Search

Erasing when drawing occurs for a variety of reasons. While the most obvious may be correction of mistakes, at other times erasers are used to create such things as highlights or marks that introduce particular aesthetic elements. When a drawing is made on paper, partial erasure ‘marks’ can provide a useful record of a drawing’s evolution. For the teacher, this historical record can be a catalyst for helpful commentary and criticism. While programmed to simulate an analogue eraser, in a digital environment the erase function can eradicate a drawing’s history with a single click. We studied analogue and digital tool use behaviours (including erasing) to compare the frequency of erasure and the effect of erasing on observational accuracy in adults between the age of 17 and 64 with various levels of drawing experience from less than two years to more than ten years. The study involved participants making one drawing on paper with traditional drawing tools and one drawing on a digital drawing tablet. We then had the drawings rated for accuracy. Among other interesting results, we found that erasing occurs with greater frequency when participants work in a digital environment than in an analogue one and that, while there were significant tool use differences between the environments, those differences did not result in differences in the accuracy of final drawings indicating the adaptability of our participants using different means to achieve the same effect.

Conventional wisdom tells us that the appreciation of local (detail) and global (form and spatial relations) information from a scene is preferentially processed by central and peripheral vision, respectively. Using an eye monitor with high spatial and temporal precision, we sought to provide direct evidence for this idea by controlling whether carefully designed hierarchical scenes were viewed only with central vision (the periphery was masked), only with peripheral vision (the central region was masked), or with full vision. The scenes consisted of a neutral form (a D shape) composed of target circles or squares, or a target circle or square composed of neutral material (Ds). The task was for the participant to determine as quickly as possible whether the scene contained circle(s) or square(s). Increasing the size of the masked region had deleterious effects on performance. This deleterious effect was greater for the extraction of form information when the periphery was masked, and greater for the extraction of material information when central vision was masked, thus providing direct evidence for conventional ideas about the processing predilections of central and peripheral vision.

The illumination of a scene influences how that scene is scanned and how it is depicted. This premise, together with assumptions regarding implications for teaching observational drawing, was the basis for a pilot study in the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design (NSCAD) Drawing Laboratory. The pilot provided evidence that helped refine the question and methods described in this expanded study. As in the pilot, participants worked from common stimuli that were lit in two distinct ways. The participants drew for a predetermined period of time while their hand movements were recorded digitally and the entire process was observed firsthand. Over a period of 7 days, five participants each completed four drawings. The 20 drawings were compared and the recordings analyzed. Digital analysis generated the most informative data in that, while light’s influence on drawing strategies proved to be less significant than anticipated, changes in drawing behavior were observed with implications for teaching and learning.