great，you really make perspective much easier.i can master every stuff that you teach,love you,my teacher.

@trustyourperspective

2 жыл бұрын

Glad to hear!

You are a good teacher

You are a Professor of Teaching

@trustyourperspective

2 ай бұрын

🙏

This is the best series of videos on perspective. The information on how accurately to measure all aspects is seldom mentioned anywhere else. Once one has the station point and the 45 degree measuring line anything is achievable. This brings me onto my question - is it possible to locate the station point from an existing image? For example, if I have a photo of a large room and I want to draw objects inside it - I am unable to measure depth because without the station point I cannot construct the measuring lines. All I am able to do is estimate it but it never seems quite right. I have searched for this information but I can't find it mentioned anywhere. I hope you might be able to shed some light on this. Thanks

@trustyourperspective

5 ай бұрын

The easiest way is if there is a one-point perspective object in the image. Then at least you know where the center of vision is. Better is if you have an object that is a one-point perspective square, then you can locate the measuring point, and then the station point. If there is only two-point objects in the image the only way I can think of is if you know what the angle of the object to the picture plane is. You would be able to find the station point that way. Otherwise I think it’s just an educated guess 🤷🏻‍♂️

@RichardRhysson-tf9cd

5 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for getting back to me, I greatly appreciate it. I have been struggling with perspective on and off for years now, so the chances of me making an educated guess are minuscule at best! My apologies for the late reply but I have been trying to get to grips with your advice and try to work it out for myself. As a reference I downloaded a picture of a room with a chequered floor. I then traced the receding lines of the room edges until they crossed which gave the horizon line and the centre of vision. I then traced the diagonals of the floor tiles to find the 45 degree measuring point. From this point I traced a line back at 45 degrees to the horizon line. Where this line crossed the centre of vision is the station point. I think that that must be right because two tiles on the picture plane measure the same as two tiles along the wall. Thank you again, you make everything seem so obvious when you explain it. You are truly a scholar and a gentleman. I now need to see how I can apply it to two point. You have given me all of the information I need but it will take some time for me to grasp how to do it. Best wishes Richard @@trustyourperspective

@trustyourperspective

5 ай бұрын

@@RichardRhysson-tf9cd Happy to help. Sounds like you are doing great.

@RichardRhysson-tf9cd

4 ай бұрын

Thank you very much, but all credit goes to you. I started out trying to learn from "Perspective made easy" by Ernest Norling. That was a misnomer if ever there was one. He made no mention of station points and his placement of vanishing points was completely arbitrary. He did show examples of what would happen if the VPs were too close together but I found it very frustrating. Also there was no mention of a way to measure depth.. From there I ventured onto KZread where paradoxically, the number of views and comments was inversely proportionate to the quality of the lesson. I was continuously told depth had to be done by eye, there was no way to measure it In the comments section people would suggest other books and I was initially excited by "Framed Perspective" The illustrations were phenomenal. I bought it and again there was no mention of measuring depth just of how to construct a grid, which was laborious and made the drawing too cluttered I found myself trawling KZread once more trying to ask more specific questions about "measuring depth" I eventually chanced on a video which didn't look like any of the others. This one had no flashy animations of cubes being constructed by invisible means. There was just a sheet of A4 paper. And was that really a stick figure? And did he really say drawing in front of the picture plane? I didn't know much about perspective but I did know that the picture plane exclusively contained the drawing Then it occurred to me that the only people to make such a claim were either completely ignorant of the rules or so aware of them that they knew how to challenge them. Listening to the commentary it was obviously not the former case. Here was someone who clearly knew their subject and that one could 'Trust his perspective'! I looked at your playlists and I started at the beginning. I thought I didn't really need to as I had been dabbling with perspective for several years, I knew about picture planes and vanishing points and all of that malarkey. Then watching the videos it turned out I knew practically nothing. Some things seem so obvious that they get overlooked a real 'can't see the wood for the trees' situation. What was especially valuable was video No 6. I had been unable to grasp the concept of cone of vision no matter how much I had read about it. All of these misunderstanding were washed away in the few minutes it took you to show how a circle would look depending on where it was in relation to the viewer. The circle appeared distorted until you tilted the paper when it became a circle again. I think if that had been shown in animation it wouldn't have had anywhere near the impact on my understanding. The paper demonstration was immediate and real and I understood it immediately. Also there was plenty of advice on measuring, I had found my Holy Grail and what's more it was relatively straightforward, at least it was when you demonstrated it. Beyond the remit of your tutorials I have come to realise why it has taken me so long to get anywhere with this subject. It is purely mental, the human brain is so efficient at helping us to understand the world that we do not see what is actually there. We stand on a street and see distant houses without realising how small they actually appear. I think if we were born and kept in a closed room for years and then placed on the street we would see tiny houses because our brains didn't know they were real properties. With the knowledge of what they are we tend to ignore the perspective altogether. Then when we sit down to draw everything looks incorrect. Perhaps a more practical experiment is to move one's hand from the face to arms length. Doing so it doesn't appear to change size much at all. If you place your other hand close to your face, however, the difference in size is immense. If you have managed to read this far, I am sorry to have rambled on but I wanted you to know how valuable your channel has been to me. I dip into it quite often and see all of these videos with way too few views and no comments. I am in awe of what you have achieved, it is easy to forget that what one is watching is effectively someone drawing and talking to himself. That he has no audience feedback and yet manages to produce a concise and perfectly explained lesson. I still struggle with perspective but the fault lies with me and my memory, because revisiting your channel always puts me back on the right track. So thank you for everything Kindest regards Richard.@@trustyourperspective

@trustyourperspective

4 ай бұрын

Wow, thank you for such a wonderful reply. I loved your analogy of seeing tiny homes, and the size of hands at different distances. So perfect! I might steal that. I figured this channel wouldn't be getting the 100K + views. But that's ok because it wasn't the point of the channel. If truth be told, I set up the videos as a way for my class to review the content. When we went online curing COVID all the class sessions were recorded. Then we went back into the classroom and the recordings stopped. I realized how helpful it was to hear the material more than that one time in the classroom. So I set up these videos for my perspective students. It usually takes more a single exposure to the material for it to click in the brain. I thought about making it a private channel, but then, knowing that most would see the analog nature of the videos, and hear a host that that has not overdosed on caffeine, and quickly move along to something more entertaining. But, I figured a select few might stick around for the content, despite of the lack of visual sparkle. And if the videos are in any way helpful, I am thrilled. Actually, I'm kinda surprised this many people have seen and commented on them. But your reply takes the prize. Thank you, and thanks for hanging in there. @@RichardRhysson-tf9cd

This is really great teaching. There is only thing in your video that I don't understand: how do you position the measuring line (floor of the room) vertically / relative to the horizon? It looks like it's roughly 3 units/feet below the horizon but I don't get why. Is it because the camera/eye is 3 feet high?

@trustyourperspective

Жыл бұрын

Correct. The horizon line is the eye level so the distance from the horizon line to the ground plane (measuring line) is how far the viewer"s eye is from the ground. In this instance the viewer's eye is three units above the floor of the room.

@MikaelGulerArt

Жыл бұрын

@@trustyourperspective thank you for your feedback! I have found out by looking at your prior videos and buying the book you advise. This is such great piece of information! Those standing point locations and measurements are almost never talked about anywhere!

Example of the question i had previously, is if you google "British Museum, Reading Room stock image" these images where the camera is pointing at the walls on left/right? Can you draw even construct these ellipses with standard squares?

@figuredrawing_attebery328

22 күн бұрын

You can't draw the entire circle using a square, but you can draw part of the circle using part of a square. You can't draw the entire circle or an entire square because that would put part of the square/circle behind the viewer. The picture plane, being a flat surface in front of the viewer wont allow for objects behind the viewer's eye to be projected to it's surface. But you can construct part of a square (1/2 of a square, 1/4 of a square, etc) and then plot points that will draw a small section of the circle, the part of the circle that is in front of the viewer. Anything beyond 180° you wont be able to draw unless you get into the world of curvilinear perspective.

I'm trying to draw accurate squares/circles that are centred behind the SP,, yet creep into vision (example: standing in a large circular tent? or on a large circular carpet) I can't find this taught/mentioned anywhere,,

@trustyourperspective

25 күн бұрын

A circle that big would be largely outside the cone of vision. So you only need to worry about drawing part of the circle. Maybe just the back half. You make a rectangle that is twice as long as deep and then plot the points. I have videos on how to plot points for an ellipse. you would just be doing half of the circle.

@58elrond

25 күн бұрын

@@trustyourperspective i really struggle to wrap my head around this concept,,, i've drawn a basic 1p square room on ground, but if i step inside the back half of it (like in this example, but very close to the window) and try to re-construct it all over again with wide angle fov (say 120 deg) all kinds of things fall apart,,, i want to make that room a circle shape (like im standing in a circular tower with wide fov, 1meter away from a window, looking out (not using curvelinear + ik it will look distorted, thats fine)

If I consider an external environment and the cone of view on the picture plane, could I draw an object that is behind the station point? It has a particular effect that I would like to represent

@trustyourperspective

7 ай бұрын

Drawing objects behind the viewer can only be done using 6-point perspective.

@hermesraid187

7 ай бұрын

🙏@@trustyourperspective