Session "Materiality in History of Architecture and Urban Planning: evolutions of techniques, perceptions and analyzes".

Cochairs : Jean-Baptiste MINNAERT, Pr. at Sorbonne University, Director of Center André Chastel: Research Laboratory in Art History (FR). Léo NOYER DUPLAIX, boarder of the École normale supérieure, Associate Member of the Center André Chastel, of the LARA of Nantes University & of the LRA of Toulouse School of Architecture (FR). Ruxandra-Lulia STOICA, Lecturer in architectural conservation, Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture (ESALA), University of Edinburg (UK). PROGRAM Introduction, pr. J.-B. MINNAERT CONTRIBUTIONS (15 minutes each) Laura SZYMAN, Design Research PhD Student and Studio Leader, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (AUS). Title: An Archeology of the Periphery: an alternative illustrated analysis of Melbourne’s peripheral housing. Summary: This presentation sits within the second axis of this session. It will discuss the techniques and outcomes of three design research projects conducted in the periphery of Melbourne in 2022-23. By considering the periphery as a site with archaeological importance, the projects sought to shift established perceptions of the suburbs through analytical illustrations that resist the “reliable” measurability of planners and developers. Melbourne’s periphery is one of rapidly built, market-driven, detached houses that are rejected by, and reject, the intervention of architects. The result posits a new mode of analysis, while smuggling in an alternative vision for the space. Théo DERORY, PhD Student, Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne University (FR) Title: De la pierre à la restitution : Gestion des données dans l’analyse photogrammétrique du patrimoine bâti – Le cas des voûtes disparues de l’abbaye de Grandmont. Summary: La multiplication et la systématisation des outils numériques en archéologie ont fait de la question du stockage et de la pérennisation des données numériques un problème majeur. Nous évoquerons lors de cette intervention les différentes solutions mises en place et envisagées pour y répondre dans le contexte de l’étude des voûtes de l’abbaye de Grandmont. Une étude particulièrement représentative de ce problème puisque chaque nouvelle campagne de fouilles ajoute de nouvelles numérisations à un corpus déjà très conséquent. Amplifiant ainsi chaque année l’urgence de trouver une solution durable à cette question qui n’a pour l’instant que des solutions temporaires. Isabella DI LENARDO and Paul GUHENNEC, PhD Students, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne EPFL (CH). Title: A computational eye for an architectural history of Venetian facades. Summary: This contribution discusses the possibility of a 'distant viewing' of architecture and how the entirety of a city's urban fabric can be questioned algorithmically. As a case study, we will show how all facades of Venice have been automatically extracted from a photogrammetric model and enriched with external temporal, stylistic, as well as cadastral information. This corpus is the starting point of a formalist reading of facades, one in which a "computational eye" on dimensions and patterns can unfold a new look upon the city – provided it is accompanied by the critical reading demanded by this re-materialisation of architecture. ROUND TABLE 45 minutes All contributors. Cochairs Emmanuel CHÂTEAU-DUTIER, Associate Professor of Digital Humanities, Montréal University (CA). Grégory CHAUMET, Engineer in digitalization and modeling, Center André Chastel: Research Laboratory in Art History, Sorbonne University (FR). Conclusion, R.-L. STOICA *** The session questions old and new virtual materialities in the History of Architecture and Urbanism: architectural surveys of building archaeology, photogrammetry, laser scanning, geomatics, etc. This materiality influences the perception and analysis of space, but to what extent? The first axis focuses on the history of the dematerialization of space for analytical purposes. While researchers specialising in the study of the Medieval period (especially building archaeologists) traditionally use reconstruction techniques, various Cultural Heritage study centres (within academia or not) have in particular used these techniques, essentially up to the limit of Modern and contemporary times. How, over the long term, have these techniques influenced the perception of space and therefore conditioned the analysis of buildings? Where (university departments, local authority heritage services, heritage conservation organisations, etc.) and by whom (photographers, surveyors, draftsmen, etc.) have these techniques been implemented? Finally, can we establish correlations between the evolution of these techniques and that of historiography? The second axis focuses, always for analytical purposes, on the extension of the dematerialization of space since the ‘digital revolution.’ Medieval buildings are thus no longer the only concerned, but also those of later periods, as well as an entire area, whether urban, peri-urban or rural. The advent of digital technologies has brought a revolution in the perception of space, creating new methods of analysis. Which new materialization techniques have mostly influenced researchers in the history of architecture and urbanism? Have these techniques constituted a real revolution in analysis or are they only incidental tools for materializing space? Where and how are these techniques applied? What new techniques should evolve in order to further improve the analysis of buildings?