How many hours we have to work each day 'just to pass'.

Personally I think telling someone to look at the presidents medals as the basis for an argument is pointless Ex Death, you are pointing out the best work from every school not the average work. We don't all produce work like that and even though I was almost nominated my work isn't up there with UCL, AA, Westminster etc. Look at Finalcrit.com for lots of average work which is mostly still very good.

I've never seen any interior design work at degree level that looked anything like the presidents medals or even anything like the average work produced at most schools, I'm sorry but I just haven't. If you could post a link to some work more than a couple of models that would be great.

I know I have small one week one page projects that look better than that it's not just all about time. Where is the rest of the work? All I see is renders and plans and then some photoshop circles, where is the development work, where are the models etc? This all goes along with what actually goes up on the wall and without it we would be failed. If that was first year architecture it would fail because of all the things mentioned which even in first year you need to address. I did warn the poster that putting work up would result in this, interior design and architecture are two different things and they address different issues.

I have to laugh at your last comment. Architects have designed and will continue to design the interiors of buildings that are more than just non de script boxes. I can probably count on one hand the times I have had to look at an interior designers work when contemplating precedent.

Anyway, http://www.flickr.com/photos/47892903@N05/, here's work from the Free Range exhibtion last year.

those images are so small they are impossible to read.

However if the RIBA picked out the best work from interior architecture/design, I think that they would be of the same quality.

*insert joke about being the civil engineers bitch at the end of it all*

I really feel for you guys.

They simply wouldn't be, I'm sorry.

Oh how did I know that someone would say something as stuck up as that? Okay then, how about the BIDA or the Chartered Society of Designers? Oh wait, they're not good enough for you are they?

Well now you're just being incredibly naive. I've already clearly stated that what I said was objective with no agenda than to give the honest truth. I'm very blunt and give people answers straight-up, regardless of whether it is what they want to hear or not. If you can't handle the truth, don't go around labeling people as 'stuck-up'.

Do you work for the RIBA? If not, then it's not a honest truth, it's what you believe, and the way that you talk on here makes you sound very stuck up. It may be a 'truth' that architecture students seem to know but honestly it's just a prejudiced view that most of you hold. I get told that so and so has worked with an interior designer who can't use CAD, and that the work they've seen isn't very good. Fair enough that you think that because that's what you've experienced.

EDIT: Also, you ignored everything else I said in the post, you just thought you'd point out that the RIBA wouldn't judge the work that interior architects have produced.

But when I tell you that I've seen work just as good you refuse to believe me because you see me as below you.

Again, you're being naive. Yes, it is a subjective opinion, but all I can say is that some opinions are more worthwhile than others (would you trust the film recommendations of a 10 year old whose favorite director is Michael Bay?). It's down to you to decide who you want to trust. Most things in life boil down to subjective opinion. Both our courses were established on the basis of subjective opinion.



I don't refuse to believe you because I think I'm above you. I don't believe you because I don't agree with you. Big difference. Personally, I'm not one for ad hominem. If you would prefer to remain ignorant then don't raise the question in the first place.

Architects>"interior architects" end of.

Do you work for the RIBA? If not, then it's not a honest truth, it's what you believe, and the way that you talk on here makes you sound very stuck up. It may be a 'truth' that architecture students seem to know but honestly it's just a prejudiced view that most of you hold. I get told that so and so has worked with an interior designer who can't use CAD, and that the work they've seen isn't very good. Fair enough that you think that because that's what you've experienced. But when I tell you that I've seen work just as good you refuse to believe me because you see me as below you.

EDIT: Also, you ignored everything else I said in the post, you just thought you'd point out that the RIBA wouldn't judge the work that interior architects have produced.

Is this all meant for me? Sounds like you're talking to many people on this thread.

Anyway, http://www.flickr.com/photos/47892903@N05/, here's work from the Free Range exhibtion last year.

Why? All I was saying is that you are more restricted with the look of the exterior of a building because of planning permission, people complaining etc. Of course I know that architects design the interiors too, but usually not with as much detail as interior designers. I enjoy interior design so would rather focus on that, no point at laughing at me about it.

No some of it was meant for Ex Death.

To be honest no one here can really give a non biased opinion on the subject. Again presidents medal work is not a accurate cross section of student work.

From what I can see of the work posted it looks to be of a much better standard than the 3rd year work that was posted in this thread.

Having shared a studio, various degree exhibitions, crit spaces, computer labs etc with interior design students I can say I don't believe their work came close to matching the architecture work. When you work in a big glass cube at all hours of the day and night you tend to know which courses have students in pulling long hours and the answer would be only architecture where my building was concerned.

I would have to argue with you about "detail". The only time I've worked with an interior designer (a very well respected one) on a private project which was a competition for a large 3 story spa/fitness/restaurant complex they came to me on the Thursday wanting a design for the following Monday. Now they didn't have any idea about what the brief should contain (except that it should include a hamam), usage numbers (sizing), use of artificial or natural light, access, planning constraints, codes, fire design, escape routes, services provision, visual connections or circulation etc but they knew what they wanted the colour scheme to be and what fittings/furniture they'd like. This was a internal fit out, it had nothing to do with the outside of the building and and I can't believe this constitutes "detail". Believe it or not the inside of a building is actually subject to more codes and planning constraints than the outside of the building and this doesn't stop you from being creative as long as you understand the rules. I'd like to point out that this designer had 20 years experience but had never designed something this big on her own except as part of a new build in which case the architect would have worked out all this stuff.

prejudiced is a big word to be dropping. this is hardly a human rights issue.

Okay, so who's opinion is more worthwhile and why?

I've seen interior design work which is great, which you haven't seen. You can't not agree with me, because you haven't seen it. You can only not believe me. I'm not being ignorant because you haven't seen this work, if you had, and still thought interior designers were crap then we could agree to disagree.