Home  /  Being an Architect   /  Different Types of Architects   /  Design like an Architect

Design like an Architect

“I haven’t ever — I mean EVER — personally met an architect who I thought was a good designer who didn’t sketch.” -some architect other than me

I seem to be reading and hearing a lot about how we just NEED to sketch. A little everyday. To think, to dream, to be architects. That everyday we need to pick up a pencil and be an architect to help us be better architects (no type-o in that sentence). That if you can’t draw by hand you can’t design. Or that you can design but you are lesser than those that can design by hand. Recently I had a friend tell me about a job interview. The position was essentially for a BIM Manager/production lead at a high design firm. In the interview the boss made the “if you can’t draw, you can’t design” statement. How sad. A mentality like that hinders the proper adoption and integration of BIM and other modern workflows and tools that might (will definitely) improve the quality of design and the value of the firm. But wait, it gets worse. I even had a comment (which I deleted) from a previous post that saw my interest in teaching a class that focuses on other methods of sketching (not even designing) as proof that I was a poorly educated, ignorant, and inexperienced fool who needed someone wiser to school him. What the fuck is wrong with us?

Someone needs to stand up to this close-minded, regressive ideological brainwashing. How about this: everyday we need to open a BIM program and design. Just five or ten minutes. It doesn’t matter what. You just need to practice. You need to stretch your mind. You need to think in new ways. And then after you get comfortable designing with BIM, find something else. Find something more powerful or less. But expand your design process and expand your toolbox. Try writing about your designs for five to ten minutes a day (more on that at the end). How about that? Design through words rather than sketches or 3D digital models. Or how about clay?

Stop being close minded. If architects are still beholden to one primary method for creativity, good luck staying relevant.

If however we are interested in other methods of design, about becoming more valuable, about taking some risks, we must experiment with some other ways of designing. And yes, if you aren’t proficient at sketching, you should probably add that to your to do list. But don’t for one second think it gets priority above other avenues of creativity just because Frank Lloyd Wright or your boss designed that way. Sorry I sound like a broken record about this, but this is my crusade and I’m still searching for the right answers to why this affects me so deeply. It’s a barrier to our relevance, but there is something more…

There is plenty of value in sketching and using a pencil/pen as part of the design process. But yet we need a decoupling. We need to get other tools on an equal footing with that classic method. One way to achieve this is to knock down the reigning champion; the other is to uplift the other solutions. The purpose of all my writing about digital vs analog methods has always been to uplift the other. But I don’t always succeed in being clear with my intentions and, as I’ve learned from my days of discussing ArchiCAD and Revit, it is easy to take cheap shots. But as I review old posts and comments I’m also struck by the fear and anger in some of our reactions. Architects turning their backs on traditional methods? NO!!!! Apostate!

I had a post I’ve been mulling over for a few months. Well I have hundreds of posts that fit that description, but one in particular has been ever present, always haunting me. It was entitled:

To become a better architect I refuse to sketch by hand

Now I try not to be sensational for the sake of spectacle, so there was deep truth to that blog post title. My assumption was that the conscious act of not doing something so assumed and taken for granted within our profession would teach me something about that skill, that mentality, and about why we work the way we do. All things that would raise my awareness and make me a better architect. So for the past few months I have been doing my damnedest to turn to other methods for problem solving-BIM, writing, using a apps on my ipad or phone, anything other than picking up a pen or pencil. Why? It goes back to that quote from the beginning of the post. I read that on a prominent architecture blog and I had only one thought in my head: CHALLENGE FUCKING ACCEPTED! Are statements like that legitimate because no one can, or because no one has really tried. I mean REALLY tried to develop a non-hand sketching based design process. I wanted to find out. To be a purist, I figured the answer was to not touch a pencil or pen at all. That way there would be no question. Because when does a couple of scratches on a scrap of paper turn into “oh see, you NEED to sketch” to design. There obviously is a Venn Diagram of Sketching, Not Sketching, and Tricky Gray Area which would undermine my arguments. So I strove for purity. And let me tell you, I mean PURITY. It was/is/continues to be not easy. Over correction is never simple.

Are you Sketching

I made this choice not because I think it’s a better route, but because I don’t know. And neither do you or anyone else. Maybe sketching and analog tools are holding us back, making us weak and dumb. Maybe they are the crutch I fear they are. But perhaps they aren’t. We have no knowledge. We have no tests. We have no data. All we can say is here’s historical proof that this method functions. Not that it is the best or even good enough. Just that it has been used for ever. Thus I decided to be a guinea pig in my own pseudo-scientific experiment (this isn’t the first one of these experiments I’ve run, but those stories are for another day).

How would not sketching change your perception and relationship with the problem at hand? How would you problem solve differently?

My work space right now is just my laptop on our dining room table, so really the only analog tools at my disposal are a pen in my pocket and some Post-it notes that my daughters haven’t completely destroyed. This meant doing everything in the computer wasn’t too hard. And all my clients and team members are hundreds or thousands of miles away. So the more that is digital, the better: a couple of lines in ArchiCAD are easier to share than ten layers of trace. And since we are so spread out and I have so many different types of work going on, having a digital trail of who said what and who modeled what and what things looked like at any point in the past is super useful.

Unfortunately the problem with aiming for purity is that it’s near impossible and foolish. After a couple days (or weeks, I can’t remember), I was working on a house design and while doing something-the dishes, driving to daycare, or maybe lying in bed-I came up with a solution to a planning problem. The closest tools at hand were a ballpoint pen and a Post-It note. I didn’t want to forget the idea so I made some scribbles.

I_sketched

The above genius idea sat next to my computer for a day or two until I got back to the project and worked out the idea in ArchiCAD. I think it ended up sort of working. Ever since this Post-It, a few others have crept into my workflow. Yesterday I scribbled the different layers of a wall assembly on another Post-It because I was in the middle of a Skype meeting and was sharing my screen; the wall assembly was tangential to the conversation so I wanted to hide my distracted thoughts from the team.

So have I failed? Have I proved that every architect (good or bad) needs to sketch? Is that garbage above sketching? Or is that just a graphic note? I don’t know. But I realize it doesn’t matter. Purity was the wrong goal. If I had to, I know I could burn all the pencils, cray-pas, and pens in my house (though my daughters would strangle me). I could design with only one set of tools. But that is dumb. The real goal is to understand the value of all the tools at hand and exploit them to their fullest. To do that, we need to devalue some and elevate others. I wish we could just uplift, but I don’t think we are there yet as a profession.

What I’ve learned from this purity exercise is this: I need pens and paper handy because sometimes it’s the fastest way to not lose an idea. It’s not about resolving the idea, but about documenting it in a manner than can be thought about later. Thought about with tools I find more appropriate for the task. For instance, the scribble above. The way to understand if it works is to add accuracy and context-two things that are (for me) much more effectively done digitally. I can’t stress enough here that the reason I grabbed the pen in this instance was about short-term speed and efficacy. I had a 3 second idea that needed 3 seconds of execution. The complexity of the idea matched the speed of the available tool. The doodle was a placeholder for future thought.

Hopefully from here I can shift the conversation to how all tools have value. But sadly I think it might mean some more clarification of the values and problems with old methods because I don’t yet think we as a profession understand when the speed of pencil to paper stops being of value (speed seems to be one of the major arguments for those methods). When does that speed breakdown, hinder thinking, or fail to keep up with the complexity of the task at hand? As in I have an idea, it’ll take 5 seconds to draw. Or I have an idea, it’ll take 15 minutes to draw. Somewhere between those two lengths of time is the cut off. Somewhere in there is the moment when you are wasting your time by holding on to old methods, propping them up as necessary for good architecting. But I don’t know where that is. I know it’s not five seconds. But where is it? I think that’s my next challenge.

Final Tangent

It’s time to end this post, but if you are curious about the connection to speed and thought, check out this awesome article about typing, writing by hand, information retention, and creativity. I want to write more about this later (well about the speed of design in general), but it’s worth sharing here. Spoiler alert: there is an inflection point where typing becomes much more creative than writing by hand. And a speed below which typing essentially makes you dumber.

Perhaps my crusade for the elevation of BIM comes from my experiences with writing. When I started blogging four years ago I was an average typist. I don’t know what my WPM was, but nothing to brag about, probably below the proposed magical 60 WPM requirement for creativity. I took the test in the article above and I am now somewhere between 80 and 100 WPM, depending on the trial run, and if I slowdown to attain perfection. I could never write by hand that fast. For me typing is a very creative process, partially thanks to speed (and years and years of practice). In the past four years I’ve experienced the transition with writing that I’m trying to push for in our industry. At some point we get fast enough that what we are doing becomes invisible. We must find that inflection point with BIM and other modern tools. We must gain speed and understanding so that we can free ourselves to higher levels of creativity. If it can happen with typing and creative writing, then it can happen with more graphic forms of creativity, right?

My brain only works when I hold a pencil

Subscribe to my blog to read more about the tricky world of being an Architect in the 21st century: Shoegnome on FacebookTwitter, and the RSS feed. Are you interested in guest blogging on Shoegnome? Ideally I want to have 2 to 4 guest posts a month. E-mail me. If you are curious how in the world BIM could make you a better designer, read this article.

Bonus reading:

Comments

  • June 26, 2014
    reply

    Architects have already managed to portray themselves as expensive sketching and drawing services with little appreciation of, or understanding about, how things actually have work or to function. I’ve lost count of the number of meetings I’ve had over the years with policy makers, developers and investor groups who cite example after example of how rigid and isolated from reality so many architects are.

    Seems to me that some of the best examples of design (how things work – not just how good the designer thinks they look and feel) can be found in fields outside architecture, such as aerospace or consumer electronic products. Those fields don’t seem to have architecture’s ridiculous dogmas that pit “sketching” against “computer-based design and engineering systems.” Both are just tools but if architects are to regain any kind of credibility, they need to start designing as if buildability, structural and environmental systems, economics, human health and well being and the biosphere our species depends on, actually mean something. The rapidly expanding universe of tools comprising BIM systems provides a vast new set of capabilities to architects. Those who embrace those tools and use them to be better, highly credible and respected designers (because those tools provide a far more rigorous evidence basis for design decisions), will find they have far richer relationships with their clients.

    For those who cling to the comfort of their sketch pad and who hire “CAD guys” to do little more than sets of 2D drawings using a computer will likely not have much of a future. These folks – all of whom I am very sure are well meaning and who want to do the very best job possible – will, I think, continue to miss the whole point about what BIM is and what it can do to utterly transform what architects spend their time doing; they can actually spend far more time iterating design options and refinements rather than spending 80%+ of their time cranking out 2D drawings where just one change can precipitate the living nightmare of having to change everything that has been thus far “drawn”

    My 2 cents

  • June 26, 2014
    reply

    Well… couldn’t have said it better 🙂 lovely article, right on the money, love it. I will sure pass it on to some collegues 🙂

  • June 26, 2014
    reply

    Hi Jared

    There was a discussion here in the UK where the question was asked “Does BIM restrict creativity?”

    My feeling is that that lack of skill using your chosen BIM tool certainly restricts your creativity; you need to get as good at designing in BIM as you could using a pencil. After all you can draw using wobbly lines in BIM too – just more accurate and collaborative wobbly lines!

  • June 27, 2014
    reply

    Jason Smith

    Hi Jared

    I have had another look at Orthograph App for IPAD from a site measure up point of view.
    Now I haven’t actually used it yet but looking at how easy it is to use as a measure up tool it could very well be used to design. You draw with you finger but it makes a true model with wall heights that can be exported in IFC or through an AC add-on can import directly into AC. Also within the App you can walk around the 3D space (it does have ceilings though).

    This could be a tool to stretch the gap between hand sketching and using a BIM tool to design.

      • July 12, 2014
        reply

        Jason Smith

        Hi Jared

        I have purchased Orthograph. I have had a play with it seems easy. I need to watch the youtube clips to know how to use each tool. But at first look I think there is a great tool for design and if I can get my boss to use it (he is keen to try) we will effectively drop the manual (pencil on paper) drawing phase. The result from that will be the transfer to AC will be instant. We could go straight into finishing the model. The app doesn’t model floors and roofs but the floor plan, doors, windows will come into AC via the add-on. There is also IFC export directly from the app.

        I also just watch an ad link from your site to Osmo. This is a kids game and hardware for iPad. This technology could be modified for used for architects, by allowing the non techno savvy people to get a electronic version from a traditional sketch.

  • June 27, 2014
    reply

    Douglas Cloutier

    Thanks, Jared.

    Regarding sketching, I agree with the time element point regarding simply saving your idea. I did it recently at my relative’s home, helping them design a project on post-its that I’m now drawing in Sketchup. My notes had to have dimensions, too.

    Also, consider this: all of our modern computing apps rely on power (or batteries).

  • June 30, 2014
    reply

    I agree — I don’t think any relevant architect in 2014 is arguing that computational design isn’t important or that architects can’t be creative without being able to draw. Sorry you’ve had to deal with so many dogmatic hand sketchers.

    One minor point: Your post implies that all drawing is for the creation of design. As someone who designs primarily with a computer I can say that for me the value of hand drawing isn’t in creation, but rather the observation of design – and the world in general. I get value from sketching because it hones my ability to look and observe critically. It’s that critical observation that makes us better designers, not drawing per se. As much as I love taking photos and sketching on an iPad, I’ve yet to find a good digital tool that allows me hone my critical observation skills better than hand drawing, especially when I’m away from my desk.

  • June 30, 2014
    reply

    Ben Frost

    Hi Jared,

    My couple of cents: good design comes from creative fluidity: testing, evaluating, refining and retesting. The more an idea is tested and refined the better (usually) the outcome. Your analogy to typing/writing speed is a good one in that you choose the right tool to allow you to propose, test, refine and begin the next iteration in the most efficient manner. Sometimes that’s sketching, sometimes computer (modelling and drawing), and sometimes physical modelling.

    The problem architects encounter and that which I see too often is in the communication of that design: the profession is stuck in deliverables limbo between ‘traditional’ drawn and printed content and actually being able to send a BIM model ‘for construction’. The education of architects allows for a whole world of different tools – both physical and virtual – to be used in the design process but does not seem to invest the time in teaching how to communicate new technology creative processes in the traditional manner still required by most contractors: ink on paper. (And why should it after all? Surely it’s only a matter of time, right?)

    The architects and drafties that I see put out the best printed content from a computer model – in my case ArchiCAD – are those that cut their teeth with a set of Rotrings and/or pencils. They have a deeper connection to the printed output, a far more subtle understanding of using ‘line’ as a method of communication, than anyone I know who has only ever printed from a screen. For that reason alone (and until printed drawings are an obsolete mode of delivery), I have to agree with the sentiment of your protagonist: everyone responsible for printed output from a computer should also have in their arsenal the ability to sketch/draw…

    In addition, and in complete agreement with your article, I also see too often people who only know how to use a computer, or are embarrassed by their sketching skills maybe, choose the computer to interrogate an idea, work out some key levels or test a detail for example and it take them hours rather than minutes when in fact the outcome will never be published… Embrace all tools available to you and choose the right one for the job…

    B

  • September 9, 2014
    reply

    Mike Lacroix

    Great Article and I see your conundrum. I think part of your problem is that you are looking at it from being an architect. I personally am not a trained/schooled architect but I believe that I have good insight and strong common sense capabilities. Actually I am an electronic engineer with very strong mechanical design skills. Currently I am basically retired but in my free time (which I have a lot of) I like to create/design buildings for areas of the city inwhich I live. And I guess I am not a good architect because I don’t sketch when I design. NOTE: Actually a am very good at sketching but I don’t see any reason for creating something on paper and then turn around and transfer it to an electronic format. Personally I use Archicad (V18) and I am not doing this as a job or to make a living. The one thing I do have for a tool is a 3D solids modeling software but what it lacks is the intelligence of BIM but is excellent for creating custom components (not well implemented in Archicad). He is my process of designing a building;

    1. Use Google Earth to obtain the dimensions of the lot the building will be constructed on and the global co-ordinates for one corner of the lot which I set as the origin. I also at this point find the proper direction of NORTH.
    2. At this point I create all the items that surround the lot (eg. sidewalks, roads, etc.) on the ground floor.
    3. Now I decide if the building should be Unique or just blend in with the surrounds to which I create a basic image of the design in my head. No sketching here.
    4. If some of the floors are underground I start there and work downwards until I reach the lowest floor then I start creating the above ground floors starting at ground level and up to the top.
    That sets the basic shell and from there I dig in to create the interior walls, columns and so on and still no sketching. One of the things that is important is to make sure to use the 3D mode/view in Archicad as that allows you to see what it will look like so you can make changes to things that look out of place. In my mind the key to creating good design without having to sketch things is to have a good ability to picture what you want in your mind and to keep comparing that image to what you are creating with your CAD software. What I think is the hardest part is presenting the design to the customer. Rendered pictures showing the unit in 3D takes a fair amount of time in order for it to look real good. That also goes with presenting doing a walk through of the design on a computer screen. Actual real models can be good (again if time is put in to paint everything) with the advent of 3D printers. In the end based on my experience, big buildings can be done without sketching as those customers usually don’t get involved with the design until the shell is created but for the small buildings (like houses) the customers want to be more involved and if changes are desired they usually want to see what the impact is right away which usually means sketching on a drawing. If you have a good ability to picture a design in your mind then you can be a good architect without being able to sketch.

    Mike

  • August 3, 2020
    reply

    rodger smith

    Great article, I guess there are many architects that agree totally with what you say — but perhaps are a bit too scared to “out themselves”. I am not an architect but for decades have seen this growing Goliath of computer based design (mainly due to my industrial engineering position where 3D + database modelling for process plants and offshore platforms has completely taken over from the old A0 drafting boards). There are still many YT architects (e.g. Eric at 30X40) that encourage hand sketching, which I guess is OK. I have been a bit sceptical about pushing the two barrows (hand & modelling) when one is clearly way more flexible than the other.
    There is of course the nagging suggesting by many of the left-right side of the brain argument; the keyboard detracts from the freewheeling spontaneity and creativity etc.
    A really good example of applying a different technique to achieving the same output is David Hockney’s quite amazing Pearblossom Highway, not a brushstroke in site, but still a masterpiece. https://www.veryimportantpotheads.com/hockney.html I sometimes wonder what FLW would have turned to given the options after receiving Kaufmann’s phone call saying he was on his way to see how the plans were going for what was famously to become known as Falling Water. Wrights creativity would have easily translated to producing the same amazing output as he did in the 2 hours at the drawing board it took to produce the FW concept plans. He was an early adopter, and innovator who pushed many boundaries, he would have embraced BIM modelling in the same way any Master Craftsman includes a new tool to his collection to use to achieve the ultimate goal which is the output, the final product.

Post a Comment