Laurie Baker never advocated an imitation of his architecture. He instead intended that his design principles would generate a truly Indian architecture. ‘Be honest and truthful in design, material usage, construction, costs, and about your own mistakes,’ he wrote as one of 20 guiding principles, which he duly respected in his projects. His last major commission started as the Navayatra community living centre, and became the Laurie Baker Centre for Habitat Studies (LBC), a place where his design ethos and philosophy live on.  The project started in 1994, when Baker was 77 years old. Keith Saldanha, an economist based in Canada, decided to relocate to the southern Indian state of Kerala and build a community centre dedicated to fostering creative abilities for children with special education needs. Having purchased a three‑and‑a‑half‑acre site in Vilappilsala, outside the city of Thiruvananthapuram, Saldanha named his project Navayatra, or ‘a new journey’, and reached out to Baker. He had heard of the British‑born Indian architect, whose full original name was Lawrence Wilfred Baker, because his work in the region had been gaining traction. Baker was rigorous in applying his own design principles (Laurie Baker Centre) The small yet densely populated state of Kerala, created in 1956, had become known as a ‘model of development’ in the ’70s. An extended period of political stability under the able stewardship of successive communist governments led to significant improvement of human development parameters, including health, education and housing, despite low economic growth. Baker’s cost‑effective design philosophy and work resonated with the holistic welfare ideology of then chief minister Chelat Achutha Menon, who commissioned him to design several welfare projects, despite his ‘unconventional’ building methods. After he retired in 1985, Achutha Menon founded the Centre of Science and Technology for Rural Development (COSTFORD), a non‑profit, with Baker as its chief architect. His innovative approach to sustainable and cost‑effective architecture emphasised the use of local resources, labour and harmony with the natural environment. ‘Always study your site: its soil, topography, water, climate and neighbours (noisy temples, smelly factories, etc)’ was another of Baker’s principles. In his sketch for Navayatra’s masterplan, Baker meticulously noted the natural features; his proposal made the most of the complex topography, preserving the prominent granite rock formations as well as the scattered coconut and mango trees. The abandoned quarry pit was turned into a rainwater harvesting tank, which catered to the water requirement of the new centre all through the year. Functional spaces were housed on the high rock outcrops so that the natural drainage would not be disturbed and to curtail foundation costs.  Construction began in 1996, with a meandering pedestrian path connecting the different buildings. Each one is unique, but they are held together by the consistent use of exposed brick and the verdant landscape. The canteen hugs the rocky edges of the large granite quarry pit, with steps descending from its kitchen to the water body. The circular array of bedrooms in the guest house preserves the existing trees, while the undulating roof of the dormitory mimics the adjacent rock formations. The curved, perforated brick walls, while appearing irregular, are meticulously designed to respond to the site’s visual context and prevailing breezes. Baker’s rejection of rigid geometries made his spaces fluid, dynamic and adaptable. Each space appears to flow seamlessly into the next, a quality particularly exemplified in the dormitory.  Read Laurie Baker’s Reputations essay Discarded materials such as cut bricks, glass bottles, stone chips, timber pieces and broken tiles, all sourced within a 5km radius of Vilappilsala, were repurposed throughout the site, and local labour was employed. Baker had an in‑depth understanding of brick, timber and stone, which he deployed in myriad ways. He himself facilitated training, in collaboration with his engineer and constant companion PB Sajan. ‘Laurie Baker firmly refused ostentation and decoration for its own sake,’ recalls Sajan, ‘yet his buildings were never dull. There would always be an element of surprise, either in the use of an ordinary material or the geometrical interpretation of space. He believed in the intrinsic beauty of all things, living and non‑living.’     The spaces designed by Baker must be appreciated in light of his design philosophy. The 20 principles of architecture that he advocated in his writing and talks are an amalgamation of his Quaker beliefs and the Gandhian ideal of commitment to social justice and non‑violence; he believed architecture should be a non‑violent insert into the land and local ecology. This new aesthetic was refreshingly non‑invasive, even if it alienated some contemporary modernists. Baker’s innovative adaptation of local craft techniques was both playful and resourceful. His designs, frugal and pragmatic, were driven by a desire to be cost‑effective – rather than the expression of purely stylistic choices.  The programmatic needs of Navayatra evolved and translated into the construction of new structures, including accommodation for invited artists and a residential space for the client. There was no electrical connection on the site; all activities took place in the daytime. The extensive use of perforated walls helped to keep the spaces cool and well ventilated. The dormitory, on the higher western edge of the site, is the last structure Baker designed for Navayatra. It was the primary learning and living quarters for the tutors who conducted classes. Its semi‑open terrace, nestled in the undulating roof, proved an ideal learning and interactive space. Its completion in 2002 marked Baker’s last site visit to Navayatra.  PB Sajan continued work on the site, designing, for example, the two small structures along the pathway at the entrance, for which Baker gave his approval. Both were experiments to test concrete roof slabs using bamboo reinforcement instead of steel rods. The centre continued to function as a vibrant community space for a couple of years, but once Saldanha moved out, due to deteriorating health, managing Navayatra became difficult. At the same time, COSTFORD, still under the guidance of Laurie Baker, required a dedicated space. The architect welcomed Saldanha’s offer to sell Navayatra, with a view to turning it into an independent centre for learning that would focus on innovation and research in alternative building technologies, but financial constraints, as well as Baker’s failing health, delayed the process. Two years after Baker’s death in 2007, Kerala’s finance minister sanctioned 8 million rupees (£70,000) to purchase the land. The Laurie Baker Centre for Habitat Studies was inaugurated in October 2009; Sajan has since been the director of both COSTFORD and the LBC. The centre encourages the appropriate use of natural resources, disseminates non‑conventional and eco‑friendly design strategies, and provides hands‑on training in innovative construction methods. ‘The thrust is not to propagate a “Laurie Baker architecture” but to understand the sound principles behind his life’s work,’ explains KP Kannan, chairman of LBC and COSTFORD, ‘and apply them to questions of housing and inclusive development.’  Due to the steep spike in construction over the decade, Kerala faces an acute shortage of sand (because of uncontrolled sand mining), granite (quarrying of hills is rampant) as well as bricks (as suitable clay is becoming scarce). The LBC’s research on, and advocacy of, alternative and low‑energy construction materials has led them to turn to mud and bamboo, while continuing to explore the use and potential of recycled materials. Sajan and the COSTFORD team designed additional buildings for the LBC, including an office annexe and a four‑storey library used for research. They also added spaces for workshops and for treating bamboo to Baker’s original masterplan, and the entire centre has been availed of electrical and plumbing connections for a better work environment.  Built primarily with mud and bamboo, the new office annexe and library serve the functional purpose of the centre, but stand out from Laurie Baker’s original designs and fail to blend into his original masterplan, even though they do follow nearly all his design principles. Baker liked to advise to ‘use common sense and have fun designing’, but the playfulness feels absent, as these two new buildings are primarily concerned with showcasing construction techniques. As a result, they compromise on spatial quality. While all of Baker’s structures were strategically positioned in relation to one another, the library seems isolated; it is conspicuous instead of blending in with the older brick buildings and the landscape. The play of light and darkness, the fluidity of spaces and the meticulous attention to detail, which are the salient hallmarks of Laurie Baker’s designs, are also missing in these new additions. The temporary sheds used for training sessions and workshops could have been envisioned as thatched pavilions instead of pitched blue tarpaulins.  What makes LBC’s success, however, is the strength of its educational programmes: the sharing of knowledge about alternative building technologies with architecture students, and the willingness to build on existing research and their own archive, which is made accessible to all visitors. Students, professionals and construction workers all come here to learn about dry rubble stone masonry, building with mud, bamboo treating and joinery, brick arches and walls, including Baker’s much loved rat trap bond, as well as the preparation of lime plasters. The centre is interested in further researching water management and establishing a permanent material lab and research space for scholars and professionals. In his lecture ‘Truth in Architecture’ at Thiruvananthapuram’s College of Engineering in 1982, Baker critiqued the resource‑intensive architecture that was starting to mushroom in the city. The indiscriminate use of concrete, excessive ornamentation and overconsumption of resources were popularly understood as a marker of status. Baker foresaw the impending crisis that such excesses would trigger. What he anticipated has only accelerated. In the face of the climate emergency, Kerala confronts significant challenges, including diminishing natural resources and rising construction costs coupled with sluggish economic growth. Ahead of its time, Baker’s practice advocated a pragmatic and reasonable use of resources – ‘don’t rob national resources and do not use them extravagantly and unnecessarily,’ he wrote in his list of principles. To this day, Baker’s philosophy represents a vital rallying call to interrogate contemporary notions of modernity.  This article was featured in the May 2025 Circularity issue. Purchase your copy here

Save this picture!Pitaya House / Taller General + Jose María Sáez. Image © JAG StudioIn partnership with the European Cultural Center (ECC), ArchDaily has launched its inaugural exhibition as part of the seventh iteration of Time Space Existence, an architectural showcase occurring concurrently with the 19th Venice Architecture Biennale. Open from May 10 to November 23, 2025, in various locations throughout Venice, this edition centers on the theme of "Repair, Regenerate, and Reuse," promoting innovative and sustainable approaches in architecture. ArchDaily's contribution is located at Palazzo Mora, complementing other venues like Palazzo Bembo, Marinaressa Gardens, and Palazzo Michiel. Save this picture!Save this picture!Aligned with the broader theme of the event, the exhibition focuses on six emerging practices that were previously selected as part of ArchDaily's ongoing series "Best New Practices." Initiated in 2020, this annual award aims to recognize innovative professionals across various fields related to architecture, highlighting the diversity of approaches and innovations brought by creatives working at the intersection of architecture and other related domains. With over 85 teams and professionals selected to date, representing contributions from 32 countries, the initiative reflects a commitment to geographical diversity and the inclusion of regions often overshadowed in the global architectural discourse. By highlighting firms from areas such as Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia, the initiative brings attention to unique architectural expressions and solutions emerging from these contexts and contributing meaningfully to the global debate.Save this picture!The six selected practices illustrate this variety by addressing all phases of the design process, introducing innovations from the roots of material sourcing to the potential of rethinking urban rooftops. Estudio Flume in Brazil exemplifies how transforming organic waste into sustainable building materials supports regional development and cultural preservation. Willow Technologies in Ghana advocates for circular economy strategies by reusing agricultural by-products to repair ecosystems and foster biodiversity. Taller General in Ecuador promotes social inclusion through collaborative architecture that reuses existing structures and materials. Studio Zewde in the U.S. integrates ecological and cultural history into landscape design. Wiki World in China democratizes architecture by engaging communities and children in the creative process. Meanwhile, Roofscapes in France focuses on retrofitting existing urban surfaces to adapt cities to climate challenges, transforming rooftops into ecological and social assets. Related Article ArchDaily's 2024 Best New Practices Collectively, these studios showcase how thoughtful intervention at the local level can foster resilient, sustainable environments, making a significant impact through bottom-up strategies aligned with the "root to roof" philosophy.Identifying and Leveraging Local ResourcesEstudio Flume, Noelia Monteiro [São Paulo, Brazil]Save this picture!Estudio Flume, founded in 2015 by Noelia Monteiro and Christian Teshirogi, uniquely addresses the intersection of environmental sustainability and community empowerment by transforming organic waste from Amazonian açaí production into locally created construction materials. Focusing on discarded açaí seeds, the studio collaborates closely with local harvesters to develop particleboard panels that serve as sustainable, locally made materials for community-driven designs. This approach not only reduces waste and preserves traditional practices but also provides economic benefits to communities reliant on açaí harvesting. Through participatory workshops and tailored material research, Estudio Flume emphasizes culturally sensitive, environmentally responsible design solutions that support regional development.Save this picture!Their work exemplifies how innovative reuse of natural resources can foster community resilience and promote ecological balance within the Amazon. The transformation and repurposing of waste from a process essential to local communities demonstrate a grassroots approach for working within local contexts while also illustrating a particular interpretation of the themes of "Repair, Regenerate, and Reuse." The studio helps regenerate ecological balance within the Amazon, turning waste into a catalyst for both environmentally and socially responsible building practices.Restoring Balance with Circular Economy Practices Willow Technologies, Mae-ling Lokko [Accra, Ghana]Save this picture!Founded by Ghanaian-Filipino scientist and architect Mae-Ling Lokko in 2017, Willow Technologies conducts material research and pioneers circular and bio-based technologies that root material development into regional agricultural practices. Their initiatives take a holistic look at the broader needs of local communities, not only reusing discarded bio-based waste such as coconut husks into new building materials, but also employing these materials to provide essential services. One example is their collaboration with Global Mamas to employ moringa seed press cake—a by-product of oil extraction—as a water filtration system that treats toxic textile wastewater, providing safe water for municipal disposal.Save this picture!Furthermore, their focus on repairing and regenerating environmental systems is evident in their efforts to develop solutions that reduce waste, improve soil health, and restore ecological balance. Projects like transforming wastewater treatment by-products into usable masonry and creating stormwater management systems demonstrate how contamination risk is minimized and ecosystems are regenerated. By closing resource loops and promoting community involvement, Willow Technologies advocates for materials and practices that repair environmental damage, support biodiversity, and foster sustainable development.Enhancing Spaces through Collective WorkTaller General [Quito, Ecuador]Save this picture!Taller General, founded in 2017 in Quito, Ecuador, uniquely approaches architecture through the lens of collaborative work and social transformation, while not disregarding environmental responsibility. Acting within regions defined by informal urban growth, the studio's practice understands construction as a continuous process of learning through community engagement and resource reuse. Projects such as the Pitaya House feature laminated pine from certified forests, highlighting innovations in sustainable material sourcing and reducing ecological impact, while San Tola Cohousing rehabilitates and reuses existing structures to revitalize Quito's historic center.Save this picture!Taller General's initiatives extend beyond physical buildings—they promote social inclusion through programs like Femingas, which encourages women and diverse groups' participation in construction. Their work demonstrates how architecture can repair urban and social landscapes while regenerating local ecosystems and communities, fostering a more inclusive and sustainable future. By blending traditional practices with innovative materials and collaborative processes, Taller General exemplifies a holistic approach to addressing urgent social and environmental challenges through architecture.Grounded Connections to Land and CultureStudio Zewde [New York, United States]Save this picture!US-based Landscape architecture and urban design Studio Zewde integrates both ecological and cultural roots into their approach to landscape design. Their work begins with understanding the land's history, indigenous relationships, and natural systems, as seen in their Cuyahoga Valley project, which reconnects underrepresented communities with the site's ecological richness and cultural legacy. The studio's design interventions organize the environment with the aim of celebrating local histories and restoring habitat and human connections grounded in regional knowledge.Save this picture!Exemplifying a different aspect of the "Repair, Regenerate, and Reuse" theme, Studio Zewde actively repairs ecological and social systems through thoughtful interventions that foster community participation and cultural continuity. Their work not only regenerates natural habitats and urban environments but also reimagines the landscape as a platform for civic imagination and memory. It demonstrates the power of dynamic participation and the potential of landscape architecture to promote lasting social and environmental resilience.Harnessing Collective Intelligence in ArchitectureWiki World [Wuhan, China]Save this picture!Wiki World proposes a transformative approach to architecture and architecture education rooted in community involvement and sustainability. Based in Wuhan, China, the studio democratizes the building process by engaging local residents, especially children, in designing and constructing their environments. Their projects, such as the Wiki Tribe community cabins, showcase how participatory methods can foster a sense of ownership, cultural preservation, and environmental harmony. Using traditional craftsmanship and local materials, they minimize ecological impact while revitalizing regional techniques and providing economic opportunities for artisans.Save this picture!By starting from the community's needs, cultural context, and local resources, the studio acts not as the creator but as a facilitator in the process of design, creating spaces that reflect collective identity. Their use of modular, prefabricated materials allows for rapid deployment, adapting to rural landscapes and seasonal activities like harvest festivals. Through a process of repair, regeneration, and reuse, Wiki World creates resilient spaces that strengthen community bonds and nurture ecological awareness, highlighting the potential of participatory design to shape culturally rich environments worldwide.Urban Roofs for Climate AdaptationRoofscapes [Paris, France]Save this picture!Roofscapes exemplifies an integrated approach to urban climate adaptation by proposing solutions for the transformation of urban surfaces, especially roofs, into elements that can regulate the microclimate and create a more resilient and comfortable urban environment. The studio focuses on underutilized rooftops, particularly in European cities like Paris, thinking of solutions to adapt an urban infrastructure originally created to conserve heat into one that actively mitigates it, thus adapting to the changing climate conditions of contemporary times. The roofing system is reimagined to incorporate green technologies such as shaded areas, vegetation, and permeable surfaces. These strategies address heat accumulation and foster cooling from the ground up, starting with the building envelope—its "roof"—and extending to urban microclimates and ecological systems.Save this picture!The studio's work highlights the potential for retrofitting and reimagining existing structures rather than demolition and rebuild, prioritizing sustainability and cultural preservation. By repairing and reprogramming rooftops with green infrastructure, Roofscapes not only mitigates urban heat but also regenerates biodiversity, manages stormwater, and creates accessible outdoor spaces. This comprehensive approach demonstrates how adaptive reuse and nature-based solutions serve as vital tools in shaping resilient, climate-adapted cities, further showcasing the "root to roof" approach of repair, regeneration, and reuse.Save this picture!Credits: Curators: Christele Harrouk, Daniela Porto, and Romullo Baratto Editorial and Project Management: Romullo Baratto Visual Concept: Miwa Negoro and Victor Delaqua Diagram Concept: Miwa Negoro We invite you to check out ArchDaily's comprehensive coverage of the 2025 Venice Biennale.This article is part of the ArchDaily Topics: What Is Future Intelligence?, proudly presented by Gendo, an AI co-pilot for Architects. Our mission at Gendo is to help architects produce concept images 100X faster by focusing on the core of the design process. We have built a cutting-edge AI tool in collaboration with architects from some of the most renowned firms, such as Zaha Hadid, KPF, and David Chipperfield.Every month, we explore a topic in-depth through articles, interviews, news, and architecture projects. We invite you to learn more about our ArchDaily Topics. And, as always, at ArchDaily we welcome the contributions of our readers; if you want to submit an article or project, contact us.

Emma Stone and Dave McCary are offloading their Texas compound for $26.5 million. The La La Land star and her writer-producer husband bought the property in Tarrytown, one of the oldest enclaves in the Lone Star state. The suburb is located minutes away from downtown Austin. After quietly tying the knot in 2020 and welcoming their first child the following year, the family of three moved from California to the historic West Austin estate, which holds the title of most expensive real estate purchase in their portfolio. The pair has decided to part ways with the abode after investing years into restoring the property.The home was completely updated by the award-winning architecture firm Cuppett Kilpatrick. For the project, the Austin-based firm took inspiration from “the gracious nature of the surrounding community,” per the official listing. The four-bedroom, three-and-a-half bathroom pad is tucked away on an oak-shaded street. The main house, constructed with Georgia-style masonry, spans 10,000 square feet. A detached garage is outfitted with a screening room and an entertainment space above. Elsewhere on the 1.24-acre plot is a two-bedroom guesthouse, a screened-in breezeway looking out onto the pool, and a garden reminiscent of a countryside retreat.A landscaped garden area in the yard of the home. Photo: Travis Wayne Baker/Twist ToursStone and McCary tapped local architects Koch McIntyre Construction to reimagine the interiors of the traditional-style house. Quaint features like herringbone oak, brick floors, and creamy marble used for fireplace surrounds and counters are incorporated in every room. The estate boasts five spacious living areas and two dining rooms flooded with natural light. Other amenities include arched doorways, leaded-glass windows, a sunlit solarium, a wood-paneled library, and a playroom. Construction on the property is not yet finished, though it is slated for completion in the summer. The listing is currently the most expensive in the city.

Behind the film’s invisible visual effects by Cinesite, including environments, aerial surveillance footage and those stunning F-18 show of force shots.  Warfare, written and directed by Ray Mendoza and Alex Garland, is based on Mendoza’s own experiences as a US Navy SEAL in a deadly moment during the Iraq War. It follows the action as a Navy SEAL platoon takes over a suburban Ramadi street before they come under attack. When they attempt to flee and call in a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, an IED explosion results in severe casualties and a further rescue. Cinesite, led by visual effects supervisor Simon Stanley-Clamp, was responsible for the film’s visual effects. This ranged from taking original plates for the house and surrounding street areas shot at at an airfield and fleshing out the environment to resemble the Iraqi city, to realizing gunfire and weapon hits, and some dramatic ‘show of force’ F-18 shots.  Here’s how they did it. The shoot The film was shot at Bovingdon Airfield Studios in Hertfordshire, UK. The Ramadi street set was completely built there as an outdoor location in the airfield’s car park. “Initially,” recounts Stanley-Clamp, “the plan was to build just the one house and digitally do the rest. But then the plan went to six houses in close quarters around the hero house where the incident takes place. It grew finally to eight houses, one was a complete working house, with a working staircase, and then the houses off it are flattage, but good flattage with enough depth to work.” Surrounding the housing set were two ‘massive’ bluescreens, as Stanley-Clamp puts it. “They were 20 feet high by 120 feet wide. Then I had a couple of floating bluescreens on Manitou’s that we could drive in to plug a gap here and there.” Cinesite was then responsible for extending the street environment and completing some sky replacements. “Production designer Mark Digby’s set was so well-built,” says Stanley-Clamp. “Sometimes, with a set for a castle or something like that, when you get up close to the set, you can tell it’s plaster and wood and canvas. But the textures we sourced from Mark’s set are what we use to duplicate and replicate out the rest of the build in CG. Our build was completely based on their architecture.” The IED explosion As a Bradley Fighting Vehicle arrives at the house and members of the platoon leave to enter it, an IED fixed to a lamppost is detonated next to the tank. Special effects supervisor Ryan Conder orchestrated the explosion. “It was shot with a lot of dust and debris and with light bulbs inside so that it was very bright,” says Stanley-Clamp. “We had prepped visual effects simulations to add to the dust and debris, but Alex essentially said, ‘No, it works, that’s what I want.’ What we did add was some burning phosphorus that stays alight for around four minutes. There was also a small pick-up bluescreen shot for a soldier falling.” “After the main explosion,” continues Stanley-Clamp, “there’s the moment where there’s just a lot of smoke. We added about 45% more smoke and tiny particulate, so small you barely register it, but you “feel” it’s presence. There’s a lot of subtle compositing work going on inside there. At one point, two of the soldiers are standing almost next to each other, but they don’t know that they’re standing next to each other. So we were having to roto each soldier off the plate and then layer smoke back over them and then reveal them and push them back. It was a lot of fine-tuning.” Prosthetics designer Tristan Versluis delivered a number of prosthetics and bloody make-up effects for the resulting IED explosion injuries. Cinesite’s contributions here were only minimal, advises Stanley-Clamp. “There’s one particular shot where we put in a fluid blood sim running as a character cuts open the trouser leg. Arterial veins and things should be pumping a little bit of blood, so we put some fluid blood in running off the wound and a couple of other little embellishments.” Show of force At three points in the film, platoon members call in a ‘show of force’ from an F-18, which involves a loud fly-by the house designed to intimidate those surrounding it with an almighty sound and pulsating wave of dust and debris.  “The show of force was going to happen only once,” notes Stanley-Clamp, “and it was one of those shots where we were told, ‘You won’t  see the jet, just hear it.’ Well, in the end, they wanted a trailer-type shot for this. Also, that first show of force is the only time we used a bit of fancy camera kit where we were on a long arm and dropped the camera down. Usually, we were right there all the time with the platoon. For that shot, Alex said, ‘Faster, faster, faster—what happens if you run it double speed?’ We ran it double speed and it worked.”  “We worked with the physics of the environment and we measured everything out,” adds Stanley-Clamp. “I mean, it’s traveling at something like 400 miles an hour. With the camera coming down, there was actually a weird optical illusion. It made it look like the plane was going up. So we had to do some tricky things to make that work.” For the resulting wave of dust and debris, Cinesite had Lidar scans of the set, and used a model of the houses and street to aid in simulations and extra backdrafts, utilizing Houdini. Says Stanley-Clamp: “We even went in and added moving palm trees, put more sand on the ground that could lift up, and then would scrape it back so you are left with patches of exposed ground.” Stanley-Clamp’s other main memory of those show of force moments was the sound. “So, the set was rigged for sound, meaning, the sound was built into our set. When that show of force happened, the first time it happened, I was looking for that fucking jet! Where did that come from?! It was absolutely deafening. Same goes for the call to prayer, the dogs barking, people chattering out in the street, it was all there.” Aerial surveillance Inside the house, the platoon has a computer with aerial maps and surveillance of their location, showing the house from above and movement around it. These screens were initially intended to only be featured briefly, but Stanley-Clamp took it upon himself to prepare some graphics that could be played back during the shoot. “In editorial,” he says, “they started to cut in the graphics that had been made, and they found it really helped with the exposition. So, they needed more.” Using the CG models constructed for the set extensions, Cinesite expanded the buildings out to a full grid of streets and residences. Adding in soldiers and other people was then necessary for the surveillance screens. At a pick-up shoot back at Bovingdon airfield, this time on the actual runway, a large 400 foot long bluescreen was laid on the ground, and a drone used to film action from 200 feet up in the air.  “We used this to film the equivalent of running down a street,” outlines Stanley-Clamp. “We had actually previs’d it with walk cycles that I had generated myself, but Alex said, ‘It’s got to be real people. Not mocap. You can tell they’re pixels, you can tell.’ For a day shoot, I got hours and hours and hours of footage, which I could never have generated in CG. Plus, I got whole platoons to walk down the street, not just individual people.”  The result was a collection of elements that brought some realistic-looking parallax to the surveillance screens, suggests Stanley-Clamp. “In fact, at one of the test screenings with some marines, the feedback from them was, ‘Where did you get hold of the footage? It’s so good.’ They thought it was real footage.” For the actual look of the footage, Cinesite consulted with Mendoza on whether it took on an infrared, ultraviolet or ‘heat seek’ look, the latter of which is what they settled on. “Right up until very close to the end,” notes Stanley-Clamp, “I thought, ‘It’s not quite right.’ So we grunged it down and raised it back up. It was looking too clean. We had to remember this was set in 2016 and effectively the tech then is a little different. You can buy night-vision goggles now or shoot night vision with drones and the quality’s ridiculous. But we had to go back to the reference, although we found that it can be hard to find that old reference.”  Subtle effects Warfare’s use of subtle visual effects extended also to weaponry. For shots requiring the Bradleys to fire from their central gun barrels, Cinesite provided a large muzzle flash and resulting smoke, timed to practical explosions rigged to buildings. Gunshots and muzzle flashes were also added to soldier firearms, along with accompanying CG bullet, phosphors and masonry hits.  Cinesite’s muzzle flashes related directly to the choice of camera. The film was shot largely on a DJI Ronin lightweight camera (the DOP was David J. Thompson) that allowed for fast set-ups and being able to maneuver in small spaces. “We did some experiments and found that shooting at 30 fps gave us the best retention of muzzle flashes,” explains Stanley-Clamp. “You would not always see a muzzle flash go off, so sometimes we’ve enhanced a muzzle flash that’s in there or put additional ones in.” “It was a bit different for something like tracer fire,” adds Stanley-Clamp. “You might think trace fire is there the whole time. It’s not. It’s about every fifth shell that goes off, that’s where you will get a tracer fire. Alex would be counting them. ‘No…no…now!’ That was a good learning curve.”  The post How an airfield in the UK was turned into the Iraqi city of Ramadi for Alex Garland’s ‘Warfare’ appeared first on befores & afters.

Karper Building Renovation / hé! architectuur + buro kiss + EA+Save this picture!© Tim Van de Velde•Molenbeek-Saint-Jean, Belgium Architects: Year Completion year of this architecture project Year:  2024 Photographs Photographs:Tim Van de VeldeMore SpecsLess Specs Save this picture! Text description provided by the architects. The renovation involves the conversion of an industrial building into housing with a coworking space and studio on the ground floor. It is an upside-down home with the living spaces all the way upstairs to provide maximum light and privacy.Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!Save this picture!Urban dense site - The plot is located in a dense urban network of workshops and industrial sites. Expanding in height is a logical step to respond to a current problem: how to densify the city, create enough housing for a growing population, and still maintain as many green areas in the city as possible. Since the eaves were much lower than those of the neighbors, we had the opportunity to use our roof as a low-cost building site and put a new building on an old building. The new facade retakes the detailing of the historical masonry of the existing facade in a more rational way, in white brick.Save this picture!3 key principles within circular building are central to this project: 1. Flexibility - The flexible and open plan allows spaces to be used in multiple ways and change function in the future. The coworking space was designed so that in a later phase it can easily be transformed into a store or showroom for the Tenue de Ville design studio. The small studios are also designed in such a way that they can be transformed into an extension of the family home at a later stage. Save this picture!Save this picture!2. Regenerative - Regenerative materials are used. These are materials with a longer cycle. *Wood, hemp, straw,...(bio-based, biodegradable, and renewable. They absorb CO2 as they grow). *Earth and loam (geo-based, they are abundant and can be reused infinitely). *Reused materials (2nd, 3rd, 4th,... hands materials). The outer shell of the new roof volume will be realized in prefabricated wooden cassettes and filled in with straw bales, taken from a nearby farm. The existing facades are insulated with lime hemp blocks. A mixture of sand and clay, from the Brussels earth-moving industry, is used as plaster. Existing elements such as floors, joinery, stairs, tiles,... are revalued and supplemented with reclaimed materials. With this project, we want to show that building in back-to-basics materials such as straw, loam, and wood is not only for a rural context but can also be applied in an urban environment.Save this picture!3. Dismountable, simple & repetitive - The open and legible inner structure is perfectly demountable due to its specific assembly (composite columns and beams with loose bolted connections). If broken down, they are easily reused. The number of materials are kept to a minimum and low-tech details or principles are repeated. It is an architecture that is understandable to all and therefore easily adaptable.Save this picture! Project gallerySee allShow less Project locationAddress:Molenbeek-Saint-Jean, BelgiumLocation to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address.About this officehé! architectuurOffice••• MaterialsWoodBrickMaterials and TagsPublished on May 21, 2025Cite: "Karper Building Renovation / hé! architectuur + buro kiss + EA+" 21 May 2025. ArchDaily. Accessed . <https://www.archdaily.com/1030330/karper-building-renovation-he-architectuur-plus-buro-kiss-plus-ea-plus&gt ISSN 0719-8884Save世界上最受欢迎的建筑网站现已推出你的母语版本!想浏览ArchDaily中国吗?是否 You've started following your first account!Did you know?You'll now receive updates based on what you follow! Personalize your stream and start following your favorite authors, offices and users.Go to my stream

As was the case in many settler-colonial regimes, like the U.S. in Puerto Rico, the British Empire aggressively enlisted colonized peoples into its military during wartime. A new commemoration project by Tosin Oshinowo will speak to this history. Sir Edwin Lutyens designed 44 war memorials all throughout the U.K. before his death in 1940. Lutyens also built a World War I memorial in Freetown, Sierra Leone, in a government building courtyard. It was updated after World War II to include the names of more dead Sierra Leonean soldiers. Tosin Oshinowo of Oshinowo Studio, a Lagos architecture office, is now adapting Sierra Leone’s National Memorial for Commonwealth War Graves Commission (CWGC). Oshinowo is the first woman and the first West African to be commissioned by CWGC, the organization said. The update will deliver structural glass members atop the existing Lutyens memorial. (Courtesy Hayes Davidson) The memorial, CWGC added, will honor the Carrier Corps, or “non-combatant laborers and soldiers from across Africa that contributed toward campaigns.” The Carrier Corps transported war supplies “across terrain that was impassable to vehicles and animals”—at least 946 of them died in combat, and were never commemorated. The original design by Lutyens is a squat masonry block with plaques on the sides that slightly tapers upward in profile. The existing memorial has the names of 229 soldiers who died in World War I, and also World War II casualties, but no names of Carrier Corps members. This will soon change: Oshinowo Studio’s proposed design modifies the existing block’s top section with a new pyramid made of structural glass. A beacon of light will shine from the pyramid’s apex, making the memorial visible from 2 miles away at night when it shines. The addendum will be made of four structural glass blades etched with the names of 946 Carrier Corps members. “Honoring the past, shaping the future, our design for the Freetown memorial stands not only as a tribute to the fallen, those who lost their lives during the First World War, but as a symbol of Sierra Leoneans’ collective commemoration, representing cost of war and a people’s resilience, as well as the global commitment to peace for generations to come,” Oshinowo said in a statement. The overall project is informed by CWGC’s Non-Commemoration Report, which is meant to combat historical inequities in British World War I memorials. So far, CWGC has completed a new memorial in Cape Town, South Africa, as part of the campaign, among other works.

On a sunny spring morning in south London, Walworth Square offers a freshly minted moment of respite from the clamorous main road. Around a peculiar new war memorial (to which war? The tracksuited boy perched on a branch is not enlightening) new trees shiver in the breeze, while, beneath them, a man, seemingly the worse for wear, stares vacantly at his scruffy shoes. Another man with enormous shoulders emerges from a gym and begins to take selfies. Across the square, steps rise to the grand Victorian jumble of Walworth Town Hall, which hasn’t been a town hall since the mid-1960s. Now, thanks to a fire and the near-bankruptcy of local government, the building houses offices, a café and a community centre. The architect of this transformation, Feix&Merlin, has had to negotiate a problematic inheritance – a (minor) landmark, catastrophic fire damage, impecunious owners and angry locals – and knead it into shape. In this they have succeeded, but the shape that it has assumed will, through no fault of the architects, prove indigestible to some.  The kernel of the extant structure was built as a church vestry in 1865. It later became Southwark Town Hall and was variously extended. Following the council’s evacuation to Camberwell in 1965, what remained was a public library, a local museum and municipal offices. In 2013 the roof caught fire and much of the Grade II-listed building was reduced to a shell; the remainder rotted behind hoardings until 2022, when work finally commenced on its restoration. Advertisement The protracted nature of this process can ultimately be attributed to chancellor George Osborne’s austerity budget of 2010. Although Southwark had at first intended to return the building to its original uses – and held a competition on this basis in 2015, which was won by Avanti Architects – it realised, on seeing the price tag, that this would be impossible. Avanti was dismissed and a new competition was held in 2018, with a revised brief. This emphasised the long-term commercial sustainability of the building, as well as an element of cultural use, taking into consideration the needs of the local community. The winners were developer General Projects working with Feix&Merlin. Their main gambit was to turn the building over to offices. However, on consulting the public while working up their proposal, they quickly realised how upset local residents were about the loss of public ownership. As a result, a community centre was added to the programme. It was the task of the designers to square this circle: how to retain the look and feel of a public building while optimising its new private function. They returned the exterior of the protected structure to its original form, including restoring the pattern to the roof tiles, which had been lost over the years. The ground floor houses the remaining public, or publicly accessible, spaces – the lobby café and community centre. The latter can be hired free of charge by local groups. The rest of the building is now offices. These also occupy its grandest rooms: the former main stair, debating chamber, library and museum. The last two functions have been transferred to a new building across the square, where they are housed in a new ‘heritage centre’. The architects have restored the historically significant interiors, more or less, removing the institutional accretions that had latterly defaced them, such as asphalt that had been laid on top of the masonry stairs and the false ceiling that hid the skylight above it. They also exposed the boxed-in balustrades on the mezzanine of the library and restored the parquet flooring throughout. All structural interventions have been achieved using cross-laminated timber. The roof has been reconstructed using it, creating a new storey with some intriguing windowless cubby holes inside its terminal turrets (handy for undistracted meetings). In the former debating chamber, the structure of the roof is exposed to view, a striking piece of engineering. On the ground floor, the ceiling of the space that now houses the lobby-cum-café, which had fallen in during the fire, is supported by hefty wooden arches. In some places, the architects have made looser interpretations of the original fabric. The public viewing gallery of the debating chamber has been extended to cover three sides of the room and a pattern derived from the lost balustrade has been cut into sheet steel to create a protective barrier for this new mezzanine. Certain elements, especially in the less important interiors, have been preserved as the fire left them. Where internal walls were removed, their footprint remains, breaking up the parquet, so that, as Julia Feix puts it, visitors can still read the original plan. Above a painted dado, the pitted and scorched surface of the old plaster, or the bricks exposed beneath it, have been preserved in their damaged state. Feix says this approach ‘lets the building talk about its history, rather than creating a pastiche of an era that’s long gone’.  This move has by now become an established procedure when dealing with rescue jobs, the obvious local example being Battersea Arts Centre, which Haworth Tompkins left similarly scarred following a 2015 fire. Its antecedents stretch back to Hans Döllgast’s post-war work on the Alte Pinakothek in Munich. In its more recent manifestations we could call this approach a fetishisation of decay, which raises questions as to what is being commemorated, and why. In Döllgast’s case, the answers were obvious: the Second World War, in order to prevent wilful amnesia. But in these two more recent examples, where the catastrophes in question were accidental fires, one might ask why a coat of plaster shouldn’t have been applied. Advertisement Walworth Town Hall helps to clarify the logic at work here, which is partly born of necessity. The building could not be restored to its previous condition or use, to the dismay of some locals, including the Walworth Society heritage group. The latter objected to the perceived loss of public access and was concerned that what remained could easily be revoked: for instance, if the café were unprofitable, it could be turned into more offices. They also disliked certain architectural aspects of the proposal, which they called ‘generic’: ‘neither bold and confident designs nor faithful restorations’. After protracted consultation, these concerns were taken into consideration by the architects in the restoration of the more significant rooms. Given the wrangling, it seems to me that, as in the case of Flores & Prats’ Sala Beckett in Barcelona, these patinated surfaces are intended to produce an impression of authenticity, without recourse to (prohibitively expensive) restoration, or ‘pastiche’, as the architects put it. It seems likely, however, that this code speaks more clearly to designers than to members of heritage groups.  But buildings are not made for heritage groups. Instead, this one is addressing two distinct publics. The community centre still opens to the Walworth Road, with its enduringly working-class character, and has already seen good use. However, the commercial part of the building has been reoriented to the new square to the north, from which it is accessed via the steps we traversed earlier. On the other side of the square rise the brick-slip-clad southern reaches of Elephant Park, the controversial development built by Lendlease on the rubble of the Heygate Estate. The Town Hall has turned its new face to these new Elephantines, the gym-dwellers who can afford to eat in the café and might choose to rent desk space here (if they have to work, that is). To return to my earlier question regarding the catastrophe being commemorated by these charred walls, perhaps the answer is: the conflagration of local government, which produced this double-headed building. Tom Wilkinson is a writer, editor and teacher specialising in the history of architecture and the visual culture of modern Germany Architect’s view As architects, we often aim to deliver transformational change, but at Walworth Town Hall, transformation came through restraint. Rather than imposing a vision, we allowed the building to speak, guiding us in knowing where to intervene and where to hold back. One key move was the reinvention of the former debating chamber into a light-filled triple-height space. Historical features were carefully restored, while a new mezzanine with a CNC-cut solid steel balustrade subtly echoes the original decorative railings of the former viewing gallery. The space is now crowned with a new exposed CLT timber roof with a bespoke light feature at its centre. All new structural and architectural elements were executed in timber, speaking to the sustainability agenda, aligning with modern environmental standards and enhancing user wellbeing. Timber’s biophilic properties connect occupants with nature, supporting physical and mental health while improving air quality. Crucial to our design language was an honest celebration of the building’s history, including the fire-damaged ‘scars’ that tell its story. While a handful of spaces were traditionally restored, most were approached with a light touch. New finishes were installed only up to the lower dado level, with the rest of the wall surfaces and ceilings left as found, retaining their battle-worn character (cleaned up and made safe, of course). Subtle material changes, such as microcement infills in the parquet, hint at the former wall layouts and structures. Striking a balance between restoration and contemporary intervention was essential. It has been a privilege to work on a building with such legacy and seeing the community return after more than a decade is deeply rewarding. Walworth Town Hall now honours its past while looking boldly to the future. Julia Feix, director, Feix&Merlin Architects   Client’s view We approached this project with a vision for developing a new blueprint for bringing at-risk municipal landmarks back to life. Now restored to its former glory and removed from Historic England’s Heritage at Risk register, Walworth Town Hall has been given back to a new generation with an exciting new purpose, made viable and fit for modern standards. In partnership with Southwark Council, and closely collaborating with Historic England and local community groups, we worked with Feix&Merlin to deliver a sensitive but impactful design approach. Our vision was that the building’s legacy should be revealed, rather than erased. The result strikes a balance between celebrating its inherited state and adapting it to modern use, combining elements of old and new by making sympathetic references to its beautiful 19th century architecture. Distinctly modern features, such as the use of cross-laminated timber to replace sections of the building damaged by the 2013 fire, are a reflective and contemporary interpretation of the original design. Elephant and Castle is undergoing a significant regeneration and Walworth Town Hall functions as a bridge between the area’s authentic heritage and its new future. Driven by a collaborative process, and tailor-made for small businesses to create, inspire and thrive, the reimagined Walworth Town Hall lays the groundwork for a new creative community to grow in this local destination.  Frederic Schwass, chief development officer, General Projects   Engineer’s view Heyne Tillett Steel was engaged as structural and civil engineer from competition stage to completion. It was both a challenging restoration of a listed building and an ambitious contemporary reconstruction, in exposed engineered timber, of its pre-fire form – at the same time creating better connectivity and adding floor area.   Built in various stages, the existing comprises nearly all methods of historic construction: timber, masonry, filler joist, clay pot, cast and wrought iron. The building had to be extensively investigated to understand its condition, fitness for reuse and, in some cases, capacity to extend.   Particular attention was paid to the impact of the fire and fire dousing in terms of movement, rot and corrosion. Repairs were carried out only where necessary after an extended period of drying and monitoring. The original council chamber roof was rebuilt as hybrid trusses (glulam and steel) to span the approximately 13 x 13m double-height volume below. The roof was prefabricated in just four pieces, built off the retained walls and installed in under two weeks.  A cross-laminated timber (CLT) covering creates the roof’s truncated pyramid shape. A new floor was added within the original massing of the west wing, utilising CLT slabs and a glulam ‘spine’ beam, creating unobstructed, exposed CLT ceilings across 7m bays at either side. The significant amount of retention and timber additions mean that the project scores very highly on benchmarks for embodied carbon, competitive beyond 2030 targets. Jonathan Flint, senior associate, Heyne Tillett Steel   Working detail The restoration presented a rare opportunity to reimagine a historic structure using sustainable, expressive materials. The original council chamber roof, destroyed by fire, was rebuilt as a hybrid CLT/glulam and steel ties structure, combining the aesthetic warmth of timber with the tensile strength of steel. The new roof had to clear-span approximately 13 x 13m over a double-height volume, and as the truncated pyramid structure was kept exposed, the increased volume of the space added a dramatic effect while introducing a contemporary character. Timber was selected not only for its sustainability credentials but also for its light  weight, crucial in minimising loads on the existing retained masonry. The trusses were prefabricated offsite in four large components, ensuring precision and reducing construction time and disruption on site. Once craned into position, they were set atop an existing concrete ring beam, a structural necessity installed after the fire to stabilise the perimeter walls in the absence of a roof. This ring beam now discreetly supports the new load paths. The combination of the timber structure in combination with the exposed brick and traditional plaster achieves a visually striking, materially honest reconstruction that honours the building’s historic proportions while firmly rooting it in contemporary sustainable practice. Julia Feix, director, Feix&Merlin Architects   Project data Location: Southwark, south London Start on site: February 2022 Completion: November 2024 Gross internal floor area: 5,000m2 Construction cost: £18.4 million Form of contract: Design and build Construction cost per m2: £4,500 Architect: Feix&Merlin Architects Client: General Projects Structural engineer: Heyne Tillett Steel M&E consultant: RED Engineering Quantity surveyor: Quartz Heritage architect: Donald Insall Associates (planning), Heritage Architecture (tender) Planning consultant: Rolfe Judd Landscape consultant: Town & Country Gardens Acoustic consultant: Sharps Redmore Transport consultant: Caneparo Associates Project manager: Quartz External lighting consultant: Atrium Specialist light feature: Barrisol Fit-out contractor: White Paper Art curation: Art Atelier Furniture, fixtures and equipment procurement: Hunter Community space operator: WTH Community Space Principal designer: ORSA CDM co-ordinator: ORSA Approved building inspector: Sweco Building Control Main contractor: Conamar Embodied carbon: 52 kgCO2/m2

Got a project that’s too bold to build? Submit your conceptual works, images and ideas for global recognition and print publication in the 2025 Vision Awards! The Main Entry deadline of June 6th is fast approach — submit your work today. To match or not to match? This dilemma has always been a burden for architects when designing extensions for listed buildings. Perhaps one of the most famous examples of a clashing extension and a listed building was Daniel Libeskind’s design for the Military History Museum in Dresden. Both praised and criticized by many, the modern extension aimed at spatially expressing Germany’s violent history. The architecture was characterized as “insensitive and inconsiderate” as well as “brave and bonkers.” Regardless of whether this specific architectural project was “the right move or not,” it poses a somewhat eternal architectural question: how should architects approach listed buildings, which oftentimes carry an immense amount of history and emotional resonance? The following seven projects reveal several tactics of dealing with delicate pieces of cultural heritage, while adding a new building extension to the mix. Aalt Stadhaus Differdange By witry & witry architecture urbanisme, Differdange, Luxembourg The existing building dates back from 1847, situated in between Church Notre-Dame-des Douleurs (which was torn down) and the local town hall. The project aim was to create a new urban landmark for Differdange. Long filigree columns were used along the west façade to create an interplay between old and new architectural elements that create a harmonic ensemble. In parallel, curated material choices such as tiles and wooden floors merge the two interiors crafting a coherent atmosphere. Void Practice Rooms By John McAslan + Partners,  London, United Kingdom Surrounded by three listed buildings, the Void acts as an extension for the Royal Academy of Music (RAM), hosting a general music practice room, an opera practice room and a new multifunctional RAM space. Preserving the overall aesthetic of the site, the Void Building’s structure and materiality draws from its historic context and internal functions. Specifically, the characteristic red brick and Baroque stone trimmings serve as an inspiration to the modern albeit contextually harmonious extension. Felix-Nussbaum-Haus Extension By Studio Libeskind, Osnabrück, Germany The Felix Nussbaum Haus was originally designed by Daniel Libeskind and was completed in 1998. The new extension, also designed by Libeskind in May 2011, provides an entrance hall to the museum, a new shop and a learning center. The design completely contradicts the existing structure and is comprised of a glass bridge that acts as a gateway. Through the specific colors and materials, the extension “blends” with both museums. The grey plaster provides a stark contrast to the Kunstgeschichtliche Museum and the Akzisehaus, while anthracite colored frames accentuate the series of openings. Additionally, the façade acts as a screen that carefully frames the geometries of the Museum openings, resulting in a grid that guides the overall composition. Marecollege By 24H-architecture, Leiden, The Netherlands Inspired by the school’s philosophical discourse, the concept for the new building extensions was derived from the anthroposophical philosophy, which claims that scientific theory does not describe reality, but the relations which belong to reality. The new building aimed at spatially recreating this theory through lemniscates. This intricate geometry becomes the heart of the design, accommodating many social spaces, auditoriums and a cafeteria. The new façade is as solid as its neighbor, made however out of grey masonry walls. Extension to the Historisches Museum By :mlzd, Bern, Switzerland The extension to the Historical Museum Bern, built by André Lambert in 1894, is composed by two distinct elements: a 1000m2 temporary exhibition hall located beneath a new civic square and a monolithic six story block along the southern side of the site that houses the Bern city archives, offices and a library. Architecturally, the structure interchanges between solid and transparent façades. Specifically, towards the square the building acts as a glazed modernist curtain wall that reveals all the activities that occur in its interior, while the south façade is made of solid, cast concrete punctured by small random openings. Rehabilitation and Extension of the Colani-UFO with shaft hall By SSP AG, Lünen, Germany In the technology centre of Lünen, over a former coal mine factory, hovers a  unique type of “UFO” building. Designed in 1985 by Luigi Colani the “UFO” has become a well-known landmark to the area, thus instigating a rejuvenation approach by the Academy of Applied Science center. The primary idea was to integrate the “UFO,” the shaft and the underlying building with a new extension, turning them into a multifunctional complex able to cater for a wide variety of venues. The design preserved that industrial charm of existing buildings, while maintaining a rather subtle form in comparison to the rest of the heterogenous buildings on site. Particularly the dark monolithic façade becomes a “quiet pause” in a somewhat complex and stimulating urban context. Museum De Fundatie By Bierman Henket architecten,  Zwolle, Netherlands Museum De Fundatie in Zwolle is situated on the border between the mediaeval city center and the open 19th century parkland and its canals. The new extension is a spectacular circular volume placed in the roof of the former Palace of Justice. The structure aesthetically contrasts the medieval façade of Blijmarkt, while however complimenting functionally the museum, acting as a new entrance. The extension – also called the Art Cloud – follows the substructure’s logic by being symmetrical in two directions, thus establishing a new identity for the complex’s urban presence. Its façade is clad with 55,000 three-dimensional ceramic elements, forming a “shimmering” surface that breaks down the original building’s solidity. Got a project that’s too bold to build? Submit your conceptual works, images and ideas for global recognition and print publication in the 2025 Vision Awards! The Main Entry deadline of June 6th is fast approach — submit your work today. Featured Image: Extension to the Historisches Museum by :mlzd, Bern, Switzerland The post Bold Meets Old: 7 Architectural Extensions that Clash with History appeared first on Journal.