Samuel Eli
Samuel Eli
Kentucky
Samuel Eli
I wouldn't worry about any conventional horizon lines or any vanishing points for that matter - if you are drawing from these sorts of references, and just working on the figures themselves (that is to say, you aren't drawing them as a part of bigger scene). The photos have the figures so close to the picture plane in deep space that any real convergence of any curved or straight line would be pretty minimal IF you are plotting a vanishing point. Plus, you would be tracking which contour and cross-contour lines are parallel and converging, and which are not. With an organic form, that's pretty hard and overkill imo. What could be useful is working on foreshortening. Which is just a form staying at the same distance from the picture plan, but changing orientation. https://youtu.be/R60e9_ofV68?t=600 This whole video is great, but Marshal Vandruff show's what I'm talking about here pretty nicely and concisely.
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
I know that the pelvis's front plane tilts down in normal standing posture, and the front plane of the rib cage tilts upwards. But, when the model is in these twisted positions, I can't seem see how they should slope.
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
Here's the reference photos as they appear;
Ribcage Assignment 03
c12972d8 5ca2 4a15 a4af a279efe84765 20 20200107084743 996d2c39 b9d6 43e2 b250 3fc6a331c9a0
Ribcage Assignment 09
Ribcage Assignment 08
Various   16 by mjranum stock
Snake Charmer by mjranum stock
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
Decided to take a break from grinding perspective stuff, and move onto doing robo-beans from regular beans and gesture drawing. For context, I've been studying some from Michael Hampton's book on figure drawing as well. Any feedback is super appreciated :) Specifically, I'm having a really hard time figuring out how to position the pelvises when they are in odd positions other than a normal full frontal or 3/4 view. They feel very stiff and robotic to do, which I'm not sure if that's the stylistic point, or if I'm missing some gestural stuff.
IMG 5726
IMG 5725
IMG 5724
Samuel Eli
My immediate reaction to seeing these; cool rendering! Did you use a reference, like a photo or proko's vids, or are they imagined? The jaw construction on the lip study seems a little "elongated" vertically. I think this would work in caricature, but sense I don't have much else to reference in the construction (i.e. I don't have a nose, eyes, or face shape to see how they are pushed in relationship to the lips), it just feels like lips that are stretched in a vacuum. The vertical narrowness of the perceived mandible shows this too, I would maybe push that out a bit. The eye ball itself has a good sense of rounded form. However, the iris and pupil don't seem to map onto the rounded surface exactly, in perspective. Maybe work on circles, ellipses, and stability of the stroke of the circle? I guess this would depend on where the person is looking. One big thing about the eye study though, is that I think you've got some anatomical features in reverse, or didn't include eye lashes on one side of the eye. The inner part of the tear duct usually is on the opposite side of the where the most noticeable eye lashes fan out. The nose stands out to me. It feels like the bulb at the tip of the nose is actually turning to the figures left side, and down, rather than being exactly in the middle. It also feels a little elongated. Again, don't know if it's the reference, but it feels like the position of the nose isn't lining up with the ghosted figures head in deep space. I want to think that it should be turned more inward, and upward, so that we are mostly seeing underneath the nose in a more triangular fashion.
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
Right now, I'm working in a very small room in a townhouse that I share with my roommate. So, can't have huge easels or desks. I have two desks (2 ft X 4ft), with one being sequestered to one side of the room and other opposite. One side of my room is my art space, while the other is my "other" space. I'm pretty satisfied with that basic layout. I'm looking for a good drawing surface/board I can use with my table top easel. I have a Art Alternatives Ravenna Table Easel, and I love it. BUT - I can't seem to find a decent, sturdy drawing board to go with it. I have a 18x24 Alvin Cutting mat that I'd like to also lay on top of said drawing board. Basically, I'm looking for a good, sturdy, and not-too-heavy drawing board where I can lay my mat on top of it. I've used 18x14 Masonite boards before, but they tend to bend and warp as I get closer to the edges with pressure (simply because they are so thin). Does anyone have any suggestions or tips? I love to work on a tilted (45-60 degree) angle when I do any sort of traditional work. Wouldn't be opposed to replacing the whole setup if it means I won't run into drawing board warping problems :/ Left a pic for scale :P
IMG 3161
Martijn Punt
Hi @Samuel Eli, i went through Marshall's perspective course recently as well. The first thing i noticed was that the box you drew is not a cube, the length sides are larger than the height of the box. This means that if you want to draw a perfect circle in one of the side planes the circle will touch the top and bottom of the rectangle, but it will not touch the left and right side of the rectangle. So i think the construction of the ellipse is fine. Try doing it on a more perfect cube in perspective and it will work out better. In the beginning of Marshall's classes he eye-balled/estimated a perfect square in perspective, in the last class he actually provides a method to draw perfect squares in perspective (Planned Projection). Hope this helps
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
It does, I see the problem now. A little frustrated with myself in how I didn't pay attention to that particular detail >.>
Reply
Gannon Beck
One of the things Scott Robertson talks about in his book is using ellipses to estimate a cube. In other words, draw the ellipses first, get them placed, and then draw the cube around them. Your ellipses look like they are in correct perspective. They are just too far apart.
SR 26Feb2016
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
Yeah, you are correct. Actually, I know what your talking about with regards to Scott Robertson. I actually found his steps as rather self evident, but when I was studying other sources, it was in the reverse order. I was getting frustrated as to why I couldn't reverse engineer by going square>ellipse, instead of ellipse>square.
Reply
Răzvan C. Rădulescu (razcore-rad)
You need to get an intuition for the cube in perspective first. Like the others mentioned, you're doing some random box - you need a cube first. Or you know a square if we're talking about one face only. I recommend you use a free 3D app like Blender and experiment with different camera focal lengths because they affect how distorted the perspective is. Draw them free hand as you reference the cube from the 3D app and check to see how far off you are. That's how you get the intuition for it. Good luck!
Screenshot from 2021 05 26 10 30 08
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
Thanks for pointing that out! I will definitely give blender a go...
Reply
Serena Marenco
I don't quite understand but it seems to me that what you want to do is not an ellipse in perspective but a circle in perspective. So, I'm attaching a little sketch I made in a hurry and it's rather ugly, just to help me with the explanation (I've always had a bad technical stroke, even using a drafting table, let alone a ballpoint pen on a notebook, considering that I'm not used to drawing on paper anymore. I just don't feel like opening photoshop right now! 😅😅) OK, when you want to draw a figure in space you have to make sure you have as many reference points as possible. Therefore, as you have rightly guessed, you have to start from a square, in which you will inscribe the circle (a circle whose circumference will have to touch all 4 sides of the square, which is not the case in your drawing), only in your drawing the construction of the square that should guide you is already wrong. So, first you will draw a square in the plane, inside which you will draw the circle. Then you will draw the vertical axis, the horizontal axis and the two diagonals. In this way you will have 8 reference points. You will draw the vertical points on the line where the observer is positioned (I don't know what it's called in English, basically the horizontal line at the bottom of your perspective plane) and the vertical points by means of 45 degree projections, as you can see in my (ugly) sketch. In this case we have two points of view: towards one the vertical points will be directed and towards the other the horizontal points. At the points where they meet you have the 4 corners of the square, which you will use to determine the diagonals and thus find the centre of the square. Using the centre dividing lines and diagonals, you will then construct your circle in perspective, making sure that the circle touches all 4 sides of the square. It requires a bit of practice but this is the procedure for 2 point prospective (Keeping in mind that my sketch totally sucks! 🤣🤣🤣)
IMG 20210526 090839
Write reply...
Drop images here to attach them to the message
Samuel Eli
Thanks for the input! Yeah, I woke up this morning reviewing the comments and realized the mistake I was making rather quickly. I wasn't paying enough attention to the true definition of "square" in relation to how a circle is defined. I was thinking that the technique could work for any box, but it has to be a perfect, equally symmetrical square. I think that was my problem to begin with.
Reply
Samuel Eli
Hi! So - I've been grinding away at Marshal Vandruff's 1994 Perspective Series - and there is this one problem I can't seem to solve when doing my own practice. I believe I'm understanding the concept correctly - that is, getting a circle on a flat vertical plane to be in perspective (2 point). However, once I've got everything drawn up and ready to plot the ellipse, it's clearly distorted or incorrectly placed. (1) Find the center of the plane by drawing the diagonals, (2) take that center and tracing back to the opposite side's VP, (3) establish major and minor axis at 90 degrees, and (4) do ellipse. I've watched other artists do this similar method, and when I watch them do it, it all makes sense. But, when the time comes to try something organic from me on my own, it always comes out - distorted and not correct? Anyone out there have any input on this? First image is me doing it by hand, second is me doing it again in digital (a bit cleaner). Out of perspective, the boxes sides should just be a perfect circle inset on the side plane of the box. Thanks in advanced!
IMG 3158
Perspective Issue