learning about maylines, electric erasers, drafting arms, french curves, along with blueprint machines and cyanotypes, and generally things of that nature are a waste of time.  drawing is different now because our deliverables are different.

there are, of course, various degrees of sketching and hand drawing that are still important.  practicing the ability to get a picture from your head to some sort of media that conveys your intention to others is necessary.

whether you're sketching a detail on the framing in the field to convey an idea, or drafting CDs in revit, it's ultimately about you're ability to create a decent thought, and then communicate that thought.  the process you're learning by drawing by hand will follow you the rest of your career, and you will spend years developing that ability.

^french curves are sexy.

french curves were sexy in the 60's.  parametric curves are sexy now.  fashion changes.

hand drafting useless?

yes & no

you won't use it much working for others

but the effort to learn teaches more than just the technical skill to draw by hand:

- laying out dwgs,

- lineweights,

- effective communication by drawing (what/how to draw),

- organizing sets,

- what not to draw,

- scale (holy shit, this one alone is worth its time in gold!), just cause you can draw infinitesimally small in CAD doesn't mean it will print out clearly that way!

Don't underestimate the benefits of learning hand drafting early in your education.

In addition to everything proto said above, I would argue that there is no better way to learn and understand the critical geometric relationship of orthographic drawings. Drafting by hand makes it very difficult to fudge projection, as you are directly pulling lines from layers of drawings below. It slows down the process in a way that reduces sloppiness. 

Sure, it is extremely likely that you will never use a mayline in professional practice, but when you move on to the computer, you will not only have a deeper appreciation for the incredible power that today's tools provide, but you will also be able to apply it in a much more informed way.

It is not one or the other, but building a skill set of tools that are all relevant. Start with the most primitive, be patient, and continue to build your craft.    

I hand draw all the time.  I still use a mayline, compasses, triangles, proportional dividers and French curves.  All of my preliminary studies are drawn by hand, either free hand or hardline.  I believe it is very important to develop skill in hand drawing, sketching and technical drawing.

There is a connection made when drawing by hand: eye > brain > hand > pen > paper that I don't think can be properly simulated using a computer. The act of drawing by hand puts you directly in touch with the work.   The keyboard, screen, mouse all remove you from the sensory connection that is so important. Of course computers are of tremendous value, but they are not replacements for hand drawing.  

I will often do a quick sketch at someone's desk, and say to them, "why don't you quickly work out a couple variations on this idea", and I'll look back ten minutes later, and they are working in CAD on it.  In the time it took them to set up a CAD file and start "drawing", they could have sketched out three or four alternatives with pencil and sketch paper, and they probably would have understood the matter in a deeper way.

If you want to really begin to understand a great building, you can only go so far by studying drawings of photographs.  You need to go to the building and draw it, either sketching or doing measured drawings.  

EKE:  You are so right.  I would add that there is something human about a hand  drawn (quick) drawing that I think clients unconsciously respond to.

I also worry that 3-D printer technology, while having its' uses, will remove the humanity and "feel" from the process even further.

Going back to the question about drawing by hand.  Its never  a waste to learn this skill. If the question is re phrased to ask is learning to do anything by hand in this day still a valid notion?   Technology is only as good as the operator or user.  Remember that it is you that determines the outcome of the work. Parametric or mayline or a sketch at the oac meeting all are tools in a an architects pocket.  The other question would be how can  I stay competitive in a changing profession?  There are so many factors remember we live in a time that appreciates speed of deliverables. And that speed comes from using technology available. While producing things whatever it may be we are under the yoke of society and the current notion that technology is the answer to producing fast and with good quality.  But where does the value of quality emerge inside of you? What does quality mean to you? That is what you will have to ask yourself.  Notions of our current times will change. But tge value of quality is something unchanging. 

drawing by hand is not rendering by hand.

spending 2 hours drawing brick when you could automate the process and do it in an hour is indulgence.

and anon, don't be a fucking idiot. Context matters. 1916 is not 2016.

This is a stupid question, anything you can do by hand will transfer to the computer.

It's always interesting when somebody says "this is a stupid question." When you were in high school did you have a solid grasp of the finer points of architectural practice, and the foresight to know what would change by the time you got through schooling? 

ugh replied to the wrong post.

I'm a moron.

at some point, most of the people posting in this thread learned how to draw, and use drawing as a tool to communicate design intent.

for most of us, we learned how to do that with lead holders and drafting boards.  we used those tools because that was what was available at that time.  i'm probably nowhere near as old as eke or wood guy, but even when i was in high school taking drafting classes, autocad was around but not well developed.  id was making the first 3d games.  photoshop was only good for making dumb little signs on dot matrix printers. 

for people just learning drawing and drafting today, there are other tools available.

i can say that drafting by hand worked as a primer for me because that's what i did.  eke and wood guy can look back to their pasts and say it worked for them.  but the reason they started with hand drafting is because that is what the most advance tool of the day was.  it would be like if their teachers told them 50 years ago that they couldn't use a drafting arm because the teacher didn't have them 75 years ago.  it's just dumb to deny technology for no other reason than things were different in the past.

i don't understand why someone would think their experience is the only possible way to learn.  that's just so self-centric and short sighted.  sure, there are important things to learn such as scale and well defined line weights, but that can be learned without a mayline. 

you should learn hand drawing to be a good architect.  you should also learn a little about classic mythology, the bible, the quran, american civic history, geography and geology, astrology, feng shui, physics, biology, and all the other things that a good liberal arts education provides, that creates a well rounded, educated person.

aside from that, there isn't much use in listening to old people say 'when i was your age we had to start fire with a match because lighters weren't invented yet.   kids just don't understand how to light a fire today.'

think of it this way.  if you were to go to a 'hand drafter' to learn how to draw for architecture, there would be some important things that you need to get in the habit of being aware of.  proto's list above is a great example.  the 'hand drafter' could teach you those.

however, if you're stuck on the tool or the technology, the 'hand drafter' would be teaching you how to turn the pencil while you draw to keep the tip the shape you want instead of teaching the important and useful things you need to learn.  what proto listed will help you be a better architect.  keeping a point on your lead will not.

i learned formz in college.  formz is now obsolete.  all the time i spent developing that skillset is gone.  i've made my peace with that, and am not holding to some antiquated idea that i have to tell the next generation they should be just like me so the time i invested in obsolete technology isn't wasted.  instead, i try to spend some time learning more relevant skillsets applicable to the profession as it exists today.

young people can learn about the past from old people.  old people can learn about the future from young people.  both are important.  those who stop learning aren't much good to anyone.

drawing by hand is sexy, need more reasons?

Curtkram, good points, but ouch! I'm only 42, though I feel older most days (thanks largely to my first career in carpentry and woodworking). 

I learned to draw on a drafting table with a Mayline, but used Autocad in college and still use it today. I put extra effort into line weights and shading, so my CAD drawings pop more than most that I see. I'm not sure I would understand line weights and drawing layouts as well if I had jumped right into BIM for everything. In training many new architects and designers, I've noticed that those skills are sorely lacking, but they add greatly to the readability of the drawings.

sorry wood guy.  still a lot older than me.  i'm not 40 yet ;)

good line weights are important to communicate intent.  whoever is teaching autocad and drafting and such should emphasize that.  no reason kids today can't learn how to do it right.  the skill maybe lacking, but it's not that hard to teach.  unfortunately, you'd have to tell them to spend some time learning how to do it right instead of doing 2 hours of work in 1 hour.

No worries Curt, I look 50 and act like I know what I'm talking about so I understand the confusion.

"you should learn hand drawing to be a good architect.  you should also learn a little about classic mythology, the bible, the quran, american civic history, geography and geology, astrology, feng shui, physics, biology, and all the other things that a good liberal arts education provides, that creates a well rounded, educated person.

aside from that, there isn't much use in listening to old people say 'when i was your age we had to start fire with a match because lighters weren't invented yet.   kids just don't understand how to light a fire today."

By "hand drawing", if you are referring to "hand drafting of technical drawings", then I don't disagree with you.  We do full-blown BIM modelling during DD and CD phases at my office, and there is really no more efficient tool for doing technical drawings than 3D CAD.

That having been said, we struggle to get our drawings in BIM to be as beautiful and evocative as they were when we drew in 2D CAD.  And we struggled to have any CAD drawings be as pleasing visually as those done with traditional hand drafting.

But for design studies and preliminary drawings, I believe strongly that the current obsession with computer graphics has not necessarily led us to a good place.  This is not nostalgia on my part, despite your suggestion.  As I said, there is an important connection that is interrupted by the computer screen and keyboard.  Computer drawing is not a substitute for brain > eye > hand > pencil > paper. If it were, then every artist would be a digital artist.

Cad is a faster, cleaner, and more accurate way to draw.  It reduces error in interpreting plans.  Doctors don't use 1950s x-Ray machines.  They do however still hand write prescriptions which I don't understand.  Many people actually die annually because of their poor handwriting.  That said, sketching and drawing is a very very valuable tool during the design process, but final deliverables should be done in CAD.  

i do not believe there has to be a difference between

brain -> eye -> hand -> pencil -> paper

and

brain -> eye -> hand -> mouse/keyboard -> screen

you're drawing a line at the pencil/mouse phase when what's important is to recognize what's going on at the brain phase. 

the difference for you is that you learned how to be an architect using the first method, so that's how your brain works.  it's what you've practiced and what you're good at.  not all people are like you.  that's why i used the phrase "self-centered' and "short-sighted" in my first post.  it sounds to me like you believe that everyone will think just like you, which is a thought i have trouble understanding.  i don't get how a person could believe that.  other people can and will be different than you, especially if they are introduced to a different toolset at a young age.

your bimwits probably don't have as 'evocative' drawings because you're not teaching them to be better architects.  you're teaching them something to the effect that darker lineweights come from the pencil you choose and the way you hold the pencil, which will never work in bim.  to learn how to make drawings look good in bim, you have to understand the tools available to you in bim.

if they understood what drawings are supposed to look like - the brain phase - then they could use the tools available to them to produce better drawings.  but you've already given up on them, since you place the difference at the pencil, which is not a practical tool for the deliverables your bimwits are expected to produce, so there isn't much hope for their improvement.

also, you have a bias towards hand drawings because in your world, that's what's important, so there will always be a confirmation bias telling you that hand drawings are better.  you'll never believe a cad drawing is as good as a hand drawing because you simply don't want to believe it.

as to all artists being digital artists, that has nothing to do with what architects do.  architects are hired to design buildings for people who want buildings designed.  our deliverables typically include construction drawings that are easy to read.  we are not artists.

As I said very clearly, I was talking about design studies and preliminary drawings.  We do all of our DD and CD in CAD.

Curt, your post is filled with such hostile nonsense that I don't even know where to start.  You've jumped to so many daft conclusions about me, my approach and my business, all of which are completely wrong.  Frankly it's not worth the time to refute.

What the hell is a "bimwit", and who would use such a horrible term? 

You said, "We are not artists"

Speak for yourself.

bimwit is similar to cad monkey.  only less monkey.  for example,

http://www.tesseract-design.com/the-benefits-of-being-a-bimwit.html

i don't think i'm making very many daft conclusions outside of what you've stated.

I hand draw all the time.  I still use a mayline, compasses, triangles, proportional dividers and French curves.  All of my preliminary studies are drawn by hand, either free hand or hardline.  I believe it is very important to develop skill in hand drawing, sketching and technical drawing.

it's great that you use a mayline and a pencil because those are the tools you learned to use to develop and communicate your designs.  i believe the assertion that it is "very important" for other people to follow the same path you did is incorrect and harmful.  my conjecture is related to the motivation you have in expecting others to feel the need to emulate your path.  it doesn't make sense to me, though that conjecture is not one you've responded to.

There is a connection made when drawing by hand: eye > brain > hand > pen > paper that I don't think can be properly simulated using a computer. The act of drawing by hand puts you directly in touch with the work.   The keyboard, screen, mouse all remove you from the sensory connection that is so important. Of course computers are of tremendous value, but they are not replacements for hand drawing.  

the reason you think this is the only way to connect your brain and the media your sketch ends up on (paper) is because it is the method you learned and the method you've spent years practicing.  it's a great way to do things.  my "daft conclusion" is that this does not apply to everyone.  other people can learn other tools without screwing up their brain's ability to think or design.  touching a tablet would technically be more sensory since your finger literally feels where it's drawing rather than using a pencil as intermediary.  again, your statement is that the process you're familiar with is the only legitimate process, which is incorrect and self-serving.

I will often do a quick sketch at someone's desk, and say to them, "why don't you quickly work out a couple variations on this idea", and I'll look back ten minutes later, and they are working in CAD on it.  In the time it took them to set up a CAD file and start "drawing", they could have sketched out three or four alternatives with pencil and sketch paper, and they probably would have understood the matter in a deeper way.

this is where my hostility comes in, and maybe i'm reaching too far to draw an assumption here, but it sounds like you're trying to push your antiquated agenda on to the next generation, which you should not be doing.  if someone is comfortable sketching in a way you are familiar with, then you could be a great resource to help them develop those skills.  if they are more comfortable with different media though or a different set of tools, you should be smart enough and capable enough to recognize that and help them develop the important parts of design and communication rather than dismissing progress out of hand.  the pencil isn't what's important in architecture; it's the building that's important, and the client relationship. 

If you want to really begin to understand a great building, you can only go so far by studying drawings of photographs.  You need to go to the building and draw it, either sketching or doing measured drawings.  3

or, you know, find another way to do it.....  it's big universe.  there is rarely only one right way or one best way to learn new things.

where i work, when people hire architects, they hire them for architecture.  artists are hired for things other than designing buildings with the intent of getting them built.  that's not to say architecture is better or worse than any other profession, just that it's the profession i happen to be more familiar with.

it's great that you have a good way to do things for yourself.  it's harmful to assume everyone else has to do the same thing.

curt, I wouldn't sketch or hand draw if I designed tilt-up too, therefore you have a point.

high schooler, I don't think you wasted your time by hand drawing. But these guys sure are wasting theirs. 

What he said ^

best concrete boxes in the region

i believe that in 20 years the world will look far different than anything i can imagine right now.  when i see kids playing, it looks a lot different than anything i could have imagined when i was their age.  its' really an amazing world, and a wonderful time to see things evolving as rapidly as they are.

if i woke up every day and said i'm going to do what i did in 1998 because it worked then, it will work today, and it will work just as well tomorrow, then i'm closing myself off to an amazing world that i don't want to miss.  i don't know just how things are going to change, but i know they will change, and i'm excited to see it.

when you say high schooler has to learn things the way you did because you don't see anything existing outside that limited sphere of influence, you're closing yourself off from that whole world of possibility.  pretending that things are always the same in a world that keeps changing makes no sense to me.

the pencil isn't what's important in design anyway.  nurture the brain, nurture the person, nurture the community, nurture the design ability.  the tool is the last thing that should matter.

Consider the possibility that working with your hands nurtures the brain, nurtures the person, nurtures the community.

pushing buttons on a keyboard with your hand is working with your hand.  swiping a tablet with your fingers is working with your fingers, just as much as touching a pencil or a stick of charcoal.  after decades of having a pencil in your hand, it almost becomes a part of you.  after decades of having phones in their hands, they'll be just as much a part of them as your pencil is to you.  i know it's a little different, but that's ok.

things are changing.  they're going to change, and there isn't much either of us can do to influence that.  i don't think there is anything to be afraid of.  i think it's something we can embrace, because it's happening with us or without us, and if this high schooler really does reject the reality of life around him to follow some 1970s pursuit, it's going to hold him back.

this is not how you grew up, and it's not how i grew up.  but it's happening.  this is how motor skills are developed and minds are nurtured.  this is what the formative years look like now.

Not for my daughter they don't, thank God. 

She may be doing a lot of work on computers, but she is also painting, drawing (yes, with a pencil), gardening (yes, digging in the dirt, not Farmville).

We don't have to immerse ourselves in every technology simply because it's there.

If technology is truly life-affirming and makes people's lifes better, then I am ready to embrace it.  But if it truly doesn't do a better job, or if I have to make some kind of compromise in order to embrace it, then I will evaluate whether the compromise is one that I think is worth it. 

Two personal examples:

I use double edge razor blades in a Parker butterfly razor when I shave.  Shaving technology has moved on, to either disposable blue plastic razors, or fancy handles with ridiculously expensive blade cartridges.  None of the current "advanced" options give me as close and as gratifying a shave as the old double edge blades in a classic razor.  Not even close.  And in the long run it's much cheaper.  So I choose to use the old technology.

I use fountain pens, an "archaic" technology.  Except that there is something extremely gratifying about laying down a line of fine ink on nice paper with a fountain pen, something that simply cannot be duplicated with a felt pen or a ball point.  So I can choose not to use the "advanced" tech, because the compromise is one I don't want to make.  There is value in the older technology that is not there in the new technology.

We are not our technology. 

What about the world outside your immediate sphere of influence?  

I know a few little kids active in sports and outdoor activities that can still spend hours in front of a computer or video game.  Maybe it's a question of empathy or situational awareness or something like that, but times are changing, and what worked in the past may not always work.  It's not a matter of if we approve of the change,  and it's certainly not life affirming. It just is how it is. 

What you consider gratification in shaving or fountain pens could just be familiarity.  To compare, you've held a pencil in your hand sketching for so long it's become second nature, as if there is a direct connection between your mind and the paper.  That comes from a whole lot of practice, to the point where it's muscle memory.  You won't ever feel that with something you only work with for a couple weeks because you won't have the same experience or familiarity.  Your younger staff who haven't had a chance to build that familiarity won't either. 

Someone without that experience will not have the ease you have with a pencil simply because they lack the experience and perhaps the training.  However if they have a lot of experience with some other media they may be able to develop the skills they already have to understand space,  form, order,  and other important architectural elements, and they may be able to develop those skills in a way that helps them communicate design intent.  It's not even a question of technology being better; just people familiar with a different set of tools. 

As a side note, I have an electric razor. Because you know, future. Power. All that.  :)

"What you consider gratification in shaving or fountain pens could just be familiarity."

Not for me. I rediscovered double-edge shaving late in life, after years of blue plastic and electrics. I used to used fountain pens in grade school, but I had fallen out of familiarity with them.  Rediscovered them about six years ago, and frankly, they are the only pens I want to use now.  Nothing compares. :)

By the way, when I do ink wash renderings, to lay down the linework, I use a... get ready for it... a ruling pen.  Yes, an archaic ruling pen.  It's the only way to get the exact color of ink I want and be able to do ruled drawing. 

I sketch at the office with a fountain pen and a 6b 6mm lead.

I've heard that the introduction of graph paper had a big influence on design. Combined with the introduction of sheet goods such as plywood, all of a sudden there was a standard module to design to.

Something I recently learned about is a video game called Minecraft, where kids (and adults, I suppose) build virtual worlds. I don't know much about it but from what I've seen it looks like modular cubes that are modified in either an additive or subtractive fashion. Gauging by the game's popularity, it's going to have an effect on architecture at some point. 

there was a building next to where i work (the skin is actually being torn off as we speak, and being replaced with glass storefront) that i've always said came from the architecture firm using minecraft instead of sketchup for design development.  it was very nice.

i never meant to imply that there is anything wrong with making a personal choice of using a fountain pen or whatever else, just that i think it's unproductive to demand others to make the same choices you've made, when there are so many other possibilities.  unless you already know everything, we should all be open to change and learning new things.

brick and block are designed to modules as well, and from what i understand a lot of traditional japanese architecture was designed around tatami mats.

I've heard that too, about tatami mats. Their roughly 3' x 6' is very human in scale, while the 4' x 8' American module is not. Interesting to note, considering the differences in our cultures and typical architecture.

wood guy, 3x6 more human? please explain

Average height of Caucasians is a little under 5'-7".  When you say 5'-10" to 6'-0" you're leaving out women, who make up more than half the population because they're more likely to survive infancy and also have a higher life expectancy.

Proto, pretty much what Rick said. Other human-scale dimensions are an inch (thumb width), foot (self explanatory), and yard (leg length). All rough and imperfect, but honed over time into a system of measurements that relate directly to humans. Scale matters when it comes to a building and its elements being accessible. There's a reason the general public often still likes multi-pane windows; aside from being tradition, a typical pane size is 9" x 12", about the size of a human head. There's nothing human scale or relatable about a 10' square plate glass window, as cool as it may look. There's also nothing wrong with the more logical metric system; I go back and forth between SI and IP fairly easily, but find the human-ness of IP appealing in the same way I prefer cozy spaces and hand-made furniture that fits its user. 

Cue the comments that multi-pane windows are stupid and contemporary architects all use larger scale components, etc....

Rick, thanks for the vocabulary. So a voxel is a 3-D pixel, more or less? Is Minecraft an additive or subtractive process? Sounds somewhat like Legos in a way?

if i were to lay down on a 6' tatami mat my feet would hang off the end.  if i were to lay down on a 4x8 sheet of plywood, they would not.

I use the metric system. All these weird feetsies and inches are just so damn useless.