|
|
 |
Authors: Jon Cherry, Kirsten Kinzer, Elizabeth Maletz, Blair Payson, Leslie Witt School: Rice University
|
| Abstract: Natural light is almost universally valued in museum
and gallery design. The impulse to design a gallery lit with natural light was the idea
driving the design of the Menil Collection. This study of the building focused on
ascertaining the balance between natural and artificial light. In particular, the team was
interested in whether natural light was used to illuminate artwork or whether its primary
purpose was providing a pleasant overall ambience. The students were also interested in
how the lighting was perceived by visitors, and how it compared to other naturally lit
galleries.The investigative work included measuring light levels throughout
the museum, conducting an on-site survey of visitors and evaluating photographs we took of
the interior. The study discovered that although the Menil Collection is perceived as a
building flooded with natural light, in reality, artwork is lit by spotlight. Almost 40
percent of the museum’s galleries do not admit any daylight at all because the art in
those galleries is too delicate. Natural light serves an aesthetic purpose--brightening
certain parts of the museum, offering a glimpse of the sky and casting shadows. The
louvers actually don’t move at all--but reflect light to cast a flattering glow on
the artwork.
The student investigators conclude that the roof system as designed makes it difficult to rely on natural light as a source of illumination for the artwork. The roof system admits light from one direction, making it hard to display art on all four walls without additional lighting. Lighting requirements differ for each piece of art, but the louvers in the roof system are not moveable. It is easier to redirect spotlights. The impression that the museum is completely naturally lit is perhaps more important in this case than the reality. As the patrons’ comments make clear, a limited amount of nautral light goes a long way in creating a sensual museum experience. onclusions |
||
|
Background: Professor Oberholzer received a $5000 Vital Signs teaching grant for the spring 1998 term that helped support the student investigation. | |
 |
||
All contents copyright (C) 1998. Vital Signs Project. All rights reserved. Created: 11/16/98 |
|
|
The Menil
Gallery
