Reconciliation of real life and drawing terms - Page 2
Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    758
    Thanks
    656
    Thanked 367 Times in 244 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    So you tell us we're mathematically wrong and then proceed to make the same point we are making?.. I'm confused here.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Shorinji_Knight For This Useful Post:


  3. #32
    JeffX99's Avatar
    JeffX99 is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,896 Times in 2,544 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Of course there is no VP in 3D space...that is so elementary as to be an unnecessary and possibly confusing point of semantics.

    As I said, linear perspective is a constructive formula/approach which has developed to allow the artist to accurately represent what we see on a 2D surface, ie: the picture plane. What we see are vanishing points. That is no more the purvey of math than it is of optical phenomena.

    Edit: IMHO the important thing to keep in mind when trying to understand perspective theory is to keep it simple. Maybe this will help:

    Vanishing points are simply the points at which parallel edges appear to converge. They can occur anywhere in the distance, and thus anywhere on the drawing/picture plane depending on the orientation of the parallel edges.

    Last edited by JeffX99; August 22nd, 2012 at 02:36 PM. Reason: clarity
    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to JeffX99 For This Useful Post:


  5. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    54
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    You're complicating your initial scenario-- 2 point perspective-- where the central visual ray is parallel to the ground, with a scenario where the central visual ray is elevated and the picture plane is no longer perpendicular to the ground.
    Are you saying that in every 2 point perspective drawing the drawing plane should be perpendicular to the ground? otherwise its not 2 point perspective drawing.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    54
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elwell View Post
    Yet another person who asks general, vague questions for what turn out to be specific, personal reasons, but won't show their work so they could actually get some real help with what their problem really is rather than what they think it is.
    Quote Originally Posted by Arshes Nei View Post
    How about you start drawing, post it and ask. If not...let's not waste people's time.
    Answer :


    Quote Originally Posted by Star Eater View Post
    I'd be hesitant to draw as well if I thought it was this complicated.

    Its a very basic problem like, in a scene I am trying to plot boxes at different depth, some near , some very far, some overlapping each other.

    Then I am trying to duplicate the drawing with changed horizon line/ changed view point. This gives rises to all sorts of confusions.

    This lead me back to basic question, what else can I use except my intuition, to analyze the rate of convergence of these parallel lines.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. #35
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    810
    Thanks
    187
    Thanked 1,366 Times in 319 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Iamcreasy

    Yes, a scene in 2-point perspective assumes a vertical picture plane. And even if you're hesitant, it's much easier for us to help if you show us your efforts. It's very hard to guess from your words exactly what is confusing you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shorinji_Knight View Post
    So you tell us we're mathematically wrong and then proceed to make the same point we are making?.. I'm confused here.
    It wasn't a mistake of fact, just a mistake of terminology: the term "vanishing point" refers specifically to points on the picture plane, that's all. Important though if you want to avoid confusing beginners.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to briggsy@ashtons For This Useful Post:


  9. #36
    Arshes Nei's Avatar
    Arshes Nei is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,259 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by iamcreasy View Post

    Then I am trying to duplicate the drawing with changed horizon line/ changed view point. This gives rises to all sorts of confusions.

    This lead me back to basic question, what else can I use except my intuition, to analyze the rate of convergence of these parallel lines.
    Just draw it! Then I'm sure you can get the specific feedback you need.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Posts
    3,870
    Thanks
    2,300
    Thanked 2,241 Times in 1,358 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by iamcreasy View Post
    Yes. But, it didn't answer my question. I get the fact that 2 point perspective doesn't exists. But, why exactly they are on the horizon line?
    Because everything converges at your eye level, which you see as a horizon line.

    What you should realize is that artistic perspective is just a set of tools for making believable pictures. It uses a ton of tricks and abstract devices to do it, which often correspond to nothing you can observe directly. You can't see a vanishing point, but you can use it to plot a set of lines that would look like they are parallel in a picture. That's it.

    Problem is, a lot of this stuff is closely related to mathematics (projective geometry) and a lot of formal methods you can find in advanced books are really convoluted - while what you need are the practical and quick ones.

    Get Ernest Norling's "Perspective Made Easy". It's practical and straightforward.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to arenhaus For This Useful Post:


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Members who have read this thread: 1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •