/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3300144
you gotta pick a second vanishing point, dummy. And then you move the 2 vanishing points accordingly to the rotation of the box you want while keeping the degree angle between them the same.

>>3300155
Any examples?

>>3300144
I strongly recommend you to look to the GRIDS section of Scott Robertson's How To Draw, it explains the exact thing you're looking for in great detail. You can find the book in the artbook thread.

>>3300144
>but it relies too much on eyeballing.
do NOT develop a habit of relying too much measuring. Of course measuring is important, but you gotta train your eye as well. Measuring, just as eyeballing, will always be inaccurate.

>>3300194
Thanks, i have it, but I still don't understand how to keep the size of the box the same. I can make a random box SIMILAR to this in perspective, but how do you rotate it perfectly?

>>3300144
http://www.architecturerevived.com/how-to-draw-a-perfect-cube-in-perspective/

>>3300144
Here is one way to do it.

>>3300216
The size of the boxes would be different so it doesn't solve his issue.

>>3300212
Rotate both squares on the same circle.

>>3300144
>Also, the video by moderndayjames doesn't help much.
I love James but thats probably the worst video done by him, all the boxes look awful

I have another pic by krenz at home at my computer that I post when Im done at work that makes more sense

>>3300280

Made it probably too complicated, but thats what i came up with. Does it look right?

>>3300280
Thanks. I'll try it later, it's way easier than "my" method.

>>3300325
Now when I look at it, it looks so wrong. How did I even know how "long" to make the circles??? I still eyeballed...

>>3300325
Uhhhhhhh that looks a bit.. too much with measuring
just with what the other anon posted, you will get it OP

>>3300325
Actually, you did it right I think but the vertical vanish point is just very close

>>3300144
I always just eye-ball it because I can so this may be completely wrong but if I were to use common sense I would say it's just this simple.

Also, wtf is up with that giant image file you uploaded it as?

>>3300460
I don't understand your image... You blocket the important part. Yeah, sorry about the large image, forgot to rezise it. I usually also eyeball stuff, but I like to understand it "mathematically" before, so i can eyeball it with proper knowledge

>>3300468
Well to use perspective talk: You just draw it as if it was a 2-point perspective drawing.

Ok op I really wanna help you so I'm gonna do a step by step

>>3300474
Would love it

>>3300478
I just gotta get home (again)

>>3300468

I grabbed these two images from the net. Imagine building A and B are in focus. The only difference between them is that the two perspective points on the horizon line have been pushed.

>>3300468
>>3300470
>>3300481
NM I misunderstood what you wanted. You just wrote you wanted to rotate the box but you actually want to rotate it around a point.

Just draw a circle and use that as your guide

all these bullshit grids and elaborate methods when all op has to do is take a box-shaped object on his desk and rotate it. do you kids collaborate ahead of time or do the schools just make you this dumb nowdays?

>>3300552
> eyeballing =! perfect perspective

>>3300553
>perfect perspective
is this math to you?

>>3300556
Learning to do perfect perspective with a straight edge and vanishing points actually makes you better at perspective intuitively.

>>3300597
by that logic learning trigonometry would make you better at drawing, too. and yet it doesn't. weird, huh?

>>3300601
but it does though

>>3300604
show the class your trigonometry-inspired artwork. i'm sure it's spectacular and you aren't just a beginner talking out of his arrogant asshole. i bet you'd argue musicians study fourier transformations if it was made relevant in argument.

>>3300612

http://www.rafael-araujo.com/calculation his stuff for example.

Fourier tranformations are quickly looked over in music technology class, yes. (Of course sound engineers study it thoroughly)

>>3300626
i'm out.

>>3300630
>>3300601
>>3300552
look at this retard pretend he knows what he's talking about LOOOL

Here you go OP. Godspeed.

>>3300630
The thing is, of course you dont HAVE to study everything so analytically etc. But the more deeply you know about concept the better you will be able to make it work.

Let's take practicing the piano for example, learning the chords. How do you learn the chords?
You could learn the shapes that your hand makes when you play it. You could learn the names of the notes. You could learn the intervals between the notes that make up a chord. There are many methods of learning the same concept, you have to find what is enough for you

>>3300636
OP, you got this??

>>3300645
One moment

Thanks :D I mean... sort of. I know how to rotate it inside of it itself, but I still don't understand how to rotate it while touching a corner/side

Here's my try

Thanks for the discussion and help so far :D

>>3300144
There's a way to find the vanishing points for any shape in a 3d space, I can show you it if you'd like?
It's a nice technique since you can just sketch out the cubes you want and then work out the proper perspective for them.

>>3300673
That would be great

>>3300280
you might as well post the next parts as well

>>3300835

>>3300671
Im glad you saved it because I didnt want these retards to get it, theyre already right in their own minds, so I'll let them continue to be wrong

>>3300637
Are you the same guy using piano analogies in every single thread lately?

>>3300908
lol, nope, i'm the OP

>>3300216
But the diagonals are not equal to half a side. This would make the rotated box longer, no?

>>3301336
Youre thinking too much about it

No but seriously, how to fix OPs problem?

>>3301520
>implying anyone on /ic/ actually know how to draw

>>3301520

isn't the solution to use an ellipse ? what is this shit ? >>3301658 why would you do that when it completely fucks the scale ?

>>3301816
Alright, I give up on this thread

>>3301942
Actually, you know what? Here.
https://youtu.be/b_luMHmlCio
If you ACTUALLY want to spend hours rotating a square with a t square or whatever the fuck it is instead of doing the method that takes legitimately 3 seconds to do, be my guest

>>3300168
probably meant something like this

Figured it out

>>3302265
Nvm, i still dont get why the box behing the first one looks so big

It "feels" right, but "looks" wrong (or vice versa

>>3302265

just get a cylinder in the box and rotate the cross section of the box around the ellipses, then extrude down.

in your example the first box looks big because these donut guideline things in perspective, the one on the bottom is way smaller, so all the cubes in this would be skewed towards the center at the bottom. it would work if the bottom plane was the same size

>>3301816
it works the same way, it's just a different method for achieving the same thing.

>>3302279
But the bottom plane IS smaller. A bucket shape should fit inside the box

>>3302293
a buxket shape in the red boxes? but that would still create a bucket that's skewed to the direction of the center. you need the bottom ellipses to still be positioned below the top ones, not all just shrunk inwards. you want the ellipses to be smaller, not for the position in relation to the one above to be moved

>>3302265
>>3302278
why are you purposefully creating skewed boxes anon? why rotate in a bucket and not a straight up cylinder ??

>>3302265
>>3302278
literally just use a cylinder to get the positions as cubes, THEN make the bottom ellipses smaller to create buckets. you don't need to work inside of a bucket to create more buckets :^)

>>3302319
>>3302323
Should the cilinder taper down? How much should it taper down? Should a cilinder be placed inside the bucket-box, or outside? I feel so retarded doing this,.

>>3302265
>>3302278
You had a good intuition by using ellipses but you are doing it wrong. The problem is that the bottom ellipse is NOT drawn in perspective, you merely shrinked the top one and that's it, you need to change it's angle too.

Honestly I wouldn't try this exercise in 3 points before you are 100% confident with 2 points perspective. 3 points really looks weird and will probably confuse you more if you don't have an already solid grasp on perspective.

Should look something like this...

>>3302397
what the fuck? why didn't you just use actual boxes? why did you make them taper at the bottom?

>>3302402
Because the object that i want to rotate is a tapered box.

>>3302412
okay that's fair, it looked like you were trying to do 3pp boxes earlier