Spwith Pup

Terrencejones · 14 October 2009, 05:46 AM

After Months of hard work and head aches I have finaly got to grips with perspective drawing (APM) This is my first effort and though far from perfect I was so pleased with the result I thought I would post it. The next step is to do a full painting.
Cheers Terry
[IMG]

[/IMG]

'14-'18aviationcollector · 14 October 2009, 05:59 AM

Very very nice Terry!

It will look absolutely fantastic when it is painted!

Regards,

David.

Kaiser Bill · 14 October 2009, 06:53 AM

Terrence...well done!!

Kaiser Bill

JohnReid · 14 October 2009, 07:54 AM

Cool! Cheers.

Chock · 14 October 2009, 08:45 AM

Some nice shading work with the pencil there, especially on the cowling and the wing ribs. Now, I hope you don't mind me doing this, because it is intended to help you rather to be negative criticism, as I would hate for you to spend a lot of time on a painting only to spot this down the line, so here goes...

Take a look at this that I knocked up quickly based on your image, which should hopefully help you a bit with getting perspective totally nailed on:

On an illustration, any object will have three perspective vanishing points, one into the far distance, one vertically, and one off to the side, these being the three dimensions, and any object in the same orientation as another will have the same vanishing points too, such as two aeroplanes in formation for example. I've only drawn vanishing point lines for two of the vanishing points on that thing because the vertical vanishing point only really becomes relevant when drawing ojects with a good deal of height, such as tall buildings and things like that.

Anything that is parallel with anything else on an object (such as the leading and trailing edges of a square wing) will have the same vanishing point, which is where the extended line from such things will meet at the horizon. Thus you have to have such things able to follow an extended line to the horizon if they are to appear as though parallel in your drawing. You've got the front to back (direction of flight) vanishing point pretty spot on in your drawing, and I've drawn a few extended blue lines which show that. Where you need to tweak things a little, is in the other perspective plane, which I've shown in red. On the enlargement of the tail section, I've highlighted where the leading edge of the horizontal stabiliser is slightly out with regard to the main wings, and where the hinge line of the elevator is similarly out by a smidge (the yellow lines following your stabiliser which I've added indicate why it is out by a little bit, as they do not match the red lines going to the vanishing point). As you can see, it's not out out by much, but it's enough to make the rear stabiliser look like it is a bit askew.

Think of a sniper firing from a location right on the horizon: wherever he aims, the bullets will appear to fan out as they come toward you, but they will all appear to come from the same point on the horizon. A vanishing point on a two dimensional drawing, attempting to emulate three dimensions, works a bit like that. Another good example is straight railway lines going off into the distance with telegraph wires running parallel to them. The telegraph wires will have the same vanishing point as the railway lines, the cross bits on the telegraph poles will have the same vanishing point as the crossways sleepers on the railway line.

If you tape your illustration to a big drawing board or a wall, you will be able to plot the vanishing points from a part of your drawing that you are happy with (it might be quite a distance, and you can use a bit of string or something to do it). Anything which should appear parallel in the same dimensional plane should also disappear off to that same point if you extend a line from it. Once you are used to that, you'll find that you can do that sort of thing mentally and with quite surprising accuracy too.

Be careful not to let things such as wing dihedral angles or fuselage taper throw you off when doing stuff like that, and instead plot your lines from known parallel locations or items, such as the wingtips, wing ribs, or wing roots. Wings with a dihedral angle will of course have their own separate vanishing points, since they will not be in the same parallel plane as a horizontal stabiliser for example, that's where things get tricky!

As I say, hope you don't mind me pointing that out, as it is intended in the best way, to help you get a painting you will be happy with. You are clearly very good with a pencil, so I look forward to seeing what you do with a brush very much indeed.

Al

Terrencejones · 14 October 2009, 11:26 AM

Thanks Al, I appreciate your help. I can see what you mean. I'm going to include the method you describe to check things out more.
I dont know if you are familar with the APM system, this is a print out of the model I did.

Unfortunately it doesn't account for human error or the slight distortions you get on a printer. I can see the nearest wing strut is a fair bit out too

.
I'm not sure I've got the wings tips right either.
It certainly pays to get a view from someone else.
Cheers mate

Terry

Chock · 14 October 2009, 12:04 PM

I'm not familiar with the system you are using there, but I am familiar with the problem it might be causing, that being the isometric view being presented, which does not take account of perspective very well, or even at all, since it is more like a constructional schematic technical drawing. This little sketch I made probably explains it better than I have done there, technically, the one on the left is correct if using an isometric view, but the one on the right is going to look more convincing, since it drops all the receding lines into a vanishing point perspective:

Al

Terrencejones · 14 October 2009, 09:22 PM

Hi Al,
APM stands for artist perspective modeling, it's used by a number of artist including Russel Smith. The model in it's original form is accurate, it's my rendering of it that is out in some places. I just need to double check and let other people have a look before committing to canvas.
Despite the issues with the Pup drawing I'm delighted with it, it isn't so much the actual drawing of it but the fact I have a system that I am able to use to draw virtualy any aircraft in any position. I'm a very slow learner with anything mathmatical, it has taken me months to figure out how to use it

but I should get better as time goes on.

Cheers Terry

PS this will tell you more about the APM

aviart aviation art perspective

JerryBoucher · 15 October 2009, 03:21 AM

It depends on whether the software is mimicking true perspective or camera lens perspective. It seems to me that it's doing alot of perspective flattening, which is something that happens with cameras using a 'long' or 'zoom' lens. This tends, with aircraft, to make one side of an object appear of equal (or sometimes greater) length than another. This is what seems to be happening in your example. So either the 'virtual' lens is too long (in terms of milimetre size) or something is slightly askew. Human eyes would not perceive perspective in such a way, ordinarily.

FOKKERJ · 15 October 2009, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terrencejones

I dont know if you are familar with the APM system, this is a print out of the model I did.

Unfortunately it doesn't account for human error or the slight distortions you get on a printer.
I can see the nearest wing strut is a fair bit out too

.
I'm not sure I've got the wings tips right either.
It certainly pays to get a view from someone else.
Cheers mate

Terry

Hello Terry,

I don't care what anyone else says, I like it.... I'm just not sure about the square wheels!
I'll have to research this matter more in full depth.

Seriously keep up the great progress.

Cheers, FOKKERJ