Oct '09 - Nov '09
The strict but wonderful Professoressa Cianci wanted us to draw everything we saw, more or less. In the end of the course "Disegno e Rilievo" the students were asked to hand in 100 drawings size A4 or A5 +make 3 posters in A1 on the themes ancient, modern and contemporary architecture in Rome. Prof. Cianci pushed me to work hard and to try techniques I had never used before. See the blog of Ciancis courses here: http://disegnoerilievo.blogspot.com/
After having posted the drawings above, I got an interesting comment on whether "analyzing" drawing was allowed in the course. The prof. focused both on having us think about the materials we used when we drew, (talking about the quality of the paper, which pens to use etc.) composition and how we worked with lines and surfaces and then, at last, she encouraged us to just draw draw draw - and write - about everything that interested us. She pointed out that doing "good drawings" was not (always) the goal. She surely wanted us to draw in an "analyzing" way though she was also really crazy about perfect perspectives and slick facades and all that... She wanted us to do all... Since I normally draw alot, almost in a maniac way, and almost only with a black Pilot G-tec 0.4 or HB 0.7 pencil l took the opportunity in this course to work more with colour (something which has really "slipped over" to my everyday sketching now) and to try for once to be a bit more "realistic" and detailed when drawing a building to remember what it looked and felt like ...The prof. often thought in the end that the drawings I had made when not trying to be proper were the best.. The question about what an "analyzing drawing" is very interesting...
I post a few more pictures which could maybe boost that interesting discussion. What is the difference between an illustration, a drawing, a sketch and an "analyzing drawing"?
On request :D :