wanted stark interior furnishings. It fits THEIR personalities very well so it goes to say that interiors as well as architecture, in my opinion, should not only work with the landscape and environment, but it should also please the clients as that is our task in a nutshell. Rammed earth: we used soils from the excavation, a little portland cement, and a little water and compacted it in lifts inside of forms, then removed the forms. FYI. Thanks again. Regards, Brett W. Nave, principal architect / studio.bna / www.studio-bna.com
Post a Comment