klara King22/4/04 1:02
Michael Bartlett writes
I'm just about to rennovate my 8m (length) x 2.7m (width) little
garden. Just wanted to ask more of a design question with regards to
paving stone size. I'm battling to decide between using 300mm X 300mm
or 600mm X 600mm paving tiles and was wondering what aesthetic effect
either would have. I'm unsure as to wether the 600x600 (which would
only essentially be 4 tiles across) would make the garden look wider
because of the wider stones or wether it will look smaller because of
fewer stones.
Not sure about the effect of size - but for tiles in kitchens, etc. they
suggest laying the tiles at a 45-degree angle to the wall to make the
floor space look larger, so that might just work for paving as well.
You could try it all out with newspaper squares...
That's a good idea and so is laying tiles 'brick built'. But as a general
rule, I'd say it depends on what effect the op wants. If you want the
garden to look larger, go for the bigger slabs. It's a bit like wall
sconces - people with low ceilings and small rooms tend to buy tiny ones
which make the room look smaller by emphasising it. Longer narrow ones give
an illusion of height and space. Too much 'smallness' in artefacts
emphasises the smallness of a room or garden. But if what is wanted is a
cosy, cottagey courtyard effect, little paving stones would be best.
--
Sacha
(remove the weeds to email me)