Thanks! Most of those links are related to Japanese roofs, and I do have actual plans (even if they require a great deal of math to translate from the Japanese unit-systems to imperial measurements) for Japanese, and could probably parse the Korean architectural sketches I've got... but Chinese, Korean, and Japanese all work on a system of elaborate brackets. Like, incredibly complex and gravity-defying brackets, given the weights of the roofs and the overhangs being anywhere from five to twenty feet, especially as you get into official or sacred building-spaces -- but the overhang on this image appears to be less than the average Chinese/Korean/Japanese overhang, plus it's supported by angle-brackets into the building's side, instead of being built upwards on brackets supported by the ceiling-beams.
At the same time, C/K/J roofs aren't curved in every aspect, but are generally flat planes that curve at the edges and corners. When they do overlap, it's defined between them, in a way that doesn't look the same as the Laotian roofline (in the picture). It's rather uncommon to see them layered in the way of Laotian and Thai roofs. Well, I say "uncommon" but I suppose I should say "if such roofs exist, they're rated as worth barely a footnote in most [english-language] architectural texts."
Obviously, the only solution is to GO THERE MYSELF!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 15 Dec 2010 06:04 am (UTC)At the same time, C/K/J roofs aren't curved in every aspect, but are generally flat planes that curve at the edges and corners. When they do overlap, it's defined between them, in a way that doesn't look the same as the Laotian roofline (in the picture). It's rather uncommon to see them layered in the way of Laotian and Thai roofs. Well, I say "uncommon" but I suppose I should say "if such roofs exist, they're rated as worth barely a footnote in most [english-language] architectural texts."
Obviously, the only solution is to GO THERE MYSELF!