Basically, I want examples that show that the mix between technology and the forest is awesome.
This is one image example that I found and like, for starters:
I appreciate any help and discussion.
Jay C. White Cloud wrote:can "technology and the forest is awesome," be explained? I am propbably missing the meaning here...
When people talk about, "living in a house in the forest," the connotation is usually of a simple shack or log cabin. Something with basic needs. Maybe basic powering: a couple solar panels for the fridge and lights. But nothing else.
I'm curious how many examples of entirely modern forest houses people have seen. Houses that lack nothing a common modern house would have, at least in function and ease of use. Like temperature control, internet, computers, toilets, and so on. It's pretty general, I know.
Assaf Koss wrote:I'm curious how many examples of entirely modern forest houses people have seen. Houses that lack nothing a common modern house would have, at least in function and ease of use. Like temperature control, internet, computers, toilets, and so on. It's pretty general, I know.
That clarification did help...thanks.
For the most part, I would say that at least 80%, or more, of the "Forest Houses" I have seen or helped build have all had the amenities you are referencing (i.e. temperature control, internet, computers, toilets, and so on..) They are not just simple "shack or log cabin," though these too can possess all the same amenities if the infrastructure is present.
Building a home, modern or natural, in a forest, desert, swamp, or other rural location has little to do with whether these amenities are present for the most part. The primary contributing factor to these amenities is first, personal choices and second, whether the public infrastructure is there to support the more technology based elements.
I would say that the architecture in the photo you shard has a rather large "carbon footprint" and would not be considered either a "natural home" nor a sustainable format of architecture. It is chic contemporary, yet lacks balance with its surrounding environment, as so many "modern homes" seem to. I would further suggest, that such structures will not endure as long as more traditional and natural built homes can, and almost always cost much more to build and operate.
I hope that clarified things a bit. Please let me know if I can expand on any points thus made.
Mike Feddersen wrote:Assaf, this may actually go the opposite route, technology added to primitive home styles in a natural setting. This video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GbM2In5Hfx4 The house at 4:08 minutes is just awesome, check out the green roof.
Thanks Mike. This is what I'm looking for! What an extensive video. It's obvious that the houses are well setup with modern commodities.
I'd still appreciate more examples, either old designs modernized, or new modern houses that sit well in the forest, showing that anyone can live comfortably in there, without feeling like a jungleman.