Just another method/technique of drawing (yet in digital format) – I use it all of the time, for particular applications.
Right but that's my point... in REAL LIFE we have all these options available. [and have for decades as was pointed out I'm using decades old SW still]
So why when teaching or examining can't these options be made available.
No, your consistent point has been ‘why draw at all, it’s biology, not drawing’
Now you’ve changed it to ‘why can’t we use vector drawing?’
That is (to my mind) a valid question, so why not put it to the institution/s exam board/s?
No, your consistent point has been ‘why draw at all, it’s biology, not drawing’
Now you’ve changed it to ‘why can’t we use vector drawing?’
That is twisting or at least stretching the definition that dictates what pencil types ...
To me that reads as if you just did the EXACT opposite to making their ergument for them. You instead just re-offered yiur argument/(strawman?). I asked you to ‘make their argument for them’
Because to me their argument is a strawman that is just repeated.
From the video:
1) Attention to details
Structural information
2) Record scientific information
Just another way of recording information
Relevant/non relevant
3) Most important - demonstrates understanding
"belief based"
From #1: Forcing attention to detail... this is just the opposite if you can't draw a decent freehand drawing. All my attention would be taken up trying to draw. Probably as important is I'd only put any detail I could hope to freehand draw.
#2 It's just another way of recording information and allows the relevant/non relevant to be discriminated - but so what, so do other techniques don't require a pencil
#3 Being able to draw he believes demonstrates understanding. He clearly say's this is a belief not fact. It is of course a bit of a sod that he will then carry this belief into marking.
(devil’s advocate cap still on)
Being able to draw he believes demonstrates understanding. He clearly say’s this is a belief not fact. It is of course a bit of a sod that he will then carry this belief into marking.
(Video timestamp/cite please?) I listened three times)
And (if he did say that and I missed it) ...again with the assumptions/cherry-picking (delete as applicable) definitions of words?
For sake of argument - do not scientists, doctors, astronomers, psychologists, neurologists etc etc say ‘I believe, we believe, that (so, and so)’ ALL of the time? It most often means ‘I/we/currently believe, according to all the best research, and/or experience/results...’
In fact it’s bad scientific practice to declare most things as incontrovertible FACTS. Which would more akin to a religious belief system. Don’t you agree?
So aren’t you here putting/changing/assuming words in mouths/strawmanning again?
(Devil’s cap off)
I do believe (ie shorthand for ‘ convinced to the best of my knowledge, based my own research and experience/experiments, both personally and professionally) that drawing (or modelling/sculpting) ie in someway reconstructing something helps me better understand and memorise it, and no matter which drawing technique/method I use: ie camera lucida, tracing, freehand, vector-building, constructive drawing, blind contour drawing etc etc etc?...
...any method seems to help me understand and retain more than simply writing about it, or seeing it/seeing a picture or photo of the subject.
Now...
1. I’m not saying that it helps you or another savant/genius/non NT individual in the same way.
2. I’m not saying that I ‘believe it’ in the same way that someone would say ‘I believe the earth is flat’
3. I’m not saying that technology and psychology/neuroscience won’t find additional ways/techniques.
4. I’m not saying that examiners shouldn’t allow for other methods/techniques.
Additionally, there seems to be so much ignorance/assumotiin as to what ‘drawing’ actually is. It’s many things. The root definition is simple. The many techniques and methods and applications are wide and varied.
Again, I’d ask if/why they wouldn’t ‘allow’ computer-drawing methods such as vector-tracing? One can still erase and make simple lines (which AFAICS are the reasons behind them specifying ‘pencil’ in the OCR Guide)
I’ll make enquiries if you won’t. i’m actually more concerned that your horrendous experience is ‘the norm’ for other students than I am in interested in shooting the shit on STW. As fun as this is, it’d be such a shame if it wasn’t also utilised as a springboard to challenge F. Rossi et al? 😉
(I’ll later try my best to address your photography/art/drawing category/definition question you asked me before I head off)
For sake of argument – do not scientists, doctors, astronomers, psychologists, neurologists etc etc say ‘I believe, we believe,
Yes and he's not saying it in a "Flat Earth" way but he still say's it.
I’m not saying that examiners shouldn’t allow for other methods/techniques. Quite the opposite.
Additionally, there seems to be so much ignorance/assumotiin as to what ‘drawing’ actually is. It’s many things.
In this context I'm following the guidelines for A Level biology
There are many definitions but in the context of the OP I'm talking about how people get taught/graded/marked/examined in non fine art subjects.
Ultimately to go back to the "teaching", a probable reason is "because this is how you will be examined"
I’m not saying that examiners shouldn’t allow for other methods/techniques. Quite the opposite.
that drawing (or modelling/sculpting) something helps me better understand and memorise it, and no matter which drawing technique/method I use: ie camera lucida, tracing, freehand, vector-building, constructive drawing, blind contour drawing etc etc etc etc…
…any method will help me understand more than simply writing about it or seeing it/seeing a picture or photo of it.
Yes but who is to say that (for example) building a molecule from ping pong balls or blocks etc. isn't better for some people or creating a virtual 3D model.
However going back a bit the problem here is when given 20 samples in an exam the stated purpose of which is to test knowledge and understanding of XXX subject this isn't what is actually being tested if someone can't draw those 20 samples recognisably in that time frame.
which AFAICS are the reasons behind them specifying ‘pencil’ in the OCR Guide
I'm not hung up on erasability, I'm hung up that "pencil" goes with "paper"...
