these are images of projects by pablo valbuena, an artist who uses light in combination with (usually found) physical construction to suggest new spatial properties.
valbuena seems in many ways the heir to turrell's early work, which relies on the same tricks of perception, acheived with much less sophisticated technology.
on the one hand, the spatial properties of these artworks are undeniable; on the other, their potential as suggestive architectures are limited by their fundamental inability to be inhabited without destroying the illusion that generates them. can light produce inhabitable space/be paired with inhabitable space? can light be used to co-opt or hijack existing spaces, bringing them into some larger system by visually appropriating them, overwriting their existing aesthetic or formal qualities?
related: are these questions that can be concretely examined? i'm wary of following my flights of architectural fancy in a bldgblog direction which never sees them resolved.
another strand of thought suggested by the examination of light as space is light = space, light = data, data = space? what would dataspace look like? is it as simple as augmented reality/information overlay?
we've talked about the essential temporality of data before - i've begun to wonder about the possibility of an information underlay - a register of old data "seeping" up from beneath the present moment.
much data is only useful given the ability to register its change over time - could a temporary data architecture ground itself in two moments simultaneously (overlay + underlay) in an attempt to provide the experience of a moment in context?
it's not hard to imagine this as information strapped to a more or less arbitrary form (see example in next post) - how could the physicality of the thing begin to be more closely aligned to the thing itself? does it need to?