Originally to try and cope with the amount of architecture needing to be drawn in this project I needed some kind of tactic to make drawing buildings more bearable to do this I looked at a variety of artists who had made drawing of buildings but not in a repetitive or structured way.

John Piper was one of these artists. (http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/piper-title-not-known-p05054) He keeps a very rough look to his work which is bold but dark so not too overbearing. I like his use of interesting angles and perspectives (something I could easily apply to my work) especially in his work on Venice. His work also seems surprisingly detailed once you have a look at t but the detail is done in a rough almost gestural way so that it doesn't seem as repetitive as most buildings.









Lucinda Rogers: (http://www.lucindarogers.co.uk/images/london/large/lucinda-rogers-London-Bridge-and-Saint-Magnus-the-Martyr.jpg)

I love Lucinda Rogers' use of line. The contract of the really thick lines and the delicate thin lines makes her work very interesting despite its relatively simplicity. Her work has a bold graphic quality to it which appeals to me and I like the muted use of tone, how she's only used slight grey washes on little bits of the drawing. Her use of line is very strong and definite though which is something that I could try but usually have a lot of trouble with (shaky hands) I should try using a bugger variety of lines though (by using different pens) but usually I get too absorbed in the drawing process and forget to vary the pens I use. I'll keep a conscious effort not to do that in the future.

David Gentleman (http://www.lucindarogers.co.uk/images/london/large/lucinda-rogers-London-Bridge-and-Saint-Magnus-the-Martyr.jpg)
I find something very normal about Gentleman's work. This also means I find it boring. I can't really think of why I feel this way except that it's the kind of thing I would expect someone to do if I told them to do an 'normal' drawing of a place. There are still aspects of his work that I like however like the use of line on parts of the clothing of the people and I can still take away tips for drawing buildings. His use of line for the building isn't incredibly solid like you'd expect for a building (none of these artists have used that sort of line really) and he's gone for more of a nod to the detail of the stone work than actually drawing every repetitive bit in himself. A lot of his lines also cross over making it easier to keep track with where everything is and speeding up the whole process. While typing I think I've figured out more about why I find his work boring and that is that it is just the wrong mixture of sketchy and clean cut, if it were a bit more of either one I think I would like it more.

Valery Koshlyakov (http://lecercledartaucailar.blogs.com/photos/le_cailar_2005/dtailkoshlyakov2.jpg)

I saw Valery's work at the Saatchi a few years ago and loved it because of all the dripping lines and general messiness of the work yet it still being a very good painting of a building at the same time. I always think his work is like looking at the buildings in the rain because of all the bripping paint. Nothing about his work even attempts to be absolutely perfect or rigid. Windows don't line up, lines aren't always even or parallel yet the style he works in means this doesn't matter and on first look it looks like he's got it all very uniform considering the nature of the work. There is still a lot of repetitiveness in his work yet I don't get the sense that he agonised over making sure that two windows were exactly the same or anything.