Personally, I prefer structures with a good proportion of solidity and transparency. I do not like buildings which are totally transparent and where everything is in the open. This is surely a very personal emotion, however, structures with a well-adjusted proportion of solidity and transparency and changes in material is observed where required whereas finished with a single material in majority allure me more.
We produce the cross-sections and principle details of the members on paper where we use steel in our projects since steel requires sophistication and many details. Details are unfortunately something no one cares in our country but if you do not use steel with sophisticated details, the structure becomes rude like a marketplace. And this is a shame for the material and the structure. In my opinion, the architect shall determine the principles of steel.
One more issue is that, there is no meaning in it even if the structure is constructed with steel unless we perceive that the structure is steel. For instance, a building is constructed and enclosed, I do not perceive it as steel when observed from the outside. This has no meaning at all. Steel is covered with plaster for fire protection or with an-other material for solidity, then steel has no meaning in any sense. We have an understanding in our office: structure is the main element of construction, its anatomy, which has to stay in the open. If it is enclosed, then there is no meaning in constructing in steel.