Transition from Conventional to Digital Media:

One Renderer’s Experience

By Andy Hickes ©

Reprinted from “The Art of Architectural Rendering”, McGraw-Hill

        After rendering  10 years with hand techniques, when I encountered an article on any computer architectural application, I quickly turned the page, trying to block the idea of using computers for architectural illustration out of my mind.  If there were any illustrations resembling renderings, I felt an added sense of DREAD as I turned the page.  Reaching the level of financial and artistic success doing hand renderings had been long and difficult, and I had no intention starting over in another medium.  But I felt, and still do feel, change on my heels and gaining.

A friend of a friend had a small, growing graphic design firm where the work was computerized.  He had recently graduated from college, and had studied computer graphics.  I was surprised and impressed when he told me he had just, one day, bought a computer and taught himself how to use it.  My computer was used by others in my office for bookkeeping and word processing.  I had not been able to maser the program though I had tried.  What follows is from my experience using computers to render.

THE NEW RENDERING TOOL

There are two general ways to use a computer in rendering.  One as a model builder: after physical dimensions of an object are keyed in, the computer constructs a three dimensional, mathematical model.  This model can be turned and viewed on screen from any angle.  Any view can be rendered and printed.  The second way uses the computer as a paint box: the thousand of dots (pixels) on screen are colored by the computer individually or in selected groups, producing an image on screen.  This image can be rendered at high-enough resolution to be printed.  Modeling programs manipulate the perspective, and paint programs manipulate color and texture.  These two techniques can be successfully combined.

Unfortunately, modeling, rendering, and painting software applications are not miracle tools that can make a good illustrator a great one; however, they can be a great boon for the artist.  In order to demystify the process, here is a list of some

ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS MANY PEOPLE HAVE ABOUT COMPUTERS:

The computer is a great time saver.  This may be true for some people, but it is easy to spend more hours to complete a commission on the computer than using traditional techniques; with a computer it is easy to stay up all night rendering.  This is not, however, the fault of the machine.  It offers more possible solutions and it takes time to sift through them.

Computers can create beautiful renderings.  Clients say they did not realize a computer could make a rendering his beautiful.  The reality is, of course, that it can’t.  People, using computers, can.  This is one of the most difficult things for non users to really believe.  It is not a matter of semantics; there is a subtle, yet powerful, belief in the autonomy of computers, the result of continue marketing of computer as a wonder machine that can do anything.  This marketing strategy is an attempt to assure people who are unskilled with computers that they will be able to easily operate such complex machines.  This consoles the unskilled, but subtly implies that we, the skilled, can be easily replaced by any unskilled person using a computer.  Computaphobia is deeply ingrained.  The illustrator’s ability to create by choosing is distinct from the computer’s ability to execute those choices.  That can be a difficult thing for even a computer user to really believe and remember; only after working with a computer does this distinction show itself.

            Computer renderings look different.  Most people have seen computer renderings and assumed them to have been done in traditional media.  There are programs that mimic charcoal, pastel, and even the most subtle watercolor techniques.  Printing the image on high-quality, textured art paper enhances the illusion.  Some of today’s best-known watercolor renderers digitize the final rendering, then print them on watercolor paper to give to the client.

Learning to use a computer to render is difficult.  It is easy for most people to learn today’s programs.  These programs assume little or no experience with computers.  A college-student assistant of mine rendered a complete school project after assisting me part-time only several months.  His professors, knowing he had little precious computer experience, did not believe he could have done the work alone.  Scanning is as easy as Xeroxing.  I myself started by scanning a complete rendering into the computer.  I reworked some details with a paint program, drawing and painting as usual but with the computer.  No my second computer project, I painted only the building on board using conventional media, the scanned the board.  Using the computer a month, I added sky, trees, and people (scanned previously).  After having my computer a month, I colored a scanned perspective sketch completely on screen.  Three years later, I am still learning the potential of the computer, finding it easy to use, and still enjoying it.

            Clients are interested in digital rendering.  Most new clients say they don’t want a “computer look”, having the same misconceptions listed here.  Some people are more open to education than others.

A computer user needs a computer temperament.  Architectural illustrators do not have to be interested in computers in general; they can be only interested in the computer’s graphic applications and still succeed.  Color theory is the basis of a paint program, and no matter what media we work in, we make decisions on brightness, contrast, hue, and saturation instinctively in our work.  The paint program precisely delineates these so they can be delicately manipulated independently or in combination.

Systems o which professional quality work can be done are expensive.  “Buy the biggest and best you can afford” is good advice, but remember the computer system is just a tool.  You don’t need the most expensive tools to create excellent work.  Beautiful work can be done on systems that cost less than $3,500, including the scanner.  Most illustrators have their work printed at service bureau, since high-quality, large-format color printers still cost more than $50.000.

SOME ADVANTAGES:

            In general using a standard tool has great advantages.  Our small field benefits as the resources of all fields are directed toward improving that tool.  The modeling and painting programs I use are also in standard use in most other fields.

The creative process is one of discovery, fueled by experimentation.  After working twenty hours on an illustration due tomorrow in the traditional methods, there’s no time to try something new, if it might result in an irreparable mistake.  On screen, there’s freedom to experiment without fear of reprisal, because you can always revert to the previous stage.  This is why, sometimes, the computer doesn’t save time.  Since working on screen does not require the same physical stamina as hand work, we can spend more time searching for the effects that work best.  More importantly, you can experiment in ways not possible with conventional media.  The point in the process when the rendering is near completion can be the most rewarding time to experiment; the overall contrast, brightness or saturation can be manipulated.  Or, for example, you can select only the blues and adjust them in any way.  Or you can add more yellow to adjust the highlights, and more purple to only the shadows.  Even the overall dimensions of the drawing can be changed easily at any time.

Client changes must cause most of the anguish in our work.  On a digital rendering you can make any change with relatively little effort.  A chair can be moved across the room, or all of the maple wood can be changed to mahogany.  Any area can be adjusted independent of the rest of the drawing.

Moreover, since the work is reproducible with no quality loss.  The renderings output for our portfolios will be of the same quality that the client received, not a second generation photo reproduction.  In fact, it is usually of more finished quality; refinements that didn’t get done before the deadline can be added when there’s time.

Exposure to art supplies and their fumes can be dangerous.  Digital work is clean, and free of chemical fumes that come with traditional air brushes.  Work areas no longer need be a mess of paints and inks; clothes don’t need to be stained and ruined.  For illustrators whose eyesight is worse for wear after years of close work and find it struggle to use an X-Acto knife or ruling pen even occasionally, the computer can “zoom in” and magnify the smallest details on screen.

SOME DISADVANTAGES:

            In the short term, expect to see virtuosity outpacing good design.  This has already occurred in graphics, general illustration, and typography.  These fields switched to digital technology several years before architecture.  For example, many of the new typefaces created on the user-friendly typography programs are fascinating, but, illegible.

To produce digital renderings, you need the ability to render, the knowledge to operate a computer, and a method to reliably output your work.  At present, getting accurate color printouts can be difficult, relying as it does on the cooperation of outside service bureaus.  Besides the sheer inconvenience of this agreement, there is the problem of quality control.  Imagine a department store display of many television sets together on one wall.  These sets are all receiving the same signal but there is great variance in their pictures.  Printouts from different printers can have the same variance.

The effects of prolonged exposure to video monitors is not known but I think it is responsible for the speed at which my own eyesight has deteriorated.  Monitors are suspected of negatively affecting health.

Traditional art methods may suffer.  Commercial use dictates the availability and cost of art supplies; as commercial and availability of traditional art supplies will be affected.  Already, certain inks and papers that were once common are no longer available.  More importantly, many hand techniques may be lost by disuse.  Even though the same results in pen-and-ink techniques, for example, can be achieved by working on screen, it is easy to miss the spontaneity and immediacy of hand technique.

All considered, would I go back to working with paints and inks?  Not a chance.

THE FUTURE OF COMPUTERS AND THE ARCHITECTURAL ILLUSTRATOR

            The tool is reflected in creation.  Gothic cathedrals were created by balancing stones on top of each other as high as possible.  The Seagram’s building is a steel reconstruction of flat line drawings created with a triangle and T-square.  Soon after the Victorians learned to mass-produce the repeating pattern on fabric, everything was covered with a printed or woven pattern.  Now we can create by manipulating whole images and three dimensional, non planar forms.  Visually we are entering a Baroque age resembling MTV more than the National Gallery Building.  Complexity and virtuosity will become the fabric of design.

Architects will design by sketching on screen by three dimensions, manipulating space and form in real time.  They will experiment with different forms, spatial relations, color, lighting, and materials as the design progresses on screen.  The finished design will be a fully rendered, three-dimensional digital model. Designing and rendering will be one again.

Getting nervous?  Just remember, it’s only a tool.  Building and selling 20,000 computers a month adds no more intelligence or sensitivity to the world.  That will remain our job.

written in 1996

Andy Hickes