I used the same Aotea study to test three ways of sharing early design work: a book, a walkthrough and a detailed page. Each supports a different kind of conversation.
Drawing sets and render folders are well suited to formal review and construction. Early conversations often need something simpler that helps a client or colleague understand the proposal and respond to it.
Because the Aotea model and analysis came from one repeatable source, I could prepare three formats without rebuilding the project each time. This note considers where each one is useful.
Twenty-eight pages, turned by dragging a corner: the walk in from the road, the ground read at a metre, the two schemes, and the references that came first.
The sequence matters. A reader encounters the walk in, the site and the references before reaching the two schemes, which gives the design a clear context.
The walkthrough uses the same camera as the still images and shows what it might feel like to move through the door and onto the deck.
It gives a quick sense of the deck height and the amount of sky visible below the raised shutter. Because motion can make an early design look more resolved than it is, the walkthrough sits beside the study's open checks.
The method study: where the data came from, the code that chose the pad, the drawings, the costs, and five checks still open.
The page gives each claim a source, calculation or open question. It supports a more considered review, although it asks more time of the reader than the book or walkthrough.
Read the method study →A book, walkthrough and method page would usually be prepared as separate pieces of work. Here, all three drew from the same model, images and analysis.
The additional production time was modest: about forty minutes for the book and ten minutes for the walkthrough once the source material was ready.
This makes it practical to choose a format around the conversation. A scheme that is difficult to read in plan can be walked through, while a longer line of reasoning can be organised as a book and shared early enough to inform the design.
Does a volume change how a client reads a proposal?
It may only change how the practice feels about presenting one. None of this has been tested on a reader.
Where should the disclosure on a generated walkthrough sit?
Ten seconds of convincing motion reads as more resolved than the design is. A caption is probably not enough.
Which form does a person reach for first?
The next study could test whether the first format a person chooses affects what they remember a week later.
What is the cost of keeping three forms current?
The practical risk is version control: when the model changes, each published format needs to be identified and updated.