Joined-up lighting design

Successful integration of lighting into building design calls for close working among design teams on technical and aesthetic issues. Last month six architects and four lighting designers met to discuss strategic lighting design in a forum hosted by Lutron

Ben Cronin: Often the lighting proposed when a building is being developed and what ends up in the finished project are very different things. Why does that happen so frequently?

Aaron Crawford: I worked on an apartment in London and, when the owner bought it, he contracted an interior design firm from Philadelphia to redesign the finishes and look at the lighting. The contractor started to install the lighting that had been recommended. When the owner visited to see the work, he saw holes all over the ceiling which there didn’t seem to be any reason for. We had been working on the bathrooms and he asked us to sort it out. The frustrating thing was that you’d want to put eight lights in a grid in the bathroom and you would be told that you could only put in seven because if you have eight then you have to add compact fluorescents, because you won’t meet Part L. Then we had to go through the struggle of how to incorporate compact fluorescent, which nobody actually wanted. Then a year later, someone comes in and rips it all out.

Ben Cronin: So who ripped them all out? Was it the client?

Aaron Crawford: It was the purchaser and they have every right to do that. Part of the marketing for this particular development is that the apartments can also be used as art galleries. I know of a number of people who have moved in with that intention and they want proper gallery-style lighting, but that’s obviously not what you provide as a developer in a base build. There is a huge disparity between what we are told to provide and the requirements we have to meet, and what people actually want.

Ben Cronin: Do the lighting designers know of any way that you could future-proof a scheme?

Rebecca Weir: I think people will always change [the lighting], because they always want to personalise their space. One problem is that a lot of architects are not necessarily following through with Part L. Certainly from the residential side, we get a lot of people saying to us: ‘Do we really need to comply?’ It is ridiculous because you pull in more lights to comply and that’s crazy – [energy saving] depends on how people use the space, on how you control the space.

Felix Mara: I think there are so many conflicts. There is the conflict with energy and another conflict I suppose is designing lighting that is going to be around for a long time.

Rebecca Weir: Another big issue is that the lighting designer will come in after the architect, who may have done an initial proposal with a budget for lighting. We often find that this is a fifth of what it needs to be.

Ben Cronin: So at what stage does the lighting designer need to get involved?

Mark Ridler: My personal philosophy is that we are designing light for people, so as soon as you know what the use of the space is going to be, that’s when you need to start thinking about the lighting.

Justina Tsang: I think on retail projects especially, we have to integrate lighting quite early on. They are such huge projects and the client really needs to see what’s best for their space. People know what they want to achieve but sometimes as a designer you need the help of a lighting consultant. You have this image of what you want but you can’t work out how to achieve it. The minute we get sent our brief and know what the space is like, we will get them on board.

Felix Mara: That comes back to the discussion that architects really need to involve lighting designers as early as possible. Quite often you will have an electrical consultant involved but not necessarily a lighting designer.

Mark Ridler: I think there needs to be a real dialogue between the conceptual and the technical elements of lighting design. I think that you need to engage with electrical engineering in order to ensure there is sufficient infrastructure and understanding. You need to know what the potential positions are going to be so it’s involved in the cost plan. It doesn’t need to be a hardship.

Carolyn Burke: I worked on a project last year in Switzerland and had an engineer involved. It was a big refurbishment combining offices and public spaces. The engineer did the blanket cost analysis with the quantity surveyor, while we were getting a bit more excited about how the lighting could work in the public space. In the end it turned out that the Swiss regulations on public spaces are very stringent. We had got a load of lighting designers involved but by the end of the process it was exactly as the engineers and the QS had designed it. It was so frustrating, because it had to be about the lux levels and no consideration was given to how it would feel to be in that space.

Ben Cronin: So Swiss regulations are even stricter than those in the UK?

Carolyn Burke: Yes, for public spaces. When you get into office spaces it’s slightly different.

Mark Ridler: I think you could do a planning design – cost it but not install it. You could do a number of show offices to demonstrate the different ways light can be used.

Jose Esteves de Matos: I think you need to show the possibilities. The problem is that most of the time they can’t visualise it. If you just show them images, no matter how good the drawings are, most of the time the buyer can’t see it.

Ben Cronin: So how do you show residential clients what they will be getting?

Sally Storey: A lot of it is showing them images, depending on what the interior designer wants. You get the mood boards of similar effects so you can show someone the difference between an LED and tungsten, and you can show them how you light a coffee table with a wide beam or a narrow beam. That way they can see the difference and see what they like.

Ben Cronin: How closely do you work with interior designers?

Sally Storey: For me, a lighting designer is presenting the space on behalf of the interior designer and, with any luck, adding to it. Often what an interior designer wants is not possible because of technical issues, so you have to work together to see what is possible. That’s where a lighting designer can have fun and add more to the brief.

Ben Cronin: Have you ever had an interior designer compromise their vision of a space or is it always the other way round, and you have to compromise the lighting?

Sally Storey: I think when you are brought in on a project early it determines quite a lot. If I come in early, then the concept is decided on together. That means I’m involved in the beginning and then I’m not involved at the next stage because we know what we’re doing.

Felix Mara: What would you recommend when a designer or architect can’t involve a lighting designer at a strategic level?

Sally Storey: On occasion I have done brainstorming days. I have even been commissioned by engineers to offer ideas and sometimes I have been involved later on when budgets magically appear which weren’t there at the beginning. I think if there isn’t someone there to consider the lighting, I don’t know where those ideas come from. It’s quite hard for an architect or an engineer to consider, unless they are passionate about lighting.

Ben Cronin: At our last forum, it was said by someone that architects don’t really understand daylighting anymore. Do you think that’s fair?

Mark Ridler: I think there is a fear that daylighting is a scientific and mathematical exercise, something that’s technically difficult.

We have gone through a period of architecture that has been very sculptural with the art of architecture being connected inside and out, and I do think that initially it should be an intuitive process. I don’t see very many projects where daylight is manipulated aesthetically, which surprises me.

Aaron Crawford: I think the simplicity of the design in architecture has been lost; everyone wants to add stuff, to add gadgets, to add another layer.

Ben Cronin: When a control system is added and users haven’t been educated in how to use it, there is every chance that they will take the system out. How do you make sure that people use the lighting in the correct way?

Rebecca Weir: I think it’s becoming easier with the improvements in technology. For example, most people have a smart phone these days or some form of portable device, so they are used to using technology regularly. If the end-user can have more local control, then it’s easier to future-proof. It’s when people have to get consultants in every time they want to alter the system that they will decide to just rip out the system and put in standard dimmers.

Morag Morrison: But isn’t it about educating the client about the importance of lighting the building and how that will affect their productivity and how much they will love the building? We have to get them to acknowledge the importance of good lighting design and we have to train them to use the systems. We have installed control systems in local authority buildings and the staff who actually operate the systems are often baffled. It’s not always technology-savvy people in charge of the system.

Mark Ridler: I think what’s interesting is that if people feel they have control over the lighting, they will be much happier in that space. If they feel they can control the lighting, they will be content and probably won’t give it another thought.

Martin Preston: I agree. If you don’t give people choice they complain but if you do give them choice they will probably just stick with what you wanted in the beginning. You’ve got to have a building that you say is controlled automatically, incorporates daylight and motion sensors and so on. But it also has to give individual control. It’s vitally important to give people options.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.