[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]

/img/ - Aesthetics & Images


*Text* => Text

**Text** => Text

***Text*** => Text

[spoiler]Text[/spoiler] => Text

Direct Link
Options NSFW image
Sage (thread won't be bumped)

Janitor applications are open

Check the Catalog before making a new thread.
Do not respond to maleposters. See Rule 7.
Please read the rules! Last update: 04/27/2021


Anonymous 14051

How to draw something in perspective with exact projection unit by unit? the image here is something i do, basically a bike with turned wheel seen from below…the other one is the perspective i used to do it with

the bike's sizes are to be specific based on proportion… but i dont know how to draw it centimeter by centimeters since a perspective does not have any units applied to it by default so objects seems only in ratio to each others?

sorry thx

Anonymous 14052

Did you get permabanned from /loomis/ for making several threads about this shit and decide to post it here? Good for them I guess.

>How to draw something in perspective with exact projection unit by unit?

You have to define at least one segment as a given length. For example, if a man were standing in a city scene in a city scene, and you assumed he was 6 feet tall, than you can extrapolate all other heights in the scene using his height alone. In your particular example, I supposed I would use either the leg of the driver of the diameter of the tire, or the height of the motorcycle as an arbitrary unit to measure all other units by extension. As you've said, it's all ratios.

At worst you could just define the maximum height from ground to the very top of the riders head as a the edge of a vertical box. and extrapolate ratios from that one straight line to everywhere else you need it in perspective.

Anonymous 14053

>>14052 whats loomis? the book guy?

ok i see…. so everything is based on ratio than actual real size? and a centimetres of a ruler is not exactly usable as a "real length"?

what about angle? how define zero to 90-360 degrees, when the actual parallels and perpendicularity are distorted by perspectives already?
especially angles like 45 degrees or thingsthat are "half" of something,
the "half" wont be very correct and the mistake could be continuously expanding wont it?

Anonymous 14061


THERES A /loomis/?? WHERE????

Anonymous 14063

what the webring

Anonymous 14064


Anonymous 14066

Don't listen to this crap OP just buy a book on it.

Perspective Made Easy - Earnest R Norling.
Anatomy and Perspective - Charles Oliver
Perspective.. for artists architects and designers… -Gwen White
Perspective for Interior Design -John F Pile

The last one looks good because it includes reflections, cast light and other advanced perspective you learn in school.

No ever explains perpective the way this poster did though. So ignore it.

Eventually you'll want to find a book on real advanced perspective though.
.. It's impossible to explain without hundreds of images. Just buy the books.

Anonymous 14070

Forced perspective…

>whats loomis? the book guy?
It's a board on imageboard I probably can't mention without being banned. Just know that someone asking almost your exact same question and using basically the same image asked another perspective question there making a half dozen threads just for this one question and got banned for it. If you're saying you're not that person fine, quite the coincidence though.

>ok i see…. so everything is based on ratio than actual real size? and a centimetres of a ruler is not exactly usable as a "real length"?

Not really no. For a very intuitive example, look at forced perspective. You should know that that the length between this thumb and finger is about 4 inches or so. If I were to draw a vertical line on the image, both the Eiffel Tower and the distance from his thumb to his index finger would be 4 inches. Obviously, the Eiffel Tower is not 4 inches tall. The length of anything is a mix between it's actual length and it's ratio relationship in regards to the horizon line, which, in a good perspective drawing, literally everything is. That's why things are in perspective, you've artificially constricted everything to a certain ratio relationship to 1 to 3 point perspective.

>what about angle?

Oh lordy that's a bitch just thinking about it. 45 is easy because if you make a cube anywhere in perspective, then draw a diagonal going from one corner to another corner on a single 'face" of the cube, by definition the angle formed between the "edges" of the cube and that diagonal must be 45 degrees. I'll be honest though, they are very few times you're going to just want a random "angle" in your drawing that isn't just a smaller component of a different shape, so a better question that makes this less abstract to run into would be to break down everything into a set number of 3D shapes (cubs, spheres, cones, cylinders, pyramids) and then using perspective to draw those shapes. I'm pretty sure I could weedle out some way of deriving every angle you want out of a page, but honestly you're focusing a little too hard on perspective for most practical purposes. If you're not going into archetecture or being an engineering draftsman I don't see why you would ever need angles that precise.

The entire field of perspective and it's rules is enough to write a book about, and people have, so go read one of the books suggest by >>14066

Anonymous 14071


>No ever explains perpective the way this poster did though. So ignore it.
It's literally how it's described in Perspective made Easy you fucking idiot. Don't recommend a book you haven't read.

Anonymous 14110


lol embarrassing

Anonymous 14132

>>14110 eh…that was loomis? couldnt tell. no answer there so i just ignored it.

are you gonna be a retard too lol

Anonymous 14155

My point is no one teaches perspective that way. Its fluid, easy and intuitive, if you do it right. The only way to get the best results is to not fuss over it much like some anal autist.And you're gushing just to make it sound more complicated than it is.

Anonymous 14156

Just know it's hard to find good books on perspective op. A TON of them are basic and all same. They don't go indepth. It's more than just a vanishing point and plotting cast shadows. I'd say if the book shows you how to draw a spiral staircase or how to draw reflections…vertical perspective… how to plot vanishing points FAR outside the composition on the horizon line…. then its a better book. But even then, I haven't listed enough techniques here, you should look for a book with more than that! Probably something for architects and engineers.

For example you probably want a good book on composition too, since you never start with just the vanishing point. If you did the composition part right, you'd design a lot of little mock up thumbnails with good contrast and visual impact… pick the best one out of all of them and THEN start drawing the piece /mapping out the vanishing point, light source. ( tracing paper.) If you don't design little mock compositions you probably won't be satisfied with the outcome. If you don't you'll have no control.

Anonymous 14157

Again, that's literally how it's explained in the damn book, that you yourself recommended retard, so fuck off since by recommending it that means you agree with me.

Anonymous 14159

>you want a book the does X
<can not name any books that do X
Either you're misinformed and don't know what you're actually talking about, or learned from somewhere other than books, in which case, you just recommend that source instead.

>vertical perspective

This is only relevant to photography, or, at the very least, I would be very amused to find an artist who struggles with this problem.

Anonymous 14163

You mean an artist like the op whose trying to learn it ?
Why would you limit vertical perpective to photography??
It all depends on what you want in a shot.. vertical perpective can look beyond amazing.

Based on my experience it's to find REALLY good books on perpective. The best perspective I learned was from a classroom. No book I've had compared to the detail they went into. If you disagree and know one that goes into advanced depth then tell me what it's called? Seriously I'm dying to know. I have pretty amazing notes from my classes though, so that's what I go off of.

Anonymous 14168

It sounds so counterintuitive to explain it that way though……its like……why??????? You don't go in and measure ratios unless you have staggering OCD kek

If thats the case you're probably not getting much drawing done either. If you don't draw fast and fluid as humanly possible, you will get frustrated because it will take too long. You'll lose the right feeling. If you have a ton of work to do it's even worse. That is the worst possible way to work when you have a deadline.n There is so much tiny detail to consider on every page, you should fly through drawing. Still that's where the fun is… detail.. All you have to do is sketch around the lines you plotted, it's not too bad. It's just hard to learn all the techniques from one place. :v

Anonymous 14187

There you go OP, go pay to take a class, that is apparently where the knowledge is kept, you will need to go there.

>It sounds so counterintuitive to explain it that way though……its like……why??????? You don't go in and measure ratios unless you have staggering OCD kek
If you master by trying, measuring, comparing, and trying again, you won't need to measure eventually, you'l have an intuitive sense. Otherwise, you're just guessing, which is fine for a fun smooth workflow and not expecting to do anything too serious.

I guess you are right though, I assumed she wanted to get good at what she was doing as opposed to have fun, in that case I don't understad why she's being so autistic herself. There's an autistic way to make sure it's correct, and if she doesn't want to be autistic, she doesn't have to be autistic or correct. If she tries hard enough long enough eventually randomly slowly grindingly, she will also get gud, this is also a valid path.

Thank you again for agreeing with me concerning listing a book that again, explains it the exact damn way I did, so again, you agree with me.

Anonymous 14219

don't be so mean please, she is cool, you are too

Anonymous 14252

Yeah but I wouldn't waste money on an art degree. Just take the perspective classes and teach yourself everything else. Such a waste of money in these times, with the internet the way it is/ whats available.
Just get an outline of illustration/ visual development BFA courses.

[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]