Teto's

[Teto 2609]

England ended up way too big, but oh well (one insult after another, eh Cascade?)

 

 

 

And I did Cambodia too, which I think looks okay, but I can't be sure because I'm not used to seeing it really. Looks good to me though, mostly.

 

[Knuckle 484]

nooooooo you forgot my St. Andrewsssssssss

[pheonix561 2080]

This is like that thing they made us all do in fourth grade except you're actually trying. That's really cool. I didn't know you were interested in geography.

[Teto 2609]

Yeah after I decided to learn the countries of Europe, and then onto Asia and America and Africa, I've been a bit more interested. Knowing all the countries and where they are makes learning about them a lot more interesting.

 

I found a bunch of old National Geographic issues in my house, so I'll look forward to reading through some of those sometime. Only read a piece on the South China Sea from the December issue of 1998. It's funny that the quality and layout of the magazine is more or less unchanged, besides the adverts for new cars which look old now, and the whimsical way it talked about how ships in the South China Sea had upgraded to e-mail, the new magical technology.

 

Also got Planet Earth on the go now too. The way you look at the world, and the way you think about it really changes when you can hear the name of some distant countries and know where it is and what it looks like. It's like the world was a big grey area before, until I drew in the lines that divide it all up and give it shape, and whenever I hear something about the countries it's like it's all being coloured in. It's kind of like the difference between being surrounded by strangers or being surrounded by people you're familiar with.

 

I recommend it to anybody who wants to know about what's going on the world; learning the names of countries. I find that I take a lot more in when I know the place they're talking about; I can take that information I've been given and easily file it away in my head, and it's added to the list of things I know about that country, like filling in the blanks, colouring it in, as I said.

[Teto 2609]

I had a go at Africa. It didn't go as well as I'd hoped, but I didn't really expect getting the proportions right on so many countries would be easy either.

 

 

For those not familiar, this is what Niger should look like:

 

 

So below Algeria and the northern countries, I started making them too big. Ghana and Tunisia should be almost similar sizes. And Lybia's size messed up as well, it should be as wide as Algeria more or less.

[Teto 2609]

Had my first go at life drawing the other day. Before that I would never have the patience to sit and just draw something, but the atmosphere was set so I managed to get a decent amount done, and I'm happy with the result, considering I haven't done much 'art' besides doodling in years. I suppose actually, now I think about it, the map drawing by eye was more or less life drawing, but easier to see the lines and angles. Still though, makes me want to do more drawing. Seeing the flaws now, but I can hardly expect it to be perfect. I'm just happy the hair turned out as well as I could hope.

 

[Teto 2609]

 

 

The Crane giveth, the Crane taketh away.

[PrimaGaga 1025]

this was really cool to see on twitter! Your art is really neat.

[Teto 2609]

Happy with how these two turned out. First one's just my dog's face, and the second is off of this old Doctor Who episode I'm watching. Best face I've managed to draw, I think. Probably because it's from a TV show with lighting that makes it easier to do decent shading though.

 

 

[Sahaqiel 1232]

o man, this all looks really good

 

Did you have a career in mind that's art-related?

[PrimaGaga 1025]

i like the evolution between the first Frasier pic and the last of that post. 

[Teto 2609]

o man, this all looks really good

 

Did you have a career in mind that's art-related?

 

I dunno. My latest thing I'm about to post suggests to me that I might end up in some sort of technical drawing, but I'll see.

 

Before that though, basically a selfie because it actually turned out kinda nice, a self-portrait.

 

 

 

And here's me trying to draw a 3-dimensional room, with a fenced-off square area in the centre.

 

 

First of all, drew the area I wanted to do on a grid as a top-down 2D view. The walls were 300cm tall, the railing of the middle area is 100cm tall, and the viewpoint is 200cm high (Skyler's height maybe?). The viewpoint is the little eye in the left bottom corner of the first picture. I then drew the direction the viewpoint was facing, and drew a grid over it. Then on the right, I drew the room again, but from the head-on perspective of the viewpoint, using positions on the overlay grid as basis for where it would be.

 

 

Then I drew the area again, isometric to give an idea of 3 Dimensionality. At this point the roof was going to be 2m tall, so it doesn't look right, but I decided a 2m tall room would be impractical and ridiculous, as well as the wall being on eye-level with the viewpoint, which would just result in a straight line across the horizon.

 

Speaking of horizon, the writing in the rest of the page is my narrative on how I was going to decide how to do the perspective on the next page. I decided that there should be a certain number of grids between the viewpoint and the horizon, and so if you took the distance to the horizon and the lengths of the grids, you be able to decide that with just a bit of division. And then I took the distance on paper (18cm) between the floor and the horizon. I used a graph and the figures I collected to decide what proportion of that 18cm should be taken up by the first 10 squares, and then drew that line on the next page.

 

I fudged the numbers I think, and maybe that's why the perspective ended up a bit funky when I put it all together, matching the points on the grid with the new points on the perspective-affected grid. Came out with this, which doesn't look too bad anyway.

 

 

So that's the story. It had maths in it, so it was a bit of fun problem solving to figure out how to position the perspective lines to show depth. Not bad for my first go at converting a 2D layout of a room into a 3D perspective drawing. Also now I look more closely, I think the furthestmost fence post is too high. If I drew two lines along the left and right sides, elongating them toward the horizon, they probably wouldn't meet, when they should.

[Teto 2609]

I really enjoyed the perspective drawing, and I think what I'll try and do next is draw my Animal Crossing New Leaf main room from several different angles pointing toward the centre and, if I actually get enough, turn it into a gif image that will make people physically ill. The furniture will be the undoing of it though. I'll break down each piece of furniture into shapes and see if I can develop them from there.

[Teto 2609]

SAHAQIEL mostly

 

I've just spent maybe like 5 hours at this point trying to figure out a method of deciding the depth of grid squares when they're subjected to perspective.

I've been working at it, and I've come to a point where I feel within reach of an answer, but I can't quite figure out a way to grasp it.

 

 

Top left: Basic idea of perspective. The foremost line is where it starts. The 'life' width of each division between points is 1m. On paper it's 2.6cm between each point on the foreline. All lines converge upon the vanishing point. Since every square is 1x1m, and the horizon is approx 1400m away, there are 1400 squares to the horizon. If you think of these triangles, they're just rows of 1400 squares each. The triangles move toward the horizon at a constant angle, so you can think of them as triangles, which brings you to the second image.

 

On paper, the triangle is 12x2.6, and so the angle is approx 12 degrees. I'll find a use for that sometime, maybe. The bottom left image is an example of one of the squares, under perspective, stretched like so, at an angle of 12 degrees. Question marks because I don't know the Y value for length, nor the value for width (W). I have the width for the start of the first square (2.6cm) and the width for the end of the 1400th square (0). In the final image, I show how it might look once you put in all the squares in. Imagine 1400 of those. Looking at it like this, you can see that all the squares will be proportional to one another. Rectangles with a triangle attached to the right hand side.

 

 

Now, if you elongate the downward line which separates the rectangle from the triangle, you notice along the bottom that the lines get closer together (assumedly at the same rate as the lines on the Y axis will get smaller as you go up toward the point where the Y axis and hypotenuse meet. Seeing this, you can assume that there must be some sort of curve, exponential or otherwise, which will show the rate at which the lines get closer together. Using that rate, and the assumption that every square is proportional to the next, you can use the percentage or ratio to calculate each width for the next horizontal line. To avoid error with measuring with the ruler, you could find an equation for the hypotenuse of the triangle, and then substitute the width as the X value, to find the Y value for the height of the line on paper.

 

So I have that figured out, but what I need to do is figure out the part involving the curve. It has a definite end, at 1400 squares, so it isn't infinite and wouldn't be exponential. The squares do get smaller in increasingly smaller increments, so it would defo be a curve. My idea just now is to use a perfect circle, and plant the Y axis crossing through the point in the bottom left of the circle where the gradient equals -1. Then find the rate at which that curve decreases to 0, and use it.

 

If people have any insight into that, that doesn't involve getting me to read how someone else did it, then go ahead.

[pheonix561 2080]

Oh god, drawing precise objects in perspective. I remember having to do this for my illustration class two years ago when I was first trying out for the program, and we all had to draw an entirely accurate representation of a light switch in perspective. It's very tedious and anal work, but there's also a catharsis to it.

Anyways, I guess what you're trying to do is show an object receding into the distance accurately in measurements? If that's the case, I'm no perspective buff but I think you're going to have a much harder time making that work in one point perspective than you would in three point. In one point perspective you only have control over lines on one axis disappearing at one point, and every other line is perfectly horizontal or vertical. Your second drawing up there, with the room with the fenced off section in the middle, would be two point. So in that one you'd have an easier time figuring out the size of one square relative to another, and you'd have good 2d representation, but your vertical lines would still be confusing.

It's really cool to see that you're interested in this kind of drawing. Lots of illustration students (actually all of them I think, myself included) who have to learn how to draw mathematically accurate objects in three point perspective learn how to do it well enough to get by for one assignment then promptly forget how it works because they all want to draw dragons and what have you. So finding someone who's really interested in the accurate side of drawings like this is always really cool. I couldn't tell you how to do it myself, because I made myself willingly forget too, but I know I could find you some tutorials online somewhere that explain how it works. Of course that means reading how someone else did it so.