Wow, thank you!

Scott's books are BEAST MODE! Love his work!

@@LaForteDailyDemos pleaseplease

Thank you! Your feedback is inspiration to do so!@@郭东-y3z

Exactly! I probably complicate the explanation too much!

The first drawing is always going to be a rough, just trying to figure out how it'll start to materialize. Once you see how it's working out you can move to the final sheet, and a larger sheet as necessary. There are other tricks to keeping the drawings even more compact to a smaller sheet of paper, but it takes a little work and experimentation to see what works. One of the best books would be John Pile's book on Interior Perspective where he shows a few other ways of setting up the drawings.

You're so welcome!

The units wouldn't matter, the concept would be the same. If you change the scale units you use, then the floor units will change too, but the system doesn't change. Set the VP and measure the distance to the furthest floor/wall base corner, bring that up to the HL 2x from the VP and that will still be the control MP

Thank you! I'm trying. Have had 2 kids in the last few years and they have put a lot of constraints on my free time! I need a streamlined workflow path from my in-class demos to KZbin...that or an army of assistants!

Not so much teaching online other than with zoom in my class rooms, but I've found some new tools which might help me get more of my content shared to the wider world! Thanks for following and supporting my work!

Thank you!!

Right?!

Thanks! Glad I could help!!

It's a method, not the only method, but one and the one which I think gives the best sense of proportions for the foreshortening.

I don't get it either, the theory I mean. I thought you just drew a corner from edge to edge on the ground plane.

Thank you! Glad you appreciate it! Eyeball method works fine when you have a base understanding, but I found the 2x method (diag distance from VP to longest floor corner) to be easy enough to remember and produces good, believable results--I've seen some methods that do not appear believable. You can even eyeball approximate that point within reason and it will fall in line fine. When people set a diagonal control point too tight in, the ground plane grid just won't look foreshortened right. I don't recall where exactly I got this method. I think it was from Professor Opheim who had a self-published book; very technical. But just about every perspective book has some variation on it, John Montague's book is very good. I've also got books by John Pile, Joseph D'Amelio, Ken Auvil, and a few more... I've tried to put together material that plugs some holes I haven't seen covered very well or are very cryptic to unpack from a book.

That won't foreshorten the ground (walls and ceiling as well) grid in a sufficiently believable manner

sorry, I don't comprehend

sorry I don't comprehend

You're very welcome!

That's awesome! Thanks!!!

Great to hear that! Thanks!!

How to establish it, or more conceptually where it comes from and why it works?

@@LaForteDailyDemos yes sir, I'm really gonna appreciate it if you'll explain it

I think you're referring to the "view". I wouldn't erase anything, but it's just that everything beyond that frame will stretch out a lot from the perspective system. Never erase your sketch though!

Glad I could help!

Nah, nothing but a mythology! I have zero skills in an abundance of other areas! Cheers!

Thanks so much!!!

My pleasure!

Thank you! This is a really good question and to be honest I'm not really sure I could answer it here as it gets much deeper academically. I highly recommend Scott Robertson's book How To Draw (Design Studio Press), and also check out his KZbin channel as well, he's brilliant, and his book has incredible depth and some excellent comparisons of distortion that starts to come into play when using wider angle lenses versus 50 or 85mm lenses and how as we move back from the object we begin more closely approaching "orthographic" flatness. See pp 167-171 especially. Elsewhere he shows some examples of environments and lens distortion or curvilinear perspective, but he doesn't seem to go into specific systems for specific lenses, unless I overlooked it. Not factoring lens distortion/curvature issues or the dynamic stylization this offers and just regarding the difference between an 18 and 85mm lenses for example, to be say the distance between our station point, ie. where the photographer is standing and the subject/object/space, then what we're looking at is better understanding the concept of the Picture Plane in relation to us, the viewers. For that, it's far better to use the "pull-down" construction system as with that method you can move the picture plane line more dynamically. I made a couple videos covering the pull down method in 2-pt perspective, but this is easily adapted for 1-pt as well (I have to re-do my video on it). As you get deeper into perspective, academically you'll find there are a number of approaches and they all overlap in various nuanced ways with differing tricks. Much depends on what the designer's end goal or industry is. One of the best books on the subject for interiors and architecture is the book, Perspective for Interiors by John Pile (Whitney Library of Design), which uses almost exclusively the pull-down system and he overlays the drawing structure with photos so you can really see the relationship. It's very easy to follow, especially if you also watch my videos on the 2-pt Pull-down system. But, back to these grids, once you understand that you can use the diagonal vanishing point to scale the grid back toward the horizon and left or right, you find it's very malleable. Also, you can always use a slightly larger or smaller unit for the module and that'll have the affect of zooming in or out. If I were in need of some kind of reliable codex, then I might come up with a system for better "knowing", maybe just do the same grid several times with the only change being the size of the module unit, say 1/4", 3/8", 1/2", and 5/8". Then I might also find a neutral space, maybe an empty room like a storage unit or something, and take a series of photos from the same standing/station point using a range of lenses, 18, 35, 50, 85mm, etc. so I can gather a controlled set, and then compare how they maybe align to the grids built using different units. However, what you need on a small A4 or Letter sized sheet isn't likely to carry over to a much larger A2 or 20x30" sheet, so this may be a lot of unfruitful exploration... I'm not sure! Hope this helps!

Thank you! I will soon!

Awesome!!! Thank you!

@@LaForteDailyDemos thank you so much sir I'll work on all these thing to improve my designing process Thank you for helping

That's a great question. I think a few things that are easily overlooked and under appreciated by beginners is line control, making confident strokes and eliminate the scratchy indecisive back-n-forth motions that comes with being unsure. Drop a line, let it arc, let it flow, run with it and adapt, improvise, allow space for ideas to emerge from little "accidents", as in a mark didn't go down exactly the way you imagined it should've, learn to live with it and then build off it, make it into a little detail. That kind of thing. This kind of freedom and improvisation comes with practice and learning to accept your hand, your work, your validity or agency. The second thing to develop is learning to be light with your arm so you can make light line work to set up your eye and then work into it slowly, progressively, and build up details through drawing deeper tonality of lines. Working on line value range goes a very long way. Maybe lastly, practice controlled cross-hatching, or just single direction hatching; parallel lines, evenly dense and even line weight. Speed and control comes with a lot of practice, but it comes. When people just jump to speed without having sufficient practice, years of it embedded in their muscle memory, then it becomes scribble. But controlled hatch lines to create value depth feeds into marker control. Super valuable and subtle technique details! Enjoy the journey!