Is it just me ...

Obviously yes, since he said no such thing. They *said* it was installed (and we saw the pipework while the floor was being laid) - although my guess was it wasn't ether working yet or switched on since Kev was wearing an overcoat indoors.

Hope you never have to be a witness to anything...

Yes, I know what you mean - which is what caused me to comment in the first place. I think that over the years, I have probably seen every one of the Grand Designs programmes, and whilst I don't always agree with all of the designs - that is to say that they don't appeal to me personally - I think that this is the first one that I have seen where I could find no redeeming features at all. I can usually find something to like or admire, even if it's just the standard of workmanship, but this one left me totally cold. I'm sure that a lot to do with this was the fact that they started out with a 'non-entity' in as much as what they actually blew half a mil on, was effectively just an awkward-shaped piece of land, that had had a perfectly reasonable use made of it, by slinging an industrial roof over it, and calling it a workshop. It had absolutely no features to recommend it for conversion to a dwelling, at all. The fact that they then went on to spend a further £600k to arrive at the finished article says, I think, a lot about them as people, and very little about him as an architect. As you say, the best thing to have done would have been to start again, and build something that fitted the space. £600k could have built something pretty magnificent. There have been several such GDs over the years which have done exactly this on very similar 'left over' sites tucked between existing buildings in London.

As for the concrete work surface, far from being any kind of design or fashion statement, I felt it was just a cheapskate option to fit an over-stretched budget. Whilst the top surface looked quite pretty, the finish on the vertical edges looked fairly rough to me. I have seen some nice polished concrete. There is a very large area of it outside the Fashion Mall in Las Vegas. But at the end of the day, it still looks like polished concrete, which is fair enough when it's on a floor ...

The plywood boxes - which might have looked better with the originally conceived perspex that they finished up being unable to afford - just looked like stacked up packing crates to me. I suppose that probably fitted quite well with their 'warehouse' theme, but I thought that it did nothing to make it any less like an industrial space, and any more like somewhere you would want to live. The daughters looked singularly unimpressed, I thought.

The positioning of the kitchen was quite ludicrous, as was that of the bog with the semi-transparent door, right next to the dining table. Beeney quite correctly warned against such a scheme a few weeks ago in her prog.

Worst of all though, by having his office just the other side of the bookcase divider, or whatever it was, I think that he would be doing himself no professional favours at all. Presumably, he would have clients come in to the office from time to time. If I was such a client, and I saw what he had managed to design for himself to live in, I would be seriously considering if I had made the right choice engaging him ...

Arfa

That's a very broad statement, and simply not true ...

Arfa

Well, having grown up in the 60's and 70's, watching stuff like The Sweeney, such terms were commonplace, and just get ingrained. When talking in 'chat' English, I have never called London anything else in my whole adult life, and I don't expect I am likely to change in the future. No one else on here seems to have a problem with it, and I can't recall anyone who has not understood exactly where I was talking about. So sorry if it offends your sensibilities, but face, bovvered ...?

Arfa

In article , Arfa Daily scribeth thus

I remember when I were a lad going to see my aunt in Kensington and it was the smoky then, mid 50's especially in the winter months..

Still refer to it as "going down the smoke"

twere the Big Smoke.

They are very popular in the USA. You might have heard of it as "terrazzo" as in the flooring.

There are special machines like floor polishers. They are used with abrasive grit. It is/was an Italian speciality. In days of yore it was done with a large block of sandstone they pushed around on the floor/surface.

Well then, name a few exceptions. I agree with the selection someone made in a previous posting. All fairly normal traditional styles.

Well, that's a pretty silly request ... How many GDs have there been over the years ? And how many of those employed an architect ? And how many were at least very good if not spectacular ? And how many progs have I watched on Discovery and History and Nat Geo about spectacular buildings around the world in every shape, height and configuration that you can imagine ? And how many of *those* employed an architect ?

All architects are NOT plonkers, any more than are all plumbers, or electricians, or even greens like you.

As ever, you are given to bald baseless statements that didn't need making in the first place ...

Arfa

Quite

Arfa

If Scotland can have Auld Reekie, England can have various forms of "smoke".

Very possibly, Peter, and there you go then, Harry. I would think that at least 70% of them used a professional architect to produce at least the basic design. Do you contend that every last one - or even a majority - of those were "plonkers" ?

Arfa

Yes, it was the water tower in London.

mark

I'd say that in the interest of making an "interesting" programme, the researchers and editor have selected the projects with problems, mostly after the build has finished, and possibly the glass boxes have had more than their share of problems. The fact that a lot of these have been designed by architects according to the client's brief, but with no say on the budget may be coincidence.

After all, where's the dramatic tension in a programme about a project that goes exactly according to plan and comes in under budget?

Grand Designs is entertainment, not a documentary.

That was shown a few days ago. Impressed by the level headed approach and what appeared a genuine commitment to doing a quality job.

Eh? How do you film the build after it has finished? And the cost of this prog to make is such that the subject is chosen very carefully before the build starts - it simply wouldn't be economical to film several builds and pick the best one.

I didn't say they were filmed after they were finished, but that the final selection was made after at least some of the raw footage had been obtained, and possibly a rough edit had been made.

You may have inside information about their budget, but:-

To me, it seems that the crew are a single camera run and gun type of operation, so not as expensive as a full crew. Maybe even a single operator for sound and video, like the news crews, but with less time pressure. I've never noticed any special lighting, apart from maybe the odd reflector, and nothing in shot to hint at more than one camera. The visits are fairly routine, too, from what I see, so not too many retakes. No studio time, either, and the CGI bits can be done afterwards. It really is minimum cost TV. The time lapse stuff I've seen can be done without any staff involvement except for setting up the camera. The editing and CGI I've seen in the shows could be done on a decent laptop in a hotel room, if they're using card or Hard Drive based cameras.

It should be within the budget to follow a number of projects, and maybe half of them don't need to pan out as programmes, with the failures becoming obvious within the first dozen or fewer visits. I'd guess that they may even have a camera crew on staff rates rather than freelance rates to reduce costs. Does he visit every project once a month? That would let him work on 20 shows a year. More if he visits less often or if a site visit takes less than a day.

It seems to me that the main limit on the number of projects they can follow is the fact they've only got one presenter, rather than the cost of "filming".