With the interim focus on the importance of drawing - given its highly assistive nature regards communication (itself increasingly lost in the screen-obsessed world of today) - a 2D sketch from 20 years ago, which itself illustrates that drawing need not necessarily be in 3D.
People who begin to draw see anything in its 3D form as far more complex and so problematic, since depicting of an object from 3 sides with some perspective is invariably harder to achieve convincingly. Not so hard for a cube, sphere or cone (the start-points of learning to draw for perspective and shading) but far more problematic if illustrating something with sophisticated shapes, such as a vehicle.
As ever ability derives from practice, and everyone at whatever age needs to start at the beginning; whether self-taught through stumbling, or better assisted step by step through books or videos, or from more formal one to one teaching.
However, for many drawing is far less easily learned through formal teaching, since the process itself exerts expectations from teacher and self-expectations from student, which prohibits the necessary 'feeling and flow'.
And since no one starts by creating a complex finished work, better to keep it simple, and to do that it means initially limiting to 2D renditions.
However, greater simplicity does not mean any less communicative value, often such illustrations may even provide more easily read information precisely because of its simplicity.
Depending upon the designer, automotive design and industrial design have invariably exaggerated 3D depiction (started in the 1950s but still ever present); with that exageration used to relay the 'spirit' of the vehicle/object. But this artistic licence only seen as fanciful and unrepresentative by the design and packaging engineers who have to specify the exact dimensions of built the vehicle/object.
In industry, the artistic impression invariably becomes disected into its 3D projections, and will be illustrated both in CAD and still invariably 'on the wall'. The old method of side elevation depicted using various thickness and colours of tape to depict hard-points and body-lines still exists given its ease and flexibility, even if it was two decades ago supposedly surpassed by full size computer generated images. The computer obviously allows for the the electronic saving of various schema, but like the continued use of clay models, tape allows immediate hands-on alterations t happen instantly. This vital to 'massaging' dimensions and proportions.
Thus, if seeking to realistically design for engineering 'readability' - 2D is vital.
The same when learning to 'absorb' an object, and so draw it. Both as a start point in drawing and as a reference when shifting from 2D drawing to 3D and onto actual making of an item.
The graphic depicted presently here, is that of a basic sketch idea using aesthetic principles I though would better suited the B-C segment Rover (positioned beneath R75) after the initial exploratory work on R55 had started mid-point of the R75 programme, so as to seek to replace medium (under)sized R45.
As well described in Arononline, TATC websites and Big Car on youtube, R55 and R75 were originally planned as Rover's 3 and 5 series competitors; but that brought dismay from the BMW Board in the 4 cylinder building in Munich, concerned about cannibalisation, and so the R30 programme was initiated, to replace R45 with something similar; so R55 became R30, a smaller vehicle ideally produced off of the New Mini platform.
The then current R45 being sold had been born from the R400/200 Honda platform, itself with similar width/ track but shortened and lengthened to produce two vehicles for two length differentiated segments. The new programme was to utilise the R50 New Mini platfom to (highly likely) repeat the same scenario of two platform lengths for the new R45 and later R25 models.
It was one of many projects underway in the then new 'GDEC' (Gaydon Design and Engineering Centre).
Paul Davis was R30's Project Director, with a skeleton staff of Packaging Engineers assisted by Chris Dewing as Product Spec Manager. Paul had sought to apply a more scientific approach to Rover Cars via its Product Attribute using a matrix approach of engineering measurables under 'QFD' (Quality Function Deployment). And Chris was seeking to best appreciate what could be utilised from the simultaneous New Mini project and suitable carry-over items from Rover-BMW parts inventory.
Rovers were to be - to quote one brand attribute - 'effortless'.
However, in reality as far as powertrain was concerned 'the die had already been cast', since the creation of the K-series engine.
It was an engineering marvel, with long-bolt construction and the application of VVC (variable vale control), but it was effectively (and very short-sightedly) designed as a pseudo race-engine: poor in the 'low-down' torque essential for smooth and 'effortless' pull-away, even if strong in 'thrashy' high revs power. In effect unsuited to the characteristics of a Rover.
K-series was brilliant for the revival of the sporting MG marque via MGF before, but not suited to Rover, and certainly not for Land Rover in Freelander. The R200s/25s and R400s/45s lacked that key attribute with Rover engines, though ironically had had them with previous Honda units.
Thus in the real world, the new cars being designed started on at least one technical 'back-foot, unable to meet the most basic of brand led technical requirements and conveniently over-looked in the project teams given the expense of k-series to develop and the need to apply it to as many models as feasible.
However, much else beyond powertrain provided the upmarket impression.
As Head of Rover Cars Design, Richard Woolley was responsible for any ultimate design and as remembered, Ollie Le Grice assisted him by exploring and working-up various basic design philosophies.
The initial style direction being explored for R30 was that of a much 'compacted' R55 and was - and like New Mini - highly 'retro'.
Yet even more curvacious to re-capture the rounded forms of yesteryear 'upright' Rovers embodied by the P4 (itself the original '75'). That 'uprightness' provided a good cabin space for the wheelbase length, and like the P4 itself, its 'blockiness' was softened with rounded surfaces and specific use of confluencing radii.
This well illustrated across the body but heavily utilised in replicating the window surrounds of original P4; with very defined separate windows, the construction methods of the time providing founded corners to the frame; those rounded edges giving strength to the glass.
This retro design direction then contrasted to the 'futuristic' sheet-glass effect seen previously on R400 (itself adopted from NSU - Audi aero advances) that had been the norm since the mid 1980s. In this 'direction' R55 was to be an unashamed smaller successor to the P4 in terms of overall forms and organic detailing.
But to my mind the solutions being drafted-up were too retro, not so much in overall packaging and form language, but in the detail. The vital importance of retro-futurism of R55 was being unwittingly eroded and at risk of becoming mere 1950s Rover pastiche.
The detail needed to contrast the curvaciousness, not ply yet more curvature on curvaciousness
.
Although there are obvious mainstream and counter-point styling trends which companies will follow to be readily accepted by the public, I had rememebered the very real problem that Nissan USA had had with its then new Infiniti brand in the USA in the early 1990s.
The Board had appointed Jerry Hirshberg as Design Chief in their Studio in La Jolle, San Diego in the mid 1980s to better understand and possibly lead the US market with Infiniti.
He had chosen to follow Japanese tropes for the new 1990s cars with exaggerated organic forms. It had been tried on the European Ford Scorpio and US Ford Taurus, morphing 'aero' into ridiculed 'jelly-mold' . And it was the failure of those cars in the home markets which had originally allowed other 'conventional' European Exec cars in (esp the Germans), and in the USA gave way to the dominance of Camry and Accord, and for Lexus and Acura to take hold, followed by Infiniti.
I had visited Mr Hirshberg in 1993 whilst doing my Masters Degree in Design Management focused on the Auto Industry (scrimping and scraping from an EU provided Student Bursary to do so. That trip also including the Studios of Volkswagen and Mazda, and a niche 'hand-fab' Coach-builder).
Whilst impressed by the facilities at the near beach-side environment, it was clear that the Nissan Design International staff had become either too remote from the realities of the American market, and especially regards the conservatism of US aspirant buyers who were buying into new Japanese luxury at the time. NDI had been set-up to follow the march and market insights Lexus had previously gained, but had become too adenturous...too 'designery'.
The Infiniti J30 (1992-97) - which was volumetrically internally small for its size, and at the rear even more Ovoid that the 3rd Gen Taurus - 'bombed' when released and so undermined the brand.
The highly organic look was well suited to A, B, B-C and C segment cars in Europe and Japan (eg original Renault Twingo, 1992 Nissan Micra and a host of mainstream others) but wholly unsuited American status cars which required greater visual stature.
[NB Nissan's latest management and financial woes are clear with major cost-cutting needed and new leadership needing to create a turnaround. 27 years on from 1992's academic Design Management visit, and the previously mentioned David Woodhouse has taken that position. Arriving from Lincoln and its innate rediscovered 'linearity' taken from the iconic 1960s Continental, itself reflective of Euro Modernism at the time..
Exactly how Nissan, Infiniti and possibly also Datsun, is re-imagined by his team, remains to be seen. It requires a mixture of good understanding of American and EM markets (into which Datsun can expand and Infiniti can reach), as well as creativity......Critically "Empathetic Creativity"
Getting it right will be vital to add positive earnings to Nissan's presently much depressed financial bottom-line].
So although Rover Cars had far more history and gravitas to deploy such an organic shape in R30, since it would have been idiosyncratic yet suited in the right B-C segment and also loyal to the brand, it needed to avoid becoming a pastiche of itself and becoming lost in the sea of bulbous cars.
The retro forms most definitely needed subtle yet powerfully contrasting details - set out as linear and angular - to infer the idea of technical precision and so overtones of advancement and futurism. Rover needed that to avoid being seen as 'cute' and so lacking innate stature in that vital volume segment.
As it was, in its early exploratory designs, R30 was heading toward becoming highly retro, when it needed to be seen as retro-futuristic, to provide the dual character much needed to create its own place amongst the European dominated B-C segment.
The very basic elements of the shown 2D sketch. sought to do just that.
This 'solution' provides for curvaceous flowing upper forms placed upon a strong more rectilinear base - each side utilising in detail its opposite to rebalance the equation and so provide for a unified whole.
In design terms, the process was almost formulaic to create beauty, but the very language of beauty was well recognised centuries ago: the right mixture of opposing balance.
It had been seen on the brilliantly original Ford Ka with its 'New Edge' design formula though taken to extremis which suited the product category; and again applied for the GT90 concept and elsewhere throughout the range.
Yet herein, for Rover Cars, something similar had to be applied far more subtly to provide greater visual balance and sophistication to suit brand and segment.
Although a 1950s spirit in the overall form is retained including tall 'clean' sides, the retro window surrounds of the Studio sketches are gone in favour of a P6 style, with a sheet-glass effect to unify front and rear of the cabin and sculpted chrome door handles placed as features themselves (also reminiscent of original Land Rover to maintain the brand interconnections of the time) and that shape 'mirrored' (though upside down) in indicator clusters mounted in the tail-edge of the roofline. (The P6 was much influenced by original Citroen DS, which itself had 'rocket-tail' indicators above the rear window). To merge the cabin and rear, the rear handle visually begins the line of the rear boot/deck lid.
A central chrome strip divides the vehicle into solid lower and fluid upper, coalesced by 'deco-aero' wheel arches with (what later became de-riguer positions) front and rear indicator/market lamps, also lozenge in shape to echo the arch -tops.
From the side the front and tail clusters appear near symmetrical, to provide visual balance, derived from the P6's arched lamp units, yet turned upside-down.
The original P6 also had a small triangular plastic feature over the front side-light that glowed at the tip of the front wing; that small but iconic object replicated in the wheels as a metaphorical nod to 'moving forward' from the past yet still respecting it: the philosophy of the brand and models.
The Rover Story as told by some good on-line historians tends to focus on the slightly later efforts, more contemporary aesthetic being created and much influenced by crisper lines. including a rounded rear window ( per Renault's then individualistic Megan) and corollary to the simpler BMW design language, so as simultaneously create both a 1-series vehicle and a second direction for R30.
But that tack did not follow in the 'Heritage Rover' ilk (of the R75 and R55), which under MG-Rover generated Peter Stevens' 'TCV' concept of 2002.
Once again - had Rover Cars not been sold to China - the very identity of Rover would have again changed to appear Germanic; and so the good work put into the brand by Woolley et al would have been lost and the brand again been confusing to potential customers.
Those who wanted German bought German, but there was an alternative mindset customer base who sought to buy something built to same quality levels but with alternative persona; that was why R75 had been born and why R55 had been initiated with its respect of a modern twist on brand heritage; and R30 latterly initiated as an alternative offering in the UK, and something that would specifically satisfy the increasing Anglophiles (many of whom were female) across Europe.
It said much about the typical short-termist and reactionary aspects of British management within MG-Rover after BMW's divestment, that the previously set design direction that had only just really come into its own with R75, R55 and R30 was to be sacrificed when the pressure was on.
When BMW had been under pressure in the late 1950s it stuck to its guns and made the most of what it had; and eaked out every penny (pfennig) from new investment gained from the Quandts.
It did not 'flip-flop', but set its sights with limited resources and executed the set strategy using an updated old platform (600 to 700).
Ideally, Rover Cars would have done likewise under Alchemy Partners and other similarly invested European and Chinese automotive interests. So as to gain scale and supply-chain efficiency for overall manufacturing and BoM cost-base reductions, so as to re-invest in resaearch and development and so grow the brand in the UK, Europe and China.
But that very unfortunately was not to be.
However, the point of all this - besides providing interesting historical insights - is ultimately to literally illustrate that more simplistic 2D drawing is as valid as 3D.
3D is invariably intimidating to someone who has not picked up a pencil or pen for decades, and might feel him or herself unable to do so.
But, with courage and spare time, just closely observe anything and everything for a period, then take-up at first loose and then more precise sketching, and then begin to replicate or imagine and so impress those sights or thoughts onto paper.
Critically, try to for a moment forget you are an adult (with typical woes) and become as open as a child when scribbling and thinking.
To quote the Propellerheads and Shirley Bassey, whether in car design or aspects of life...."Its all just a little bit of History Repeating".
So be that 7 year old once again in spirit...but with the mind of an adult and so the ability to think in a far more considered way.
Take the odd carefree moment of the Summertime, and begin to create for yourself.
