Put it this way, if the third vp is such that as you go farther back shapes get larger then it needs to be the other way. Such as in my earlier mistake.
Another way to put it, place the third vp above the horizon.
No. The question is about constructing squares in perspective. This does not involve a third vanishing point for verticals.
Let me take the freedom to explain what Elwell was trying to say; I beg him to forgive me if he was trying something else. The construction lines that are vertical in your two-dimensional drawing go through the diagonals of parallel squares in your three-dimensional world. As such, they are parallel and will have their single vanishing point. This vanishing point must be constructed first, in order to construct squares.
Again, find yourself an introduction to perspective, it shows up every now and then in this Forum, if you really, really, really want me to use the Search features for you, just ask, and I will refuse...
I'm sorry but I don't understand, why three vps and so on? Let me ask this using other words: can you tell me how do you verify you have a perfect square in prospective?
I found few topics about this but no one really exaplain how to find sides of a square, some of them are really old and example images are not available anymore.
Daafone, artistic perspective is not science. Its just a cheesy quick fix to get some stuff in certain locations on your picture to look correct. As soon as you begin to rely on it, it will make your picture awkward looking. You must keep correcting it by eye.
Last edited by kev ferrara; April 26th, 2012 at 12:34 PM.
Reason: why muddy the waters...