[BobbyG-39]

What school do you go to? I am a designer at Ford and teach at CCS.

I looked at your sketches and briefly read some of the responses.

To become a car designer, you need to separate the design part from the drawing part. If you're learning how to draw while you're trying to design, trying to communicate the car in 3D actually overtakes the design process.

You seem to have a good handle on proportion, but your perspectives are a bit tricky. I would suggest developing the design in side view first, to get the overall proportion of the car right. Then do a direct front end view and a direct rear view. This way, you'll understand your design before trying to draw it in perspective. Now you can use the rules of perspective to communicate the design in 3D.

I gotta run and do errands, but I will let you know more later....

[t66turbocobra]

Originally Posted by BobbyG-39

What school do you go to? I am a designer at Ford and teach at CCS.

I looked at your sketches and briefly read some of the responses.

To become a car designer, you need to separate the design part from the drawing part. If you're learning how to draw while you're trying to design, trying to communicate the car in 3D actually overtakes the design process.

You seem to have a good handle on proportion, but your perspectives are a bit tricky. I would suggest developing the design in side view first, to get the overall proportion of the car right. Then do a direct front end view and a direct rear view. This way, you'll understand your design before trying to draw it in perspective. Now you can use the rules of perspective to communicate the design in 3D.

I gotta run and do errands, but I will let you know more later....

I've never drawing a car since I started school. I appreciate your input and will start implementing your recommendations in my next drawings. Thank you again for your expertise.

[BobbyG-39]

I see you are in Detroit. Do you go to CCS? I went to U-M Ann Arbor in product design and then to CCS....

As for your sketches, I will agree with some of the comments- the designs are sort of anonymous.

However, it depends on where you're at in your academic career to know if this is an issue. From your comments, I don't think it is yet....

When I have students that are starting out, I don't want to see any of their own designs. First you need to learn what good proportion of different types of vehicles are. So we concentrate on side views- front drive car, rear drive car, sport coupe, sports car, pickup, crossover, Body On Frame SUV, and so on. Once you understand the "architecture" of each of these kind of cars, you can see where the pitfalls of each are and how to make each one look good. At this point in time, the shape of the grille or headlight is unimportant. The reason a Chrysler 300 looks better than a Ford 500/Taurus is not the big grille or headlights. Take a look at how big the side windows are on 300 vs. 500. Then see where the windows are - placed closer to the back wheel. The A pillar ( windshield post ) is further behind the front wheel on a 300. On the 500, its almost right behind it. Then look at the front overhang ( how far the front bumper sticks out past the front wheel. ) You must understand where to place these elements in architecture first, and where they need to be depending on what type of car you're doing. The 500 is front-drive family, the 300 is rear drive sports/luxury. This doesn't mean you can't make a front driver look good, just look at any Audi or the new Malibu.

Like I said before- do side views first, then front, rear, and sometimes plan ( top ) views. This will help you understand the car in 3d and project it in perspective space. Once you're comfortable with your perspectives of these generic architectures, we can address the comments on design.

The design, or the "theme" can be inspired by anything- it could be the brand DNA, which could be retro, but doesn't have to be, it could be related to the function, or anything else you're inspired by ( the skeleton of an insect, a flower, a plane, whatever. ) It should relate to the brief, which is the basic one or two line project statement ( i.e. design the next Ford Edge for 2020, or create a new sports car that uses glass in an innovative way for empty nesters in 2015. ) Here is where you want to be the most creative.

You need to balance the idea of the design being reasonable considering modern laws, requirements, and buyers tastes...for example, an open-wheeled, topless hot rod with no luggage space doesn't make sense for a crossover- but that doesn't mean it needs to look like a sanding block for it to be reasonable. Take a cue from all the different kinds of hot rods there are from a single design- the 1932 Ford. In actuality, the 1932 Ford and 1932 Chevrolet are much closer looking that today's Fords and Chevys. But many people have creatively modified both to express their own ideas.


Car design is a very competitive field, and you have a better chance at playing for the NFL than being a car designer, simply because there are more football players than us! ( You will also make alot more money in the NFL, too. ) But if car design is your passion, as it was mine, stick with it, and draw your hands off...

Car designers are chosen similarly to scouting in professional sports. Most companies will pick who they want from different schools in senior year prior to graduation. You need to convince visiting designers from OEMs who sponsor projects, instructors, and those who hire for internships that you understand the brand, and can do the super hot-looking renderings of very creative designs. If they hire you, they're better their butts that you will create the next best gotta have it design, that can push through the corporate red tape and get everyone excited to put it on the road as you drew it....

One comment about your sketches- the perspectives seem foreshortened, which is making your cars look narrow. Also, don't leave out the wheels- the most important thing to a car is stance, and that's defined by the wheels. You wouldn't do a figure drawing without the feet, so don't leave out the car's feet either....

I took one of your sketches, drew over it, and then did a quick 5 minute re-do of it, then a quick 15 minute tone-on-tone ( b/w render in Photoshop. These are quick, not masterpieces, but hopefully can give you a good idea of where to go...see attachments to this message

Good luck, and feel free to post more or send me private messages with sketches. I will gladly give you my feedback.

[Job~Rated]

Originally Posted by t66turbocobra

foreign design is superior to us design.

Surely that's a matter of opinion.
All this modern cr*p looks like it was designed in the same wind tunnel to me.
Push the envelope, I say.
Whether they float your boat or not, noone can deny the P/T Cruiser has been a big hit on both sides of the water. The new shape Mustang is also very popular, not least because it is so similar to a 40 year old design. The new Challenger & Camaro will also be big hits, I'm sure.

But, that's just my opinion & opinions are like A-holes - everyone's got one.

[t66turbocobra]

Originally Posted by Job~Rated

Surely that's a matter of opinion.
All this modern cr*p looks like it was designed in the same wind tunnel to me.
Push the envelope, I say.
Whether they float your boat or not, noone can deny the P/T Cruiser has been a big hit on both sides of the water. The new shape Mustang is also very popular, not least because it is so similar to a 40 year old design. The new Challenger & Camaro will also be big hits, I'm sure.

But, that's just my opinion & opinions are like A-holes - everyone's got one.

I do agree with you that bringing back classic designs like the Mustang (I love the new MUstang), Camaro and Challenger was a and still is a great idea. When I said, "Foreign design is superior to US design". What I mean, and this is just my opinion from what I see, is that foreign designers aren't held back as much from pushing the envelope. American designer are just as good, if not better then foreign design, just look at the American comcepts cars. But from what i see is that most of the awesome cars the Americn designers prduce are never built. I feel that the corporate guys(non-designer) hold back the American designer from actually building these cars. This is just what I see. (My opinon). My passion is American Cars.

[BobbyG-39]

Originally Posted by t66turbocobra

I do agree with you that bringing back classic designs like the Mustang (I love the new MUstang), Camaro and Challenger was a and still is a great idea. When I said, "Foreign design is superior to US design". What I mean, and this is just my opinion from what I see, is that foreign designers aren't held back as much from pushing the envelope. American designer are just as good, if not better then foreign design, just look at the American comcepts cars. But from what i see is that most of the awesome cars the Americn designers prduce are never built. I feel that the corporate guys(non-designer) hold back the American designer from actually building these cars. This is just what I see. (My opinon). My passion is American Cars.

Both of you are saying the same thing, just differently. You are right, there are things that were done back in 40s, 50s, 60s, and even 70s that we just can't do now for either safety, federal, CAFE, or cost, other reasons. For example, we can't do fins like a 1959 Impala because the welding would slow down the assembly line, we can't fill gaps w/ lead for safety health reasons, and UAW will red-flag any design feature which requires an non-ergonomic installation procedure. And forget a boat-tail 72 Riviera- the car would never make it because the ergonomists would worry about someone complaining that the window is too small or the view is distorted. Not to mention the expense of a compound piece of bent glass, and the manufacturing implications.

Keep in mind, too that because of culture and competition, cars from different companies do tend to look the same. The 32 Ford and 32 Chevy were almost identical, the 40 Ford and 41 Willys were very close, eveyone had fins in the 50s, everyone went boxy in the 60s, and aero in the 80s. It's those standouts like the 36 Cord 810, 49 Ford, Continental Mark II, 53 Studebaker Golden Hawk, and 63 Riviera and 66 Toronado that really pushed the envelope. Comparing different eras sets the stage for "why can't/don't they do ( insert your styling feature here ) anymore???"

But t66turbo, your comment was foreign versus domestic, and yes your are right. The company must be willing to invest in their product to get stylish cars on the road. And since we are so much more regulated today than in the past, it's even more important to invest in your product so you develop cool features that make your product unique and desirable.

The company must allow the designers ( and push the engineers ) to develop something that stands out from all the rest.

And yes, it has been the case that the foreign ( Japanese, German, Korean ) automakers change their cars stem-to-stern every five years while the domestics made do with a new headlight and grille, along with old engines and technology.

However, I see instances that this is changing: look at the Ford Edge, Ford Flex ( very unique modern "woodie", http://www.fordvehicles.com/flex/details/ ) Chevy Malibu and Cadillac CTS as examples, as well as the Mustang and Camaro examples you already cited. ( I am very proud to have worked on the Mustang.) Just don't expect a bubble-top flying car with open wheels and side exhaust......pushing the envelope costs money, and even if we draw it, the company must be willing to pay to produce it.

[DVierstra]

Well said BobbyG-39. I agree.

Now a whole new demand will change automotive design again. Hybrids and electric vehicles may alter current designs and standards even more.
I will be checking out this event tomorrow: Anaheim California Electric Vehicle Symposium (EVS) Be interesting to see where automotive design is heading.

[Rob Keller]

The cars all look alike because 90% of the drivers could care less what it looks like they want to get back & forth for the least amount of $$$ & the most mileage.


Everything produced today has this wedged look with wheels
that ford flex looks like a minivan that has gotten to big for its own good .

With a lot of emphasis on all these creature comforts that do nothing but distract drivers its all & all too much.

IM HO!



R

[Job~Rated]

This one's a winner!!

[DVierstra]

Now here's something I could REALLY sink my teeth into...



My stuff

[powerrodsmike]

Here is my favorite car drawing..(no I didn't draw it, but I like the car....it's a Fillmore.... I think ..dig the fins )

I like the free flowing lines and jello lens eyeglasses perspective.

Later, mikey

[BobbyG-39]

Originally Posted by DVierstra

Now here's something I could REALLY sink my teeth into...



My stuff

I prefer this one, designed by my friend Steve Gilmore. This is something actually realizable as a production car, too!



Here is another shot ( Steve is the one in jacket, not the one w/ the microphone ):

[79C10]

Heeeeyyyyy..... that's perrty neet-o. Looks like Billy Gibbons got hold of a new Chrysler 300 ! mad cool

[malc]

That is cool but has severe all round visibility problems.

"This is something actually realizable as a production car, too!"

Never, the market for such a car would be too small.
Remember 99.99% of people want a car to go from A to B and one they can fit the wife and kids into.

[BobbyG-39]

Originally Posted by malc

That is cool but has severe all round visibility problems.

"This is something actually realizable as a production car, too!"

Never, the market for such a car would be too small.
Remember 99.99% of people want a car to go from A to B and one they can fit the wife and kids into.

You are correct the market would be small, but if built as a niche vehicle off another existing platform would allow a "halo" vehicle that would be worth more to the brand's image than the actual volume of sales.

As far as the visibility comment, remember this design was for a Hot Wheels, and Steve hit the nail on the head as far the proper proportions for that size. In other words, the design has to scale down to 1:64 ( the big model is a 1:5 scale ) so in the larger size, it will of course look somewhat cartoonish with mafia-slit windows....Look at any Hot Wheels car and you will see the proportions have been modified to work at the smaller size ( scaled up, most of the wheels would be something like 30s, too. )

The skill of a good designer is being able to translate the beautiful concept into a production-reality design, and trust me, with normal Chrysler 300C amount window glass, this design loses nothing.....

Of course, I am biased