Close to your typology
Before a before/after proves anything about craft, it has to prove it belongs to your kind of building.
Plenty of practices click through to a case study, look for a minute, and never write back. It isn't a craft problem — the render is good, the light is right, the massing reads. It's a recognition problem. Two minutes in, nobody has seen anything that looks like their building.
A single-family renovation, a mixed-use podium and a civic campus don't share a review process, a set of concerns, or a jury. A before/after built for one doesn't transfer its evidence to another just because the mechanic — early scheme, markup, approved final — is the same. Before a reader can judge whether a pair is honest, well-lit, or carefully staged, they have to first believe it's talking about a building like theirs. That belief is the precondition. Everything else is craft, and craft only gets evaluated once the precondition is met.
Not one typology — several
A retail drive-thru and a civic campus don't get reviewed the same way, or by the same people. Both are real Praxis work.
For a multi-tenant commercial scheme
Real review markup against the approved final, same site and camera — the massing is the only thing that moved. This is the closest pair we have for a multi-tenant commercial or retail typology. If yours is different, it isn't this one.
The full review story — what moved, round by round, and why — is in the Bronte Commercial Centre case study.
We won't call a mismatched pair "close to your typology" — that's the fastest way to lose the one thing this whole idea depends on. But we've carried enough different building types through review that most inboxes get something recognizable, not a generic one. Reply with what you're working on — single-family, multi-family, retail, institutional, hospitality — and we'll send the pair that's actually yours, or tell you honestly if we don't have one yet.
