The Perspective Course
Understanding Perspective(101 Lessons )
Intro to Perspective
Materials to Spare You Pain
Depth Tricks and Old Masters
Intro to Forms
Orthos and One Point
Orthos and No Point
XYZ
Grids
Eye Level
The Picture Plane
Wide Angles
Bonus Lessons
Mastering the Skills(0 Lesson )
Course In Progress
Course In Progress
Learn how to draw objects that don't touch the picture plane, whether they're placed behind or in front of it.
Newest
Thieum
7d
Antonio Komadina
2mo
I’m reading the comments, and it’s not a problem to read them if something in the lessons wasn’t clear, but having to read the comments just to figure out where the mistake is in the video, or how something wasn’t fully explained in the video, doesn’t make sense.
The videos are 5–10 minutes long, and I bet it wouldn’t be hard to make a quality version.
By the way, thanks to Stepki for the explanation.
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but people are engaged—it’s not about the price or the fact that I paid for it. The point is that the course is beautiful, and it would be a shame if it weren’t complete.
Antonio Komadina
2mo
Is it really such a problem to make a corrected 5–10 minute video that clearly shows how to pull the true height when a square passes through the picture plane? I understood that one way is when it’s drawn from the points where the square passes, but I figured that out from the comments rather than from the video. The video is 5 minutes long—I don’t want to complain, but I don’t believe it would be hard to fix this properly and elaborate so that others wouldn’t get lost, and the course would have its completeness.
Ayesha Mahgul
2mo
did it, but i don't get it why we are doing that to get the height.
Maria Bygrove
2mo
Now that I watched all the videos in the Picture Plane section, and I'm rewatching them and drawing along, feeling like "yeah, obviously, this all makes sense"... it's hard to believe that just a week ago I didn't even know there was way of drawing things accurately and fairly simple one too.
I think I just always assumed that people eyeballed things like height and depth. And I'm sure most of them do. But knowing how to do it accurately will make the eyeballing so much easier!
Thank you @Marshall Vandruff! This section alone made the whole course worth the money for me :)
Having said that, I hope I'm not overly optimistic. If anyone spots any mistakes in my drawings please do point out! ;)
@deadsm
2mo
Ok I followed along and it worked but I am still a bit lost on what's actually happening here. Hopefully it will make more sense later on when applied!
Rick B
2mo
Don't know why this one gave me some much trouble at the beginning. This is the way I figured it out. even if the edge is not touching the plane. the area that is touching the plane is still an invisible shape. (in red) once I thought of it like that. it all fell into place. Second image. made sense once I figure out the first one.
Stepka
2mo
Marshall, I was wondering about something regarding the height measurement of the object in the drawing. Is it accurate to measure the height from the front corner of the box? Since the box is projecting through the picture plane, it seems that the front vertical edge might appear taller than the object's actual height, perhaps due to the effect of foreshortening, where objects closer to us appear larger, and those farther away appear smaller.
Would it make more sense to measure the true height using verticals dropped from either of the two intersections where the nearer edges of the rectangle meet the picture plane? Alternatively, could we extend either of the farther edges to the picture plane and drop verticals there to measure the height correctly?
Max Long
2mo
Thank you Stephanie, for simplifying this assignment with one of the most basic shapes, being the cube. Early on in this course, Marshall Vandruff said to simplify, and this is a perfect example of simplifying, so thank you again!
•
2mo
Here is what we are trying to be sure of in response to my error:
The height measurements must have a single "standard" on the picture plane.
A height line that already touches the plane is most convenient.
If there is none, we choose one and extend it to touch the plane.
Then, from that standard, all other heights conform.
You wrote:
"the front vertical edge might appear taller than the object's actual height"
Yes. With one standard height line, other heights change as they get closer or farther.
You wrote:
"could we extend either of the farther edges to the picture plane and drop verticals there to measure the height correctly?"
Yes. You seem to have done that in your image.
Let's try to simplify the idea this way:
In the plan, we choose one line as the standard for "true height". It must touch the picture plane, even if by extension.
In the projection, we line up an ortho to transfer its "true height" to that line.
All other heights will grow or shrink as they come toward or away from us.
I know this is difficult. It is also temporary. And Stepka, you have given it useful thought.
Andreas Kra
2mo
Here, I tried to recreate a model of the plan projection using GeoGebra. If you’d like to try it yourself, here is the link: https://www.geogebra.org/calculator/vpfuvfwr
I tested three different scenarios. The first concerns the viewer’s proximity to the picture plane. The second scenario involves a shifting horizon, and the third examines rotating the cube in front of the picture plane. Due to Proko’s file limitations, I had to compress the GIFs significantly. If you’d like to explore them yourself, you can follow the link.
M C
3mo
let me get this straight: we choose the height, but to apply this chosen height correctly (not bigger or smaller than what we chose) we have to use the point projected by the angle not toughing the picture plane onto the picture plane. right? but then if no angle touch the picture plane why use that one and not the others ? hellllp help
Rick B
3mo
I am having a hard time on this one. gonna have to watch that video a couple more times. it is just not computing at the moment. but then again it is late in the day for me.
Sandra Süsser
3mo
Fantasy object plan projection: overlapping exercise
Michael Giff
3mo
In the demo we put a vertical line to plan out the elevation. Can we go past the vp line?
Michael Giff
3mo
Michael Giff
3mo
So when we speak of elevation in perspective we are talking about the distance an object is from the picture plane... which will dictate how steep the angels will be falling back to the vanishing point.... yes? maybe?
Even without fully understanding at least I can follow along... despite sloooowly. Can't believe there is more to this demo and then another demo.... and then the assignment! Have mercy, good sir!!
Michael Giff
3mo
Really confused about the elevation height. I hear the words that "we choose" to make it so high but we have so many line systems in place at that point it feels like we really don't have much of a choice at all.
Sandra Süsser
3mo
So I did a little experiment. First I did another test of what I already learned (the object not touching the picture plane). Then I changed the viewers position wanting to know how distorted the object would get projected and where it would cut off (get out of sight). It depends on the cone of vision (60°) capturing the whole object on the plan and not the projection area, right? The farther towards the border of the cone of vision, the longer the object and of course in general more distorted it seems.
Next, I figured one could run a line down from that cone intersecting the object as well to determine the exact cut (where the projected object goes out of sight). Is that correct? I guess it should be more curved though given our curvelinear sight and of course rather fading transition than a hard cut, but just for construction and explaining reasons I marked it as a straight line.
Note: I didn't care about the elevation being exactly the same each time. Kinda eyeballed it since this wasn't my learning focus.
I hope I didn't screw everything up here xD. Did I understand it correctly?
Sandra Süsser
3mo
Correction: Something was irking me with first box. Turns out, I didn't drop the VPs correctly, so here's the corrected version. Sryyyyy.
Hans Heide Nørløv
3mo
I had some trouble when trying to do one where 2 of the corners are in front of the picture plane…
Stepka
2mo
I think in the second picture you should measure height not on the sight lines, but on an edge of the rectangle extended up to the picture plane, exactly as you did in the first picture. Or you can drop verticals from the points where the rectangle already intersects the picture plane.
Michael Giff
3mo
PANIC, PANIC!! I'm at the 8:45 in the demo... why is my line going above the true height line?
Hans Heide Nørløv
3mo
You just placed the box and horizon line too close to the top veiw.
the top veiw is not even actually a part of the final drawing, all it does is give us the needed infinite vertical lines.
you could in theory just place your scene a kilometre down the infinite vertical lines and it would give the same result.
Anke Mols
3mo
Unfortunately I simply didn't understand this one.
I have an example here.
I measured the height of the two smaller houses simply by taking the height from the ortho and applying it to the front corner of each house. I guess this is wrong and this is what "how to draw objects off the picture plane" is about. Do I at least understand the problem??
Spyridon Panagiotopoulos
3mo
First, let me say that I both love and dread this exercise. I love because it is legitimately fun for me, puzzles to be solved with usually clear and well defined solution. Hours lost everytime I do them, and I love every time.
I also dread it, because it scares me to think I will always have to plan everything and I wont be able to sketch loosely as I always wantes to.
That said, I do need some help.
I could not find the corner to box C, since my method failed. What am I doing wrong? I had to eyeball it, and I think it looks goos, but what is the real solution? Is it because the projected point is outside my VPs?
Spyridon Panagiotopoulos
3mo
I found it. The above is entirely wrong, I misunderstood how to project. Redid it again, and works fine.
Dedee Anderson Ganda
3mo
I wonder if my logic is wrong somewhere. For the last demo, the intersection of the final lines doesnt seem to match. I thought we need to still use the lines projected from the edge of the box that already passed the picture plane after finding the supposed projected height. Is that wrong?
Dedee Anderson Ganda
3mo
so we DO need to FORGET about it. But why? Where did it go? Does it get so far in front of the canvas of our picture, that we cannot draw that? Then why do the box still can get drawn as a perfect box not a box that it's front plane is half carved out? I guess that's why it is hypothetical? Does that means it might not be accurate since we cannot prove it? *thonking, thonking*
Give a gift
Give a gift card for art students to use on anything in the Proko store.
Or gift this course:
About instructor
I Teach Creatives
