Sometimes, the models are necessary + meditative in order to explore a thought. Creation + development  are to me much like the verbalization of a single sentence. At times, they are just a momentary expression, other times their resonance sometimes lingers much like a formal move or color. Physical models contain the humanity and human error that at times I feels is missing in computer generated models. I liken it to the difference between hand-generated animation and the computer-generated world of "surreality." Yes, much like old Looney Tunes vs. 300.... I require  a reality in my architecture for as far as I know, we don't jet around in flying cars and if my craft is to express the deep longing of man for beauty then I insist that it should represent man- not some idealistic pseudo representation of the wild imaginings  of a visual science fiction writer. The truth is, anything can inform a study model; a crumbled piece of paper, straws, cardboard, the flight path of a bird, a simple piece of clay.... you just have to look at it with inquisitive eyes. I often ask myself if something could inform a structural system, skin or form. If an image or object catches my attention, I have to wonder why + see if I can transfer that moment of interest into something completely unrelated. There is truly nothing like the formalization of a simple idea + the transformation of normative materials into something that could represent an actual space- one that is felt, moved around in, or even lived life in.  Besides, models are cool, ʖNOʔ