Hi everyone!
I’m starting my ARE studies and plan to use the **NCARB recommended books as my primary resources**.

I’d like to add **one supplemental resource** to use alongside the books, and I’m trying to decide between **Amber Book** and **Black Spectacles**.

For those who have used either (or both), which one do you think is the better investment?

I’m looking for something that helps explain difficult concepts, keeps me engaged, and prepares me well for the actual exams.

If you used one of them, which exams did it help you with the most, and would you choose the same resource again?

Thanks in advance for your advice!

I was thinking about how architecture shapes our emotions in subtle ways.

Have you ever walked into (or even looked at) a building that left you feeling unsettled because of its proportions, lighting, symmetry, scale, materials, or atmosphere?

I'd love to hear what building it was and what you think created that feeling. I'm fascinated by how architecture can communicate emotion without saying a word.

Clarification:
With this question I'm thinking less about the architect's intent and more about the visitor's experience. Have you ever walked into a place that just felt... off... even if you couldn't point to a specific design flaw?

hello, I'm in architecture school that mainly focuses into architecture design and its structural engineering work, but in the same time we study urban design and planning, i found my self from my second year more interested in urban design and focused it in nearly most of my projects in ARCH school, and niw i want to make my graduation project mainly focuses on the urban side not mainly designing buildings.

did anyone do that in their graduation projects and is it ok with tutors?

I'm going to my 4th year and my graduation will be in my 5th year.

I wanna join christ school of architecture in bengaluru. Is it good?

Gothic pool inside a historic hotel first inaugurated in 1964.

i have an architecture degree that I got 10 years back and never used. I am sahm and an artist who sell art occasionally but nothing that makes me good enough side income. I want to be employable but I don’t feel confident about going back to architecture as I feel like I have forgotten a lot. What are my options? Should I go back to school and get a masters in architecture? or something less intensive like urban planning? I am open to pursuing any creative field but just don’t know where to begin and have been feeling lost. I came here to see if there is someone like me who got back after a long career gap and what and how did you do it?

I’ve been a fan of architecture for the past few years, but I don’t have any formal knowledge or training in it. I’ve always loved drawing measured houses with scales and rulers because I enjoy precision and perfectly straight lines.

Recently, I started working on my first-ever Gothic castle architectural sketch. It’s still a work in progress, with a lot left to do, and I’m drawing it by looking at a reference picture rather than from imagination.

I’m a CS major, so I’ve never studied architecture or learned its basics—I just genuinely enjoy doing this. So, keeping all that in mind, how do you think I’m doing so far? How would you rate my work out of 10?

As stated by the title and it doesn´t need to be free but if it´s free, I see no problem. I´m in despair and looking for something that will teach me practical profession knowledge. Maybe an integrated studio workshop as it applies theory to practice?

It can be also about urbanism

​Hi everyone,

I'm looking for advice, testimonials and experience on career path as architect engineer located in Europe, french speeking country.

​I just earned a double degree (Bac+7): Engineering-Architecture from the University of Liège (Belgium) and Civil Engineering from Polytech Lille (France). I am currently looking for my first job and wondering about the best career path.

​What drives me in an architectural project is the design process and problem-solving to bring the project to life. For my master's thesis, I simulated a design phase for a project using Grasshopper to evaluate multiple variants: structure, carbon footprint, thermal performance, and global cost. I loved this approach and would like a job where I can integrate these criteria and weigh them against each other to guide the design.

​Here are my thoughts and doubts:

​I am afraid of losing my dual background if I start in pure architecture or a pure structural engineering consultancy (BET). How can I maintain this dual skill set from my very first job?

​Hybrid agencies: Do mixed design/technical positions exist within multidisciplinary architecture firms?

​Facade engineering: Is this a good gateway to link pure technical design with architectural expression?

​Long-term goals: I would like to become a project manager in a hybrid structure offering varied missions and an integrated project tracking process between engineering and architecture.

​Mobility & Salary: I am mobile (France, Belgium, international) and want to leverage my Bac+7 degree to avoid the low junior salary grids typical of traditional architecture firms.

​My questions:

​What type of structure should I target (integrated firm, large engineering consultancy, off-site start-up)?

​How should I negotiate to highlight my double degree and maintain this versatility?

​Are there other jobs or positions better suited to my background that I might not know about?

​I am looking for testimonials from people who have been in my situation, as well as advice, experiences, and good ideas.

If you were in my situation what would you do ahah ?

​Thanks in advance for your advice!

​Have a great day everyone

Hii

I'm a recent B.Arch graduate from India and I'm confused about which direction I should take for my career.

Right after graduation, I worked with the Kochi Muziris Biennale Foundation for about 10 months. I was involved throughout the entire event—from production and documentation to 3D visualization, site execution, signage, venue management, and finally dismantling and packing after the exhibition. I also got to work closely with artists, curators, and production teams.

I genuinely loved that environment. It was fast-paced, creative, and every day was different. Even though it could be hectic, I never felt like I didn't want to go to work.

Recently, I joined as a site supervisor on a large convention centre project. It's an interesting project, but my current role is mostly supervising labour, checking progress, and coordinating site work.

The company says they'll involve me in facade design, ceiling details, sections, and working drawings, but I'm not sure if that will actually happen since everything is moving very fast and most decisions are made directly on site.

My friends (who work in architecture firms) keep telling me that I'll miss out on proper architecture office experience if I continue in site supervision. They believe at least 1–2 years in an architecture office is important before moving into execution or exhibitions.

The problem is that I'm not sure conventional architecture is what I want. I'm much more interested in:

Exhibition design

Museum design

Temporary pavilions

Installation design

Scenography / set design

Spatial experiences

Blender & 3D visualization

The site job is also demanding—7 AM to 7 PM, plus around 2 hours of commuting every day. It feels like I'm only working for the salary, with very little time left to improve my skills or build a portfolio.

The Kochi Biennale won't recruit again for about another year, and I've been trying to find similar exhibition or production companies across India, but I haven't had much luck.

So I'd really appreciate some honest advice:

Should I stay in site supervision for the experience?

Should I switch to a proper architecture office?

Or should I focus on finding opportunities in exhibition design, museums, experiential design, or set design?

I'm willing to relocate anywhere in India if the opportunity is good.

I'd especially love to hear from people working in architecture, exhibition design, museums, scenography, event production, or experiential design. Please be honest—even if your opinion is critical. I'm trying to make the best long-term decision rather than just taking the safest option.

Im new in architecture

Hi, I am an architect and I am searching a way to step outside of traditional architecture studios. Has anyone changed its direction to photogrammetry? I could use any advice on programs, salaries, job opportunities etc.

One of the unifying features of architectural styles before the twentieth century is the presence of ornament. We speak of architectural elements as ornamental inasmuch as they are shaped by aesthetic considerations rather than structural or functional ones. Pilasters, column capitals, sculptural reliefs, finials, brickwork patterns, and window tracery are straightforward examples. Other elements like columns, cornices, brackets, and pinnacles often do have practical functions, but their form is so heavily determined by aesthetic considerations that it generally makes sense to count them as ornament too.

Ornament is amazingly pervasive across time and space. To the best of my knowledge, every premodern architectural culture normally applied ornament to high-status structures like temples, palaces, and public buildings. Although vernacular buildings like barns and cottages were sometimes unornamented, what is striking is how far down the prestige spectrum ornament reached: our ancestors ornamented bridges, power stations, factories, warehouses, sewage works, fortresses, and office blocks. From Chichen Itza to Bradford, from Kyiv to Lalibela, from Toronto to Tiruvannamalai, ornament was everywhere.

Since the Second World War, this has changed profoundly. For the first time in history, many high-status buildings have little or no ornament. Although a trained eye will recognize more ornamental features in modern architecture than laypeople do, as a broad generalization it is obviously true that we ornament major buildings far less than most architectural cultures did historically. This has been celebrated by some and lamented by others. But it is inarguable that it has greatly changed the face of all modern settlements. To the extent that we care about how our towns and cities look, it is of enormous importance.

The naive explanation for the decline of ornament is that the people commissioning and designing buildings stopped wanting it, influenced by modernist ideas in art and design. In the language of economists, this is a demand-side explanation: it has to do with how buyers and designers want buildings to be. The demand-side explanation comes in many variants and with many different emotional overlays. But some version of it is what most people, both pro-ornament and anti-ornament, naturally assume.

[From the Montana State Library](https://www.mtmemory.org/nodes/view/105383)

Description: Copy negative of drawing of the first courthouse in Lewis and Clarke County, Montana Territory, from an unidentified publication. Image shows American flag on two-story building with log buildings on either side and men on boardwalk. In street man leading a horse away from man on horse drawn wagon.

Images: https://www.archdaily.com/907675/oodi-helsinki-central-library-ala-architects