Although there are substitutes for skill, there is no substitute of understanding. A collection of methods is of little value unless you have a firm grasp of the principles on which those methods are based and are able to recognize opportunities for putting them to actual use.


No one can draw any object unless he either has it before him as a model or is sufficiently familiar with it to create it from imagination or re-create it from memory. Leonardo da Vinci was an infinitely better draftsman than Galileo, but he could not have made Galileo’s sketch because he never saw a sunspot.


A drawing is said to “read well” when its meaning is clear. Thus, a fashion sketch reads well when it tells the dressmaker everything, except the measurements, that she needs to know in order to make the garment.

Reading a drawing is easier than making one. You can read drawings that you cannot make, but you cannot make a drawing unless you could read it if it were made by someone else. For this reason, learning to make drawings begin by learning to read them.


The fact that two-thirds of the space in this book is taken up by the text and captions demonstrates that, even in the field of communication, most drawings need to be supplemented by words. Again, although drawing is an extremely handy method of making certain computations, this does not alter the basic truth that the great majority of computations can be carried out much more easily and accurately by mathematics.

Perhaps the chief virtue of drawing is that it is most useful in the very places where language and mathematics fall short.


Unnecessary accuracy is a waste of effort; unnecessary carelessness can defeat the purpose of a drawing. I have drawn many notes which were perfectly clear to me at the time, but which conveyed no meaning at all when I treid to consult them several months later.


Omitting the useless is as important as including the essential. Aristotle started a fundamental truth when he said that everything which does not add will detract.


Construction is based on two principles: (1) If we con fix the proportions of a drawing, we usually find that the hardest part of the work is done. (2) Drawing an approximate line helps us to visualize the correct one.


Half the difficulty of learning anything comes in grasping the principles upon which it is based. Knowing a specialized trick — like the coin construction for heads — will not get you very far. But when you master a principle, you take a stride in seven-league boots. I have attempted to explain the principles of practical drawing in this book. However, you will not really master them until you can apply them to your own problems.


We cannot learn to draw without practice, but practice is dull and no one enjoys it. If you study some individual type of drawing, you must begin with formal exercises which have no value except as practice material. In general drawing, however, you can start by making charts, diagrams, and tracings that you can actually use. You will then get your practice by drawing these.


This may seem like too much trouble merely to check a single paragraph. But reading without understanding is worthless and often misleading. Also, the trouble was not caused by the drawing but by my failure to understand what I read. If I had been correct in my belief that I knew the facts, I could have completed the drawing in less than a minute. Finally, making the drawing left a much more vivid impression on my memory than reading could possibly have done.


Poets, perjurors, and politicians do not always regard clarity as an asset, but it is the chief requirement in useful thinking. “Truth is more apt to emerge from error than from confusion.”


Some divisions of this type have become so conventional that we tend to think of them as inevitable, but this is never the case. Even time is not naturally divided into days; a calendar day is an artificial period. When you chart material based on a continuity, it is essential to chose a system of division that suits the purpose for which the chart is made.


Although organization charts are useful for reference, their chief value lies in the mental process involved in making them. If you study a textbook which already contains a chart, do not be content with this; make your own and keep it abreast of your advancing knowledge. Your chart will differ from the author’s because your viewpoint is different. Also, if you want to study a subject from several viewpoints, make a separate chart for each viewpoint.


Adding arrows to connecting lines greatly enlarges their range of meanings. Single arrows show “influence”. Arrows that meet indicate “conflict.” Half-arrows with double lines represent “love.”


Diagrams are easier to draw than pictures and often more effective.


No self-respecting artist would paint a cow and write under it, “This is a cow.” In practical work, however, we not only put a caption under the cow, but we label the horns, tail, and spigots. When we want to explain something which may not be obvious from the drawing or which cannot be drawn at all, we simply add a note.


Combining parts of different sizes produces excellent illustrations for instruction pamphlets and training manuals. The cartoon effect catches the eye, saves space, and focuses attention on the important points.


You do not need to find improvements in order to keep your drawing fresh: the important thing is to make an honest search for them. Woodenness in a drawing is not a sign of a mechanical technique. It is a reflection of a wooden mind.


The eye cannot compare areas or volumes accurately. Pictorial charts should be based on heights or on lengths. If they show either areas or volumes, they are apt to mislead those who try to read them.


When sketching plants and trees, it is usually convenient to construct both a web and a grid. The grid fixes the overall shape, and the web provides a skeleton for the branches.


The datagram catches the eye and invites inspection, whereas few people will study a table if they can avoid it. More important still, the clarity of a datagram brings out many facts which a numerical table conceals. This is so true that most scientists and economists regard datagrams as essential tools for thought.


Beware of glyphs that may bias the observer. Using money bags for “Investors,” hammers for “Factory Workers,” and sickles for “Farmers” may lead some observers to regard investors as rich and greedy and cause others to think of factory workers and farmers as tools of Communism.


If you understand the nature of the data, you should have no difficulty in selecting the appropriate type of datagram; if you do not understand the nature of the data, you have no business drawing any datagram at all.


I cannot stress this too strongly. Construction is a valuable tool, but projection is the master key to an understanding of the meaning and the methods of drawing.


You will find that tracing your own projections is easier than reading mine. With mine, you must puzzle out the purpose of each line before you can understand it. With your own, you know the meaning of the line before you even think of drawing it.


The convention of showing the light as coming from the left is so thoroughly established that light which appears to come from the right is likely to make raise portions of the drawing seem like hollows.


Books are ideal objects for practice-doodling when you study 3D drawing. They are almost as easy as blocks, but they have enough detail to hold your interest and to present you with a few minor problems as well.


Isometric should be used when all three aspects of the source deserve the same consideration, but this is rarely the case. Normally, the interesting features are confined to one aspect or at most two. Isometric divides attention equally and therefore fails to emphasize the chief elements of the source.


When a circle appears as an ellipse in a drawing, the short axis of the ellipse should be parallel to a perpendicular to the plane of the circle.


This building method is easier than simply drawing contours but it is much more than that. It forces you to think in terms of solid masses existing in 3D space. Without this approach, your people are apt to look like flat patterns that outline 2D shapes on the paper.


Although sklines provide a remarkably easy and accurate method of figure drawing, we cannot expect the procedure to be completely straightforward. Unless you have an unusually good eye, small mistakes may occur at any stage. Check your construction constantly and make whatever adjustments seem necessary.


Feet are easy except for the problem of making them stand flat on the ground. The best way to do this is to sketch footprints as constructions and then draw the feet on the prints. You may have trouble in making the footprints lie flat, but at least the construction itself is simple and you can see what you are doing.


Tricks in rendering are not substitutes for a knowledge of structure. On the contrary, rendering techniques seldom work unless the structure is drawn correctly. Even this is not enough. You cannot get the structure right by tracing, but you cannot render it effectively without understanding the nature of the structure and keeping this clearly in mind while you draw.


Artistic layout is a study for a lifetime. Practical layout is less demanding. Your layout will be adequate if they present the material clearly and seem reasonably well balanced.