Fake Yonge St Toronto

Jury final_Modalités-Precision

accordance with what was announced at the last workshop session, the delivery format is the horizontal A1. Feel free to call your board by placing several levels per sheet, create boards attached to dial up a big sign one document of surrender ... Good job to you

Can I Shower After Iui

Mock Jury at the 50th

Many of you want to submit a final model complementary to 1:50. Interested students are invited to join this Friday morning, Mayor Claire, Rita Basile for the realization of two bases at 1:50. Any help is welcome. Please come with cardboard cutter, glue, ruler for making white pedestals.

Heather's Friend Brooke

final_Modalités

Filing of the Tuesday, June 3, 2006 between 17:00 to 18:30 in room 102.

Students absent or carry a medical certificate is imperative to file their documents in the state by another person. Absence filing prevents access to the jury.
Attendance mandatory for all students on June 4 at 8:30

DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED
1) Implementation Plan to 0.5 cm / m plan of the ground floor of the project qualification surrounding areas and public spaces (narrative level) and general profile section;
2) Plans furnished 2 cm / m in all levels of the project with representation from the immediate context or necessary to the understanding;
3) Longitudinal section of 2 cm / m in the project with cuts and / or elevations of neighboring
4) Cross section at 2 cm / m with cuts and / or elevations of neighboring
5) Elevations (all) to 2 cm / m with cuts and / or elevations of neighboring
6) 1 comp 1 cm / m to be installed in models of mass
7) At least 3 internal and 3 prospects prospects External
8) + all that the students deem necessary to promote their project and make it explicit.

- The documents include the following titles (readable and hierarchical division):
- Name of the student
- Unit
- Academic Year
- No exercise and
Title - Date
- Title Plan



EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. Ability to use the results of the analysis and present a personal look at the context to make it explicit and communicable;
2. Capacity building a remark on the classification of urban and architectural dimension, to initiate an attitude;
3. Capacity building of architectural coherence vis-à-vis the above statement about (character, scale, relative to the ground ... ...);
4. Adequacy of the response to the program and its spatialization;
5. Spatial and formal qualities of urban and architectural projects;
6. Qualities of uses, distribution, sizing;
7. Quality of the portfolio.

The jury presidents will ensure that each review / discussion of projects takes place in two stages: A.
Critique / Discussion on items 1. and 2.
B. Critique / Discussion on items 3. 4. 5., 6., 7.

Prepare your oral presentation to specify as clearly as possible these points.
Your presentation can not exceed 10 minutes.
She will be in two stages:
1. General presentation of the party
2. Traffic through the project

Wearing No Panties In Public

EXE 4 3_Consigne

accordance with the verbal communication of this Friday for the upcoming sessions, the conditions for presentation at the workshop are:

• presenting all plans, sections and facades (from Wednesday 14 to them) and a model at each session.
  
• the scale of 1 / 50 for all documents (except scale model 1 / 100);
• the context documents (different levels and sections) to Wednesday 14 to 14h in view of these common documents.

For this last point to you to arrange for a display at 14h. The session today will start with this correction.

Logitech Eyetoy Usb Camera Driver Sleh-00030

ATTENDANCE TEACHERS BEFORE JURY FINAL EXE

Wednesday, May 7 AFTERNOON
Géry Leloutre

Friday, May 9 MORNING
Mawet Mark Iwan Strauven Denis Pools, Gery Leloutre

Friday, May 9 AFTERNOON
Mawet Mark Iwan Strauven Denis Pools, Gery Leloutre



Wednesday, May 14 AFTERNOON
Mawet Marc Denis Pools

Friday, May 16 MORNING
Iwan Strauven Denis Pools

Friday, May 16 AFTERNOON
Iwan Strauven Denis Pools, Gery Leloutre



Monday, May 19 AFTERNOON
Mawet Mark Iwan Strauven Denis Pools, Gery Leloutre

Friday, May 23 MORNING
Mark Mawet Iwan Strauven Denis Pools, Gery Leloutre

Friday, May 23 AFTERNOON
Mawet Mark Iwan Strauven, Gery Leloutre

Glycerin Based Soaps Acne

3_Consigne 3

Friday 09 MAI 2008 at 12:00
ATTENDANCE COMPULSORY FOR ALL STUDENTS IMPORTANT PAPERS.

Logitech Mouse Dongle Bluetooth Hack

3_Jury Exe-Exe-order for

Minimizing Burst Capillaries

3_Organisation jury's Preliminary Draft Outline

SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS: The
Friday, April 18, 2008 from 8:00 9:30.
Students absent or carry a medical certificate is imperative to file their documents in the state by another person. Absence filing prevents access to the jury. Only documents filed today will be presented.

DATES:
On Friday 18 April, the afternoon of Monday 21 April and all day Friday, April 25.

DOCUMENTS TO BE SUBMITTED :
1) Implementation Plan to 0.5 cm / m plan of the ground floor of the project vicinity and qualification of public spaces (narrative level) and general profile section;
2) Plans furnished 1 cm / m in all levels of the project with representation from the immediate context or necessary to the understanding;
3) Longitudinal section of 1 cm / m in the project with cuts and / or elevations of neighboring
4 ) Cross section of 1 cm / m with cuts and / or elevations of neighboring
5) Elevations (all) to 1 cm / m with cuts and / or elevations of neighboring
6) 1 comp 1 cm / m to be installed in models of mass
7) At least two perspectives internal and external outlook 2;
8) + everything students deem necessary to promote their project and make it explicit.

documents include the following titles (readable and prioritized):
- Name of the student
- Unit
- Academic Year
- No exercise and
Title - Date
- Title Plan

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
1. Ability to use the results of the analysis and present a personal look at the context to make it explicit and communicable;
2. Ability to construct a discourse on the qualification of the urban dimension and architectural, to initiate an attitude;
3. Capacity building of architectural coherence vis-à-vis the above statement about (character, scale, relative to the ground ... ...);
4. Adequacy of the response to the program and its spatialization;
5. Spatial and formal qualities of urban and architectural projects;
6. Qualities of uses, distribution, sizing;
7. Quality graphical representation;
8. Quality of presentation.

Prepare your oral presentation to specify as clearly as possible these points. It will focus
time:
1. General presentation of the party (very concise)
2. Traffic through the project (in outline)
Your presentation can not exceed 5 minutes. There will be 12 minutes per student, including debates.

AFTER THE CEREMONY, THE WORKSHOPS devoted exclusively DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS TO 2CM / M.

Keep A Blunt Wrap Moist After Opening

EXE 3_Cotes

Chorizo Sausage Appetizer

BCN_Photos

Using Chicken Broth After Expiration Date

Exe 3_Organisation Jury Sketch

Friday, March 21 at 9:00 2008_Début Jury

Running order attached to this set
10minutes per student
Presence students throughout the compulsory jury
Presence 8:30 compulsory student organization space for display panel and the first passages
Organize 4-zone pitches (two display while two present)

A present for the rebate:
- a board showing all that the student considers necessary to develop and make its plans clear and explicit (logos, diagrams, sketches ....).
- A model built into the model group
- Implementation plan with public spaces to 1cm / m
- Plans furnished and longitudinal and transeversale 1 cm / m (May be by show of hands but the scale and with thicknesses somewhat believable)
- Outlook facades

No Supportted Camera Detected

Days Doors Ouvertes_Organisation

A list of hotlines is displayed at the workshop. These hotlines concerning visits to the institute that students traditionally frame B2. Another list on the menu salty that you are asked to compose and perform for the Saturday lunchtime. Thank you for taking part.

a reminder, all models of study in Year 2 are required for exposure. You can store them in the workshop of B1, with other models already present.

You can also send me any photos of study trip to Barcelona that you consider representative of quality (ten architectural, ten groups), via the folder " B2_Voyage studies -Barcelona" on the desk of first computer left in the room pc of the library, on Thursday March 13 at 16:00.


thank you in advance!

Modelos Sony Ericsson 2010

BCN_Book

He got out, thank you all!

What Race Has Red Under Tones ?

BCN_Book: Missing Documents

The following students have submitted their work:

Alizé FEYAERTS
Quentin GRESY
Emery Kajingu
Issam Karram
Lauranne ROCHEFORT
RUPPERT
Rachel Christine Scifo
Carl Eric VAN DER SPEK


groups of students following have handed over the pictures folder on their work:

GENDRON Audrey & Jessica Alba MONSON
MARTIN BENET & Julien PURNELLE
YAKOUB Said EL SEGURA & Lydia
Ernoux Candy & Judith Mierop
Benedict MENU & Corey BINARD
Filipe GUTERRES & Jef VAN HOVE

reminder, this work is listed. Missing documents must be presented to Denis Pools on Friday 22 at 10:00.

Haggarty's Silver Cleaner

EXE EXE 3_Enoncé

Documents relating to the new financial year are available in the "Documents downloadable " this blog

Erection Whilst Waxing

3_Travail Preparatory

For the first meeting this Monday, February 18 14:00 you are asked to give us, per student, three exploratory sketches A3 site of the Petite Rue des relief

Waxing Services Bergen County Nj

BCN_Book: Terms

You are asked to prepare a text and representative illustrations (photos, plans, sections ...) with the (the) implementation (s) you choose from the list of achievements that will be visited during our trip Study in Barcelona.

Your work, formatted strictly following the standard document available folder Study Tour BCN'08 zone Downloadable documents on this blog (file: BCN_book_fichier type_2.1.doc), will include between 4000 and 6500 characters (including spaces) per output, 12000 for teams 27 and 32, and illustrations (resolution: 200dpi, image size 10/15cm). Page numbering and the file name refers to the cards (see the file BCN-Book_adresses.xls to find references to your achievements), they refer to the day of visit and achievements visited (eg the NCB file -book_2.1.doc refers to the first embodiment seen on day 2, each of its pages will be numbered 2.1_voir file type). Each text will end with the literature sources that have made it possible.

file type is done in such a way as to allow easy compilation of your documents. It will be printed in duplex. The first page should remain blank even pages captioned illustrations will resume or not resume the odd text. 6000 characters correspond to the two pages following the layout set. The 1500 first announced characters do not correspond to the achievement of treatment precise, clear, contextual, and descriptive reporting of the party of the architect.

This will be done during the week of Monday, February 11. Rebate (Labour illustrated and laid out format. Doc file and illustrations attached) will for Monday, February 21 at 14:00 at the workshop . The work of each team will then be compiled into a book that will be given to each.

Sh:/pogodynka.sh: Permission Denied

EXE 2_Cotes Jury

BERTRAND Denis_46
Great attendance at the workshop but totally inadequate participation in group dynamics and interaction with the teacher. Proposal with use problems (including non-illuminated office), having changed very little since the sketch. Will of "marginalization" of the building expressed in a minor resulting in highlighting the row and a widening of the field. Arguments boat (artist = marginal). Very low quality graphic presentation (with the exception of perspectives).
Attitude workshop to move towards the exchange and called into question.

BOTTARY Sébastien_45
totally inadequate participation in the workshop (two confrontations over the entire project sessions!). The jury can not be the teaching moment that has not been met during the workshop sessions.
The views at the party's base remains very formal and superficial, without sitting on a true reading of the context. The project is also very detrimental to the direct neighbor, so that this point has often been discussed at group and individual corrections. The project poses contamination problems when certain works are collected in one space whose size is not appropriate (eg Flavin / Viola / Gadenne). Configuration problem also input system that is confronted too directly to the steps. The record is incomplete (missing facade, facades 1cm / m, too few prospects) and the graphical representation is problematic, both instruments show of hands.
A change in methodology of work will absolutely take place during the second half.

CORSINI Ludovico_40
insufficient presence and participation in the workshop which is just as (one confrontation of the project on all sessions).
File incomplete. In the circumstances, no further specific comment to what has been oral statement during the jury will be made.

GENDRON Audrey_30
The continued presence and the many presentations did not allow the student to offset the enormous difficulties endured in his personal life, difficulties that have failed to set the conditions of serenity and availability of sufficient mental to a satisfactory job. The project presented significant difficulties in dimensioning, traffic, catch light, expression. The record is also incomplete. Ways appear at this stage and given the circumstances short of the expectations a second bachelor.

GONELLA Adrien_30
Great attendance at the workshop but inadequate involvement in trade with the teacher. Proposal
Introducing major problems of practice (including cafeteria), sizing (including stairs) and spatial structure: ground floor ancillary functions organized around abruptly; staircase "relief" to the outside to expression and the situation problematic. No exploration of the project by cutting.
Lack of current students serving his strong will.

LEVAUX Aline_45
Totally inadequate participation in the workshop (two confrontations of the project on all the sessions!). The jury can not be the teaching moment that has not been met during the workshop sessions.
The project has problems of design (eg spaces allotted to Dan Flavin) and associations problems or incongruous works (Alif / Gursky, Gadenne / Viola). The assignment of one empty double height entry system is very promising for the exhibition space (the operation of vacuum remains very limited and not optimized in terms of relations between different levels). The superimposition of the functional division and volume division also makes the project rigid in its operation in its path, in its distribution. Decreasing the volume and spool attached are also problematic. The graphical representation is also improving.

Mierop Judith_48
very presence on the workshop and totally inadequate participation in the workshop (two confrontations of the project on all the sessions!). The jury can not be the teaching moment that has not been met during the workshop sessions.
The project has not fundamentally changed from the draft. Critics who had been laid on the stairs "technical" then on the corner and the risks incurred by Manichaeism a closed facade to street and open space and garden were not genuinely integrated into the proposal final. The staircase is similar except it moves and concentrates all the vertical circulation. The purpose of the work on the architectural promenade and the course is little explored in what should have the power to know the cut, visual sequences, rhythms, space research in natural light etc .... The graphical representation also remains expressive.
a major effort to participate and work should definitely be developed during the second half.

MONSON Jessica_42
Great attendance at the workshop with irregular attendance. Proposal
still floating at this stage, the unfinished nature, with problems of design (stairs, space Afif, Gursky), graphic representation of spatial structure (columnar space Wéry). Integration problem of Viola to outer space. Work cut artificial minor and lackluster of spatiality. Artificiality of the descent into the temporary exhibition space. Volumetries additions anecdotal.

PURNELLE Julien_30
totally inadequate participation in the workshop (a confrontation of the project on all sessions!). The jury can not be the teaching moment that has not been met during the workshop sessions. Proposal
unsophisticated having problems confronting the context. Confusion of ideas without hierarchy.