Architect Drawings : A Selection of Sketches by World Famous Architects Through History
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
sketches. The digital medium easily and quickly forms primary geometric shapes, similar to architects’<br />
hand-constructed diagrams. The shapes, devoid <strong>of</strong> detail, could also be considered preliminary<br />
because they provide basic conceptual information prior to design development. The more these<br />
programs increase their speed and ability to manipulate (form and deform) shapes, the more they<br />
replicate the creative impulses <strong>of</strong> hand sketches. Whether they are truly as effective, only their<br />
extensive use will determine.<br />
It is obvious, however, that computer sketches <strong>of</strong> even simple shapes can be limiting. In most<br />
cases, it takes substantially more time to render details digitally, especially perspectives. Digital programs<br />
tend to create straight-sided objects more easily than rounded, although this problem is<br />
quickly being rectified. A digital program that will stretch the shapes and then allow them to be<br />
viewed from numerous perspectives certainly has advantages. In many cases, the ‘true’ look <strong>of</strong> the<br />
image depends upon the needs and intent <strong>of</strong> each architect. In some situations, the more ambiguous<br />
object encourages architects to derive inspiration from the undefined form.<br />
The interpretive qualities <strong>of</strong> the imagination sort the undefined as the human mind wishes to<br />
make sense <strong>of</strong> the fragments. The philosopher and psychologist James Gibson found that ‘a picture<br />
cannot at the same time possess high fidelity for something concrete and high univocality for something<br />
abstract’ (1982, p. 248). In the same line <strong>of</strong> thinking, but in different words, Richard Wollheim<br />
supports this theory: ‘we cannot, at one and the same moment, see a picture as configuration and as<br />
trompe l’oeil’ (1974, p. 29). Providing absolute clarity early in the process may not always be possible<br />
or even desirable. Similar to a caricature, the deformation or exaggeration might prove to be more<br />
insightful. The use <strong>of</strong> the computer for sketching may therefore suggest an inherent conflict between<br />
precision and imprecision.<br />
The digital image can be seen but not felt. The direct relationship between the pen/pencil and the<br />
paper may, for some architects, provide an intimate connection to the object <strong>of</strong> their creation. The<br />
hand gestures <strong>of</strong> the drawing instrument add expression to their sketches. Although technology has<br />
replaced keyed coordinates with the stylus and more responsive mouse controls, the human body is<br />
still separated from the image emerging on the screen. The immediacy and personal control <strong>of</strong> the<br />
hand sketch may encourage thinking in a way that digital technology cannot.<br />
The advantages and disadvantages <strong>of</strong> both media are numerous and the success <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong> these<br />
forms <strong>of</strong> sketches may be determined <strong>by</strong> their time, place, and intention. As mentioned earlier, when<br />
solicited for sketches to be included in this volume, nearly all <strong>of</strong> the contemporary architects contacted<br />
sent in hand sketches. This is surprising, since they were given the opportunity to send either<br />
digital or hand sketches. This may be particularly revealing, since many <strong>of</strong> these architects use computers<br />
extensively in their design process and throughout the development <strong>of</strong> the project. Either they<br />
still use hand sketches for initial design thoughts, or when a ‘sketch’ was requested they thought first<br />
<strong>of</strong> one completed <strong>by</strong> hand. Very few <strong>of</strong> the architects sent a statement explaining what they were<br />
thinking when sketching. This brought to light several issues in the making <strong>of</strong> sketches. First, these<br />
prominent and busy architects had little time to explain their design thinking. Second, it meant that<br />
remembering or writing down a visual thought process was difficult for them, considering the time<br />
that has passed.<br />
Whatever their form, sketches take other roles in the design and construction process besides conceptual<br />
discovery. As suggested in the general Introduction, architects additionally use them for<br />
recording impressions, evaluating and communicating ideas, as a way to facilitate observation, and<br />
because they enjoy the activity and learning that comes from sketching. <strong>Architect</strong>s also employ<br />
sketches in various stages <strong>of</strong> process, such as exploring details, making changes during construction, or<br />
during intra-<strong>of</strong>fice visual communication.<br />
<strong>Architect</strong>s such as Greg Lynn utilize advanced technologies to invent fluid, amorphous forms.<br />
These abstract forms can be more easily viewed in perspective and analyzed (such as a section cut)<br />
with computer rendering. Frank Gehry, although using sketches extensively for early ideas, relies<br />
heavily on the computer to develop and visualize his complex shapes. Zaha Hadid provokes theoretical<br />
constructs with paintings and digital images as a starting point to locate form.<br />
208