For so long serious discourse about the potential of these technologies has operated within the realms of visionary speculation, as thought it was a product of science fiction. Today the world is in progress of digitalization, touching our everyday lives. Bill Gates has predicted that the present decade will be recognised as ‘The Digital Decade’, its impact will have been so far-reaching that impossible any individual of human existence will remain untouched by it. Douglas Rushkoff describes digital revolution in terms of a ‘renaissance’. It more proper than a ‘revolution’, the process rethinks the ways in which we experience our realities.

Within the discipline of architecture the effect of this new phenomenon has been especially marked. For some time now many architects have been researching the potential of the digital domain. While new technology is turning media into a no-boundary zone we know as cyberspace, architectural form is also coming to question its orthodox definitions. Architecture, according to this view point of digital definition, is a question of building, and forms developed on the computer screen are just fantasies if they do not possibly realize to the real world. Eventually the true volume of work produced in this mode will bring about a new paradigm to rethink what is architecture. But the exception goes to the buildings of major significance, such as Jorn Utzon’s Sydney Opera House or Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, which has been completed that the experimental work of the avant-garde is known by the general public. This project was not only born from the digital, but it was also realized with the digital media.

Henri Bergson on Creative Evolution said, “Our perceptions give us the plan of our eventual action on things much more than that of things themselves. The outlines we find in objects simply mark what we can attain and modify in them. The lines we see traced through matter are just the paths on which we are called to move. Outlines and paths have declared themselves in the measure and proportion that consciousness has prepared for action on unorganized matter, that is to say, in the measure and proportion that intelligence has been formed.”

Regular architects have focused almost exclusively on the real world; on how their architecture could be arise above the ground. Our profession is now under threat, as developers, builders, surveyors and others have majored the space is reserved exclusively for it. A better tactic might be to follow the example of Asymptote, UN Studio and AMO, and be concentrate in expanding the field of architectural enterprise into new alternative, such as the digital realm.

One of the examples of digital architecture is hypersurface, which revealed enormous possibilities for the relations between shape and image. Any shape, logically, could be textured with any image. The use of this technology would open a new dimension of effects because there is realm of potential relations between image and form. What we called ‘hyper’ (media) and ‘surface’ (topological architecture) has not yet been considered in connection to one another. With varying degrees of inhabitability, a hypersurface is the envelopment of exchanges between human agency and problem. It’s a zone of exchange between consciousness (languages or text) and levels of the inorganic. It’s the the word we are preferring to explain any set of relationships that behave as systems of exchange.