thoughts on street comparisons
skhotha
a somewhat interesting page which unfortunately lacks structure, for instance an introduction to what you will be doing. the project called for a comparison between 3 streets. this is not evident in the project. some sort of table could have assisted in comparing, for example, trees, sidewalk with, furniture, number of lanes for vehicular traffic etc. some of the graphics are too pixelated to be informative. drawings have come a long way.
4/10
manyaka
cover page info could have been shrunk to create a more visual page cover. where are the contents page + page numbers? as much as the drawings of the streets are appreciated, but one has no idea where or what context the streets are located. a comparison matrix would have helped frame the project. streets are linear, thus maps always assist in understanding the relationship the have to the architecture etc. why are there no maps? info on the background page is plagiarised from, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhibition_Road thus i was unable to mark the rest of the document.
0/10
james
contents page, page numbers. reference page? overall a somewhat pleasing project which could have benefitted from a simpler layout. the current one is rather complex and makes the document difficult to follow – see conclusion page, or the web for comparison matrix templates. plans would have enhanced the project. well done.
5.8/10
nyundu
good aerials demonstrating where the streets are within a context. next time try to be consistent with the eye height – jozi you have it 1721m, london at 21m – to get a more comparable + accurate picture. a well put and easy to access document which would have been excellent with a proper cover page, contents page, page numbers. project introduction, conclusion and reference page. normally caption font is smaller that running text font, yet you have it the other way round – why? crisp work that keeps improving.
6.2/10
quarm
page numbers are greatly appreciated, but mean little without a contents page. fantastic context page with the same criticism stated above as far as eye heights are concerned. a north point on the base + building footprint maps would have gone a long way. project is well executed. comparison & conclusions page, the font size is a little large, thus starts to feel like a “page filler.” would have enhanced the document if on the pages there was a heading to guide us into what is actually been covered – as in, public realm, pedestrians, parking, shade, porosity etc – also for consistency sake. next time think seriously about this.
6.8/10
anaman
kudos for a thorough contents page with page numbers. fantastic intro, but then why does the font size decrease? is this significant? on page 3 you state that, “in this assignment, an analyses [which should read analysis] of these characteristics outline . . “ which? specify. you name a lot, and you cannot tackle everything. be intelligent on what you chose to unpack + how. context maps on page 4 are appreciated, but where are the sites? illustrate this. on page 5, when describing the street, you use left and right. this is not good enough since they can be interchangeable depending on what direction one is facing. use north, east, west + south. these are constant, as should the font size in the document.
7/10
muneebah
it is lovely to see an image on the cover page which deals with the subject material in the document. a missed opportunity though. the other 2 streets should have been included, and then the title “comparing streets” is apt. no contents page, intro, conclusion, references or page numbers. rather perplexing. the crisp aerial images of the 3 contexts are welcome. project layout has come a long way kara and it is very accessible. pity that you have a text box around the text. why? captions would have greatly enhanced what is already promising work, especially the last matrix page which frames the project – this is how the project should have been executed. you have to push yourself harder.
6.3/10
mkhulisa
a very strong submission which unfortunately is betrayed by a lack of structure. if you are going to pursue this route then i suggest that once you have cut and pasted your page, you then photocopy the – i have attached a page to demonstrate this. your work will come out cleaner + crisper. drawings need an explanation and headings. the tree page is good. push this further. fairly decent work with layout problems which can be fixed with more rigour + focus.
5.3/10
