It seemed very plausible these days that the pencil may have died an untimely death. Consider the masses of drawings now produced at the rate buildings need them to be marketed, sold or made redundant almost as soon as they were transacted across boardrooms or presentation suites. Enabling images, videos and computer renderings Today we rather walk through animations, computer videos made to give experience on the tube, and without any need to examine context, place or climate. Imagine architecture without pencils, and art without the canvas. Untimely did we say. Perhaps a resurrection is about to come our way. Will iPads take second fiddle to design. When do we return the classrooms to a life drawing studio and when will we stop to think, are computers as good as humans in conceptualising the space, the realm or we satisfied with mere imagery before construction documentation begins to take precedence. What form of investigation will architects need before they finally pick up the pencil and think, why not let the hand do what it must, and leave machines to do what it must. There must be debate and discourse to compare what would be the value of one design which is made though computer animation and graphics and one which went through hundreds upon hundreds of drawings, sketches made by hand. There has to be a difference between a building prepared totally on CAD and one which was entirely processed by hand and rendered by humans, but can we really tell the difference and does it matter which is which. Has technology compromised the production of useful art or has it not.