Here is an overview of the process as done on a few of my recent renderings. I am not listing each and every step because I am targeting this to professionals who will already be familiar with most if not all aspects of this process. It's just the assembling of these that is new. Also, I am focusing almost entirely on the computer portion of this hybrid technique. The other portion, traditional watercolor painting, is something you should already have some familiarity with. Watercolor is well covered in numerous books and web-based tutorials.

I began my rendering business in 1984 after working as the assistant to render Brian Burr. Initially, I did all layouts by hand using the classical projection method. In 1987 I began using a CAD product called Datacad to model the projects I was hired to draw and had it generate my perspectives. These were transferred to illustration board by 'pinning'. A printout was taped to the board and a push-pin was used to mark through the end-points of every line, which was then drafted onto the board in pencil in a connect-the-dots fashion. I believe it was my artist sister, Analisa, who declared the pin method to be a complete waste of time, forcing me to figure out how to use a pen plotter and medium gray waterproof ink to get Datacad to draw the line perspective right onto the final paper with perfect accuracy and lines that looked like pencil. The rendering was then completed with traditional media, at first airbrush and colored-pencil, and later looser watercolor.

All along I was experimenting with computer rendering software, but was never very satisfied with the results. The images were rarely as good as any decent artist could do by hand. At that time one of the biggest reasons to do computer art was so you could say you did computer art. I experimented by re-doing some renderings that I had done by hand with a rendering software called Renderize, but never got an image as good as my hand-painted ones.

What I recognized was that there were aspects of an image that I could do so much more quickly and easily in a digital rendering, but there were other aspects that were extremely hard to do in the computer that I could do in a short time with a pencil or brush. I decided to combine the two methods in an effort to create a new type of image, a digital/traditional hybrid. I hoped to combine the strengths of both and by-pass the weaknesses.

Keeping in mind that the end product is a commercial illustration, I have no concerns about maintaining a fine-art aura of traditional painting. I'll save that for other work.

The last piece of the puzzle for making this method work was a good CMYK inkjet printer to output the computer image in my studio. This was important because I rarely have the time to get images output by a service bureau.

When on a deadline you are as likely to need to output an image at 2AM as 2PM, so having all aspects of your production process available in-studio is very important. I was hired to do a series of interior renderings in a hurry. This is perfect work for computer imaging because it is too time-consuming to draw lots of office furniture arranged throughout a space, but in CAD it is a breeze to do, including doing fabric colors, complex shadows, etc. On my way back to my studio from picking up the assignment I stopped in at a computer store and bought my first Epson Stylus Pro printer. I did a "pretty good" digital rendering, printed it out and spent a few hours coloring over it with pencils, softening the otherwise harsh image, correcting lighting, adding a few entourage items. 24 hours later I was back in my clients office with a final rendering, the first of several dozen in the following few months. Who needs a net?

More recently, I have tried to push this method much farther by using Photoshop to modify the digital image and add many elements and effects that I would have done by hand. Photoshop is also critical for combining all the various elements I use to assemble the image before printing. While this working method does sometimes save time, the main reason is for the challenge of it. I have been modeling, drawing and painting buildings every workday for twenty years. I was looking for anything to make the seem new and interesting. Creating new working methods does that.

In Photoshop you can also import and drop in images onto signs, client logos, etc. Using the 'transform' tools will allow you to position these elements and make them fit in perfect size and perspective. Work on layers and flatten them down later if you need to keep the file size reasonable.

This technique is not perfect, and not for everyone. It is an interesting new way to approach producing a watercolor rendering. In some cases it is not even faster than just painting the picture the old-fashioned way. But sometimes it saves a tremendous amount of time. This has been an important factor in developing the technique as a method for dealing with commissions where the client has high expectations and a low budget. In these cases I feel that using this technique has allowed me to include the levels of detail the client wants while not devoting the time it would take to layout and paint a similar picture by hand. Also, I can print the image fairly large and still get through the watercolor portion quickly because the image is fully toned to begin with. I just use a larger brush.

Finally, I find this new way of working exciting. It is nice to have something new to try after so many years of architectural rendering. I hope you enjoyed this tutorial. Remember also that you can pick-and-choose parts of it to apply as they serve your way of working.

Ernest Burden III