Hello, when I first started architecture school, I was trained by an older teacher(in his 70's) who was heavily in favor of crisp black and white technical drawings( with site plans being an exception). He was not opposed to color, he just didn't teach the use of color. Fast forward 3 years and I am in a new school, new program that emphasizes production, rendering of drawings. There are some who can pull off black and white drawings with crisp line-weights, but at least 80% rely on color. I render plans,section using a method I call texture image mapping. I draw in 2d on cad, then use various swatches I create from photos in illustrator. Along with transparency and draw order, I create drawings that have a textural effect. Every critic I've ever had loves my technique and style, but I believe there are some weaknesses. For one, I believe some technical information can be lost in aesthetic quality of the drawings, people say its not a big deal, but I am worried this may be a bit much for a work portfolio. I don't want to have every drawing from the last 2 years to have a style some employees may view as unprofessional looking. I am going into my 5th year in September and need some advice.
Attached are some 2d-renderings, please critique them at every possible level
I would describe those drawings as somewhat weak and flat. They don't read as three-dimensional at all.
One thing you could do to punch them up would be to put a multiply layer on them in photoshop and add some value shading in neutral grays and darken the shadows a bit. That would retain the color hues and saturation, but give them a stronger tonal quality. It also wouldn't be that time-consuming.
As a general rule, if the drawing doesn't read well in black-and-white or greyscale, it won't read very well in color either. That's because value is a major component of color perception. The human perceptual faculty (retina/optic nerve/visual cortex) is tuned primary to reading contrast in the visual field. In other words, what we "see" is the boundary conditions between and within contrasting areas and textures, not the areas themselves. That's as true for color perception as it is for value perception. You can test this very easily by taking a scan of your rendering and switching it to greyscale mode in your photo editor. Or, if it's a hand-rendering, step back from it and squint at it until the color goes all grey and you are only perceiving blocks of dark vs. light.
@gwharton- one problem I'm having is the images appear very different from computer screen as oppose to print. Depending on the computer screen the the image may show little contrast, then when I print the color saturation is over the top. Sometimes I print 10-20 samples to get it right. I've recently begun integrating shadows(as you can see) on some drawings. I agree with you that depth perception can make or break this style of drawings(think thats what you were trying to say).
That's why Photoshop has printer profiles, so you can sync up the appearance of the screen image better with the print image by shifting all the color values to the properties of the print device on output.
However, screen color and print color are fundamentally different in how we perceive them, so you should always be creating the imagery to the print, not the screen. Colors that look good on a screen will always appear way over-saturated in print if they're not corrected first.
the color value is flat - either keep the section black or white or fade out the elevation textures; you should read space or the structure - these do neither. The grey poche doesn't do much for me.
I would honestly say what you're doing right now is fine for your purposes (school). But, if you aren't already, you need to be looking all day every day at buildings and drawings from offices you like. I think you will find the best way to hone your drawing ability is to first understand what exactly it is you LIKE. Then... imitate it.
I promise if you looked at presentation drawings from offices you respected, they would not look like that.
Jun 22, 12 5:18 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Need a critique on drawing technique
Hello, when I first started architecture school, I was trained by an older teacher(in his 70's) who was heavily in favor of crisp black and white technical drawings( with site plans being an exception). He was not opposed to color, he just didn't teach the use of color. Fast forward 3 years and I am in a new school, new program that emphasizes production, rendering of drawings. There are some who can pull off black and white drawings with crisp line-weights, but at least 80% rely on color. I render plans,section using a method I call texture image mapping. I draw in 2d on cad, then use various swatches I create from photos in illustrator. Along with transparency and draw order, I create drawings that have a textural effect. Every critic I've ever had loves my technique and style, but I believe there are some weaknesses. For one, I believe some technical information can be lost in aesthetic quality of the drawings, people say its not a big deal, but I am worried this may be a bit much for a work portfolio. I don't want to have every drawing from the last 2 years to have a style some employees may view as unprofessional looking. I am going into my 5th year in September and need some advice.
Attached are some 2d-renderings, please critique them at every possible level
Holy crap those are some huge trusses. Are you planning on building a skyscraper on top of your ode to brutalism?
The color seems lovely, but this is coming from a guy that stares at MS Word 99% of the working time.
I would describe those drawings as somewhat weak and flat. They don't read as three-dimensional at all.
One thing you could do to punch them up would be to put a multiply layer on them in photoshop and add some value shading in neutral grays and darken the shadows a bit. That would retain the color hues and saturation, but give them a stronger tonal quality. It also wouldn't be that time-consuming.
As a general rule, if the drawing doesn't read well in black-and-white or greyscale, it won't read very well in color either. That's because value is a major component of color perception. The human perceptual faculty (retina/optic nerve/visual cortex) is tuned primary to reading contrast in the visual field. In other words, what we "see" is the boundary conditions between and within contrasting areas and textures, not the areas themselves. That's as true for color perception as it is for value perception. You can test this very easily by taking a scan of your rendering and switching it to greyscale mode in your photo editor. Or, if it's a hand-rendering, step back from it and squint at it until the color goes all grey and you are only perceiving blocks of dark vs. light.
@gwharton- one problem I'm having is the images appear very different from computer screen as oppose to print. Depending on the computer screen the the image may show little contrast, then when I print the color saturation is over the top. Sometimes I print 10-20 samples to get it right. I've recently begun integrating shadows(as you can see) on some drawings. I agree with you that depth perception can make or break this style of drawings(think thats what you were trying to say).
That's why Photoshop has printer profiles, so you can sync up the appearance of the screen image better with the print image by shifting all the color values to the properties of the print device on output.
However, screen color and print color are fundamentally different in how we perceive them, so you should always be creating the imagery to the print, not the screen. Colors that look good on a screen will always appear way over-saturated in print if they're not corrected first.
the color value is flat - either keep the section black or white or fade out the elevation textures; you should read space or the structure - these do neither. The grey poche doesn't do much for me.
I would honestly say what you're doing right now is fine for your purposes (school). But, if you aren't already, you need to be looking all day every day at buildings and drawings from offices you like. I think you will find the best way to hone your drawing ability is to first understand what exactly it is you LIKE. Then... imitate it.
I promise if you looked at presentation drawings from offices you respected, they would not look like that.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.