Another Architecture website with images of architects sketching
I think my current favorite architecture website cliche is the image of an architect “working”: pencil in handle, sketches everywhere. (for a good laugh, click on this Google Image Search of “Architect Working”). We do love promoting this idyllic and limited view of what we do. I really wish we could move beyond that.
I lament that my drawing ability has atrophied. Perhaps this will change in the future, but I can say my skills peaked when I was eighteen and a senior in high school. I am out of practice and know my younger self could destroy me in a competition (same goes for my twenty-one year old self and bass playing, but that’s a different story). Fortunately I can still beat both of them not in technical skill but in creativity and functional skill. I know how to think better in both those mediums now. I can explore better now.
I lament that my drawing ability has atrophied not because I think it makes me less of an architect but because I have only so much time to focus on hobbies. And I’ve chosen other hobbies that are more important to me. Drawing is a hobby, not a fundamental architectural skill. Yet we do everything we can to put our favorite hobby at the center of our profession’s image and value.
Does that burn? Can you deny it? You will. And I look forward to reading those comments. And I REALLY want a guest post explaining why it is central to our value. 
Professions and tools evolve over time. Do you? For another example of an icon of a bygone era becoming a hobby, read this post about bows, arrows, and machine guns. Subscribe to my blog to read more about the tricky world of being an Architect in the 21st century: Shoegnome on Facebook, Twitter, and the RSS feed.
Steve Nickel
Hello again Jared BIM guy…(Being In Minnesota, not)
I hope this story doesn’t bore you. We got a design/build job in 2008 for a couple who wanted a translation of Greene & Greene (early 20th century Pasadena, CA architects) up here in the Rockies. We later learned we somehow beat out their daughter, an architect and ArchiCAD user. But, she had warned them that we still draw the “old-fashioned” way. They agreed, but went with us anyway. Still, that was our signal to move to our ArchiCAD software, and get with the 21st century.
Now Amy (wife) is our website designer. She laments the loss of hand-drawn images, and encourages
us to retain some of our “architecty” drawings on our website.
Beyond this, (a very personal observation), in the VERY early stages of concept design, some clients like
the “loose” trace paper drawings of Floor Plans and/or Elevations. It seems to give them reassurance that changes (or a complete redesign) is still on the table.
But as usual, only one firm’s opinion…thanks for your work.
Steve and Betty Nickel in Colorado
Jared Banks
Steve, I think those are great comments. One of the powers of hand drawn stuff is the comfort it gives to clients. And that’s not to be flippantly disregarded. However I do cringe whenever things are labeled “architecty”, be it styles of media, glasses, clothing, etc. Mostly because it tends to be nostalgic.
Are things that are labeled “architecty” holding us back? I don’t know. Can computer images and other non-traditional media convey that same sense of closeness and personality that is so readily apparent in things done by hand. How can we show the artist’s hand in ArchiCAD or Revit? Or should we? Seems like there are a few battles here and I honestly don’t know which I think really needs to be solved:
1) Should the artist’s hand be visible in digital works?
2) Should architects be stressing the visibility of their presentation style?
3) Is that view of architect as print media artist overshadowing what should really be presented: the qualities of our actual (to be built) designs?
I think the answer to all of that is yes. But that leads to some paradoxes…
Jared Banks
Oh and these kind of stories never bore me! I love them.
Patrick May
about that google image search… is drafting while wearing a hard hat a key part of passing the ARE? I may still take the test some day, and would like to know ahead of time if investing in new head wear is essential.
Jared Banks
I believe it’s called a Thinking Cap. And yes, it’s required.
James
Then what of the sketch render (like in ArchiCAD) or software maybe like sketchup that gives a sketchy feel to a design. Is this bad? After reading the architosh article on Steve Bell, and his convincing and realistic renders of a sketch design. It’s interesting the way designers communicate a design or a vision can make the target audience feel, be it convincing or nostalgic or trust or comfort etc.
Jared Banks
I haven’t read that article, but I’ll have to check it out. I like the sketch renderer and similar options in other programs. I’m actually about to write more about that soon. What I like about those solutions is that they are controlling the resolution of the design for the benefit of the viewer. The sketch render doesn’t delete information, it just masks and hides it. I think that’s very different from another tool which does have that intelligence to begin with. So in short, I think it’s good. But more on that soon. Probably.
David
Jared, not sure I have time to answer your challenge in long form, but let me give it a quick try. The more generic the tool, the more conceptual possibilities are open and the fewer decisions need to be made to use the tool resulting in faster iterations. A pencil or pen (or brush or whatever) is the generic tool of choice for most Architects. Even in Rhino or SketchUp parameters need to be input to draw even the simplest line or volume while with a pencil the input is the ingrained, intuitive “move hand.” ArchiCAD can be even more intimidating in this respect, as each tool has more parameters and even the naming (slab, wall, door) tends to prompt decisions that may not be ready to be made. I think this also holds true when developing elevations or more detailed drawings; windows as groups of lines are more generic and open to conceptual possibilities than an object with parameters for shim spacing and materials.
Jared Banks
As our favorite film professor says…yes, but.
We’ll have to find time to chat about this more in the coming weeks because your comment has me thinking about a lot of things that have been on my mind. But here’s what I’m thinking at the moment: what is the right form of generic? Is distilling a window down to a few simple lines better than distilling it down to a few simple parameters (say proportion, density, and color). I don’t disagree that the simplicity of the pencil is a huge strength, but what if we’ve been doing it wrong this whole time? What if we should be caring about different simple things? Obviously this is a bit of a specious question, but maybe not. Maybe we can unlock greater value and creativity if we shift our abstractions to something else. I don’t know. But we’ll talk about it soon.
Or maybe my issue is just one of identity. Should we be so closely linked to a tool, any tool. Does that misrepresent us? Make clients not expect certain things from us? Or from others in our profession who fuck things up on the job?
Nathan
Hmmm.. I guess I am not aligned with you on this one. If I had to sum up my philosophical beliefs pertaining to the discipline of Architecture, I’d say, “You have to think before you draw, and thinking requires sketching.”
I wrote two very brief articles why, here:
– http://www.wearetaylor.com/talkwellness/posts/learning-to-sketch-its-critical-to-being-an-architect
– http://www.wearetaylor.com/talkwellness/posts/design-is-a-process
Not pimping my site, but I am just fundamentally at odds with those who don’t sketch. I have found, without ANY exception, that when it comes time to construct a project, if the details haven’t been sketched out first, the project will have an incredibly difficult delivery through construction. I am fascinated, perplexed, and morbidly frustrated by digerati who prefer a cool LED screen verses the warm feel of pen and paper. I LOVE SketchUp, I appreciate REVIT, I mastered AutoCAD and Microstation before that, but drawing and thinking are two different things. Sketching IS thinking.
Jared Banks
I disbelieve. First, here’s your post with some words swapped out. How is my version of your article fundamentally different from yours? It’s not.
There are folks in this office who can sketch like DaVinci, and there are folks in this office who turn first to the mouse instead of the pen. It is to you traditionalists that I am targeting this email. Using a pencil and pen or whatever is an amazing and useful skill, but it doesn’t make you a better Architect. If you are serious about this business and look at it as a career and not a job, I encourage you to start modeling with BIM. You can model modern cityscapes with BIM, or you can detail out the fastening sequence of a casework anchor. It doesn’t really matter what you model, as long as you apply critical thinking to your digital tool. Model something!
I challenge all of you to model one detail by hand this week. Do not copy a detail you already have on trace. Come up with something from your mind’s eye. Make a connection between your hand and your creative lobe. Create a model of what this building would look like if it was rounded instead of square. Model the inner workings of a mortise lock, create a decorative metal & glass railing system attached to the edge of a steel stair stringer. Model something! Don’t worry about it being good, there is no Bad! Just model something! It will help you think, it will help you create, it will help you explore alternate ideas, and it will help you solve problems on your projects, I guarantee it!
Now read your post again but change sketching/modeling for “build with your hands.” There are many types of architects and many ways of thinking.
So first I want a convincing argument as to why doing all the above in a computer is inferior to doing it all by hand. And once you give me that answer I also want to know what this means. If architects for some reason HAVE to use one particular tool over another why is that? Is that the fault/magic of the tool or the fault of architects? Because to me, if we are really in the situation where architects are so connected to one tool, then we are to blame. That is a dangerous position.
Furthermore, to say skethcing IS thinking just doesn’t cut it with me. Have you never figured out a design problem while going for a walk, while driving, while talking about the detail, while in the bathroom, while sleeping, while eating, while building a physical model, while detailing something in CAD or BIM…of course you have. You are most comfortable thinking with a pen or pencil in your hand. This is a cultural artifact not something special or magical.
This issue of how architects design isn’t about you or me, but about something bigger. About our relevance in the world. I’m not saying architects shouldn’t sketch, or that there isn’t value to sketching, but our over emphasis on such a limited set of design methods is beneath us as a profession.
One last question, if you’re right and there are no good designers who don’t sketch, how do we fix that? Because what is better? Getting all architects to sketch or finding a greater diversity in creativity and thinking?
Oh sorry, one more thing. Clearly I am very passionate about this misconception within our profession. How is saying “you have to think before you draw, and thinking requires sketching” any different from making a wild claim like “all music must be composed on the piano because to think about music requires a piano”. I know that might sound like a wild jump, but is it? Clearly my statement is wrong. But how are the two not the same?
Brian P.
I read this post a few days ago, and have been contemplating what my response should be, if any. Hopefully this will come across as well as it is in my head.
First off, if anyone is stating that a certain technology (anywhere from hand tools to virtual reality) is the only way to think through an idea, they are wrong. We all work differently and each instrument has their benefits for different users. And the notion that you have to sketch to think, is not accurate. Sketching, drafting, modeling is not thinking; it is concentrating what you are thinking on. As you place the lines or families or whatever, you begin to narrow your focus between the items you already know and the ones you are working through.
Secondly, on the issue of why hand drafting tools are seen as essential to the tool box of an architect, I would add this. I don’t believe the tool is superior to any other that we now have available to us in terms of expressing our ideas. I believe it is the one that will always be part of the tool box. CAD is slowly losing its relevance there while BIM is becoming more dominant; sticky backs and blueprints have been completely eliminated, but the pen/pencil or similar will always be there. I don’t always have my computer or tablet to work out an idea, but I can almost always grab a writing instrument and find something to draw on. So I guess I don’t see the tool as any more important in terms of ability to convey my thoughts, simply as probably the most likely to not be eliminated from our various options.
Alan Manning
You are lazy. Plain and simple. The hand sketch to generate ideas will triumph over computer generated drawings now and forever. The fact that you said you look back at your 18 year old self… psshh.. get over it. Sketching can be done at any moment in the day, there is always time for a sketch.
Alan Manning
Okay, I was a little heated when I initially read the article. Just put simply, there is always time for a sketch… even while on the shitter. Could be the shitter time sketch of the day, and adds more detail each time the shitter is used… I’m sick of hearing architects say, “oh I remember when I used to sketch.” Sure it’s a hobby, but more importantly, it’s a way of life.
Jared Banks
I hope you’ll stick around and watch for some follow up posts to this one. I think they’ll make your blood boil. Sketching can be a way of life, but why do we insist that sketching is the only/best way of life for an architect? How does calling someone lesser or lazy or not as good a designer because they don’t live the life of a sketcher help? Are you an architect/AIT who sketches or a sketcher who is also an architect/AIT? I choose to be something else. Sketch all you want. Fine. But don’t assume other methods are second class.
Also if you are up for writing a guest post explaining why hand sketching to generate ideas will always triumph over other methods, send it my way. I want to understand why so many people think that. And when you write it make sure to discuss both digital and physical model making, as physical models get getting the shaft in this discussion.
Jared Banks
A comment I started to write this morning became a blog post. You can all read it here: https://shoegnome.com/2014/05/15/one-day-will-teach-architecture-class-sketching-without-sketching/
Pingback: I will teach this architecture class: Sketching without Sketching