Observation - The Human Perspective

Yesterday was the first day of the sketching course that I am taking and the Professor, Hugh Thompson, said something that I had been thinking about for a while. We were discussing sketching building in some sort of landscape and two people came up; Bonington and Railton, both of who are accomplished Draughtsmen and artists.

While looking at some of their work, Hugh mentioned the preference for lowering the horizon to bring the view point more of a human scale. It is that which started me thinking. When creating a perspective, be it a sketch or a finished drawing, from where should it be taken? I understand the decision to create sketches from a human position, it makes sense. You draw what you see before you. It makes the drawing more believable to the human eye. This seems to hold true to what I have observed in previous drawings. Viewing the building so that there is some relationship between what is being viewed and what the viewer can relate to, the objects they see on a daily basis. It lends familiarity to the subject being drawn, and as a result, the drawer can be less accurate or less realistic in the actual representation. The drawing can be simpler if the viewer is presented with spacial relationships they already unsterstand.

Of course that doesn't mean that you shouldn't add the detail or make it less realistic. It just means that when creating a drawing, use how people understand space and buildings to your advantage.

Observation - The Tools/Media

Something that I have been thinking about recently has been the actual medium that I am using and will be using in the future. Most of this is due to the fact that I will be doing quite a bit of drawing/rendering in the coming months and I am comfortable with certain set of tools. They are what I know, what I understand and what I have some competence with. This has lead me to wondering about the different groups of tools.


The first grouping is the pencil and ink group. When I say ink, I include pens and computer plotting. They achieve the same thing, in the same manner. The only difference is that a computer is controlling one of them. These seem the core of architectural drawing. They are what people learn first and what is produced most often in firms. I suppose that is due to the speed of which drawings can be completed. They are the most efficient but they are also the simplest. That is not to demean them, just a analysis of their characteristic. The pencil and ink create Line drawings, most often. They are simple. Line after line, defining space, conveying the base information for a set of drawings. The construction set; meant to convey information in a simple manner, straightforward and concise.

As an extension of this, the pencil and ink can be used to render the drawings. Adding texture and shadows. Giving a bit more meaning and information to the drawings. They create a character for the building that is being drawn. Give it a bit more depth, literally and figuratively. These drawings are usually black and white, the medium I seem to be using the most often.

The next grouping is the watercolour, markers, painted. In essence, it is the addition of colour to the previous group. They become more literal. Convey more information again. The viewer no longer needs to imagine what colour fills the room. It is laid out in front of them. But even these can be ambiguous in some regards. It isn't a photograph, it is still and interpretation of what may be.

The final group that I have identified is that of the photorealistic drawings. This mainly consists of the computer rendering. Normally, these drawings don't leave much for the viewer to invent in their imagination. It is exactly as the building will be. Material, colours, and scale.

All of these still leave a lot of the image up to the artist creating them, but the further along the groupings go, the less is left to the imagination of the viewer. Something can be said for allowing the that person to fill in what ever they see fit. It can allow for some ambiguity in the design, which can be useful. The tools can determine what type of drawing is being created, and vice versa. It comes down to the intent of the drawing to figure out which of them fits best.

The Bed - In Progress 1

This is a scan of the drawing I am currently working on. Looking back at 3x3x3, it was said that the bed was the most successful element of that drawing. This new drawing is building on that success. Staring with the same bed, let the drawing generate the design. No orthographics, just rendering. It is a reversal of the standard way that architects work. This drawing is the work in progress. I thought documenting how the design grows and develops would be a useful exercise.

There are so many things happening in the folds of the fabric. The way the lights hits the fabric creates the deep shadows and causes the gradients to spread outward across the bed. From this, other ideas have begun to develop about the design of the rest of the room. The chaos of the bed makes me want to have a more regular pattern to the floor. Something more linear; Wooden floor boards, crossing under the bed horizontally. They will also need to be darker than the sheets. The sheets are very faint while being surrounded by white, but with something darker butting up against it, they will be easily distinguishable.

Soundtrack - Sounds of Thesis

Below are the songs that I have chosen for the soundtrack for my thesis. Some of them are easy to identify as related, and others are a bit more difficult:

Working Full-Time - The Constantines
Here I Dreamt I was an Architect - The Decemberists
My Mind is Ramblin' - The Black Keys
Draw Us Lines - The Constantines
Photocopier - Fujiya & Miyagi
Making Plans for Nigel - Nouvelle Vague
Lines in the Suit - Spoon
A Strange Arrangement of Colour - I Am Kloot
We Will Become Silhouettes - Postal Service
Same Old Thing - Black Keys

I would be open to suggestions for other songs or if anyone just wants to comment on what is already here.

Found - Two Sides of Design

I found this t-shirt at Threadless.com and wanted to share it. It isn't something that will go into my thesis but I found it interesting non the less. I had never thought of drafting tools in this way before.

Observations - The Defining of Space in Drawing

I made an observation yesterday in my daybook, while I was working on the next drawing. There is a definite difference in the creation of space (on paper) between Line drawings and Rendering. The lines of an orthographic drawing define the space, interior and exterior, with a single stroke. The line divides one area of the page from another, just as a wall would do in the built world. It is a straightforward way to create the spaces that the designer is looking for.

With a rendering, however, it is more complicated. You can't create that boundary in the same way. Rendering is the illustration of how light interacts with the different components in a design. (ie. walls, windows, furniture, etc). Instead of giving a bounding line, rendering needs to fill the space with light and shadows to give it definition.

Daybook - Excerpts from 3x3x3

The Perspective:

"I wonder, and have for some time now, where is the best place to take a perspective from? Eye height seems to make the most sense, but it doesn't always show the building as I would like it to. Maybe more from above...

...I close my eyes and try and picture the perspective in my mind.

I just went and scanned through some collections of architectural drawings in the library. All were different in regards to the viewing angle, but this does lead me to an answer of sorts: My perspective has to demonstrate something that the other drawings don't. In this project, I am trying to gain additional "dwelling" space. Therefore, my perspective should show that.

A lower angle, looking through the extended exterior space into the interior.

Also, picking a scene/scenery. It needs to have a location, so it doesn't sit all by itself in a blank field."

"I think I have figured out what the perspective is going to look like. It seems that setting up the fore, middle and back-ground gives the drawing depth and character.

The perspective is now roughed out in pencil. It looks okay, but there is something slightly off about it. I think the perspective of the background might be a bit wrong. I can't quite seem to figure it out."

Abstract - Attempt 2

I was unsatisfied by my last effort so I just went looking at some other help and resources.

I found this on the blog I just want to take pictures, linked below.
http://ijustwanttotakepictures.blogspot.com/2009/03/formulating-abstract-some-advice.html

Questions to help formulate an abstract:

• What am I doing?
• Why am I doing it?
• How am I doing it?
• What do I hope to find?
• What will the significance be?

What am I doing?

I am drawing architecture.

Why am I doing it?

I am looking for some connection between what and how we draw and the design. I am also looking to have a better understanding of what is the best way to go about drawing a project. In addition to these I want to be better at all aspects of architectural drawing. So, I guess I am looking to answer some of the questions I have in this regard to make me a better architect. I feel that, depending on the circumstances, an architect should be able to decide on what type of drawing would be best suited and how to best accomplish it. In some firms there was something missing in the drawings that were issued. An unexplainable lack of certain elements. Be it detail, information, clarity or beauty. All which are elements that are essential to an architects drawings, in my opinion. The drawings are the product that architects actually create, not buildings. They are made by the contractors and construction workers.

How am I doing it?

Through various drawing exercises, I am exploring the different aspects of architectural drawings. By drawing different building types, with different media, for a variety of purposes.

What do I hope to find?

I hope to find some connection between what we do and how we do it. I am also looking to gain enough experience to have some sort of guidelines for projects in the future. If a project comes up at an office, I have some experience on which to base decisions on how to best represent the project.

What will the significance be?

This is a question I have been asked for a while. Significance for whom? The significance for me is the exploration of something I feel strongly about. Becoming better at something architects are required to do every day, as explained in the preceding paragraphs. The significance for Architecture as a profession? I really don't know.


I think all of these can be expanded on and developed, but I think it is a good start for my abstract.

Abstract - Attempt 1

With people constantly asking "What is your thesis about?" it becomes habit to say the same thing over and over even if your thesis has changed since you wrote it down last. I thought I would take a new attempt at writing what will become the abstract for my thesis. I am going to start a bit slow and start with a few sentences that continually come forth when I am explaining what I am doing:

This thesis is an investigation into the relationship between Architecture and the Drawings that Architects produce. Architects trade in images, they are the language with which we communicate. An understanding of that language is essential to the architectural process. Through a series of drawings, this thesis will gain a better understanding of architecture and the relationship that exists between the two.

I guess without knowing what the relationship is it is hard to write about. But that is what the thesis is all about.

25 Hour Drawing - 3x3x3

Exercise Synopsis: for a "Dwelling" measuring 3m x 3m x 3m, complete enough drawings to sufficiently describe the building. Two restrictions: only 1 sheet of paper, and I must draw for 25 hours total. If the drawings are "finished", I must keep drawing up to the 25 hr mark.


This is the result. An ink orthographic with pencil renders. The design was up to me and was completed quickly. That was not what the exercise was about. This is the first in a series. There will eventually be 3 total. All will be dwellings of some type, but they increase in scale: 8 x 8 x 8 and 24 x 24 x 24.

I think the increasing scale done on the same size sheet of paper is an interesting investigation into the effects that the drawing surface (or the constraints there of) will have on the drawing.

Because of the scale of this people, being 1:20, a fair amount of detail needed to be added so that the drawings didn't look empty. With it being a dwelling, I thought that some illustration of inhabitation should be added. I started with the bed; ruffled sheets, duvet tossed aside. These things added the feeling that someone was/could actually live in this space. This, to me, is the most successful part of the drawing. As I continued on, I made mistakes, fixed them, made new ones, etc. It was a very interesting process, being forced to continue drawing even if I thought it was done. I thought that I either needed another day of drawing, or 4 hours less.

With the bed being the most successful portion, a new sub-project has arisen. On a new sheet of paper, start with the same bed. Draw the way the light plays across the bedding, and begin to spread outward, letting the drawing (the light and shadow) determine the room. It was almost working backwards. Letting the drawings generate the design. It should be and interesting project.

Throughout the drawing process I am keeping a journal of the thoughts, revelations and questions that occur to me as I work my way through each drawing. I may be posting some of these pages with the drawings in the future.