Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Painting buildings in shallow perspective
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
I've just done a quick acrylic sketch of a Parisian street scene. For most of the buildings, the perspective was easy to paint, because the view is down a narrow street and the roofs and windows have vanishing points within the picture.
The problem is that a prominent building at the entrance to the street is positioned at a very shallow angle to the viewer. The vanishing point is well outside the picture. To construct the perspective I'd have to tape the picture to a desk, find the vanishing point on the desk top and then draw the line back from the vanishing point to the painting. It would work but it's fiddly to do. I could cheat and draw the building so that it's facing me and has no perspective (one point perspective I think it's called). But I prefer to use the original set up.
Is there any way to draw convincing perspective lines when the vanishing points are outside the picture? I'd appreciate any help.
I'm using an old photograph perhaps taken in the 40s/50s, which I think is still under copyright. Here's a modern picture, not quite from the same angle but it's from flicker so I assume it's free to show it.
Edited
by keora
Posted
Are you aiming to get the top of the building into the picture? Or is the building you're concerned about the one immediately behind the bakery? I'll tell you what I'd do: I'd leave it out, and play the innocent - pretend it just wasn't visible from where I was standing...
It doesn't look all that 'right' from a perspective point of view even in the photo, though, and it's an old building that wouldn't have been built with any geometrical precision, so I'd just map out the building with a short rule - ie see where its rather few lines go - transfer that to your painting, and if anyone tells you "that's wrong" tell them they should go there and they'll see you were right. They won't, of course.
I know this is about as helpful as lending you a rubber ladder, but unless you're doing a technical drawing for an estate agent or town planner, perspective does wander about a bit and all sorts of features disrupt it. Play with it on a piece of paper until it looks right to you - I do sometimes use a rule, or more usually a pencil on its side, when drawing/painting buildings but more often I just judge it by eye; and I think you'll get a livelier result that way. If in doubt, consult the buildings of Egon Schiele.
Posted
Love your example of multiple-point perspective Robert!, a fantastic piece of drawing.
I generally just go with what looks right Keora, it always works for me. Two-point or even multiple-point perspective is quite common when drawing street scenes. You can use the method that you suggested, I don't know of any alternative method to help you further.
I tend to work on the basic principle that I'm constructing a drawing which is my interpretation of the scene, and not an accurate architectural plan - I'm never far out to the eye, and I'm confident that you won't be either. If in doubt, post it on here and ask for critique.
Posted
I think what we're both saying, Keora, is - don't treat your painting as a geometrical exercise. Don't worry about the vanishing point, unless you want to produce a very precise, very accurate, image. And if you do that - it'll look like an architectural diagram. That degree of accuracy hasn't much to do with art - it's about technical drawing; a great skill, if you have it: but I sure haven't! Have we misunderstood what you want to achieve? If so, tell us - and we'll have another go - but on the whole: perspective needs to be about right; not exactly right. It goes wrong when you have obvious geometric anomalies, i.e. lines going obviously the wrong way, ie against each other, against logic - but when it's too exact, it reminds you of Dr Albert Speer's clinical drawings for the new Berlin: too cold,too academic. I would put the ruler and set-square to one side, and scribble on a few bits of spare paper: and think I'd probably get a better result.
Posted
Thanks very much, Keora, for alerting me to this site - I hadn't been aware of it before, and it looks to be endlessly fascinating.
The device to which you've linked looks a bit fearsome - being quite hopeless with wood and a saw, I doubt my ability to make one; and I've not seen anything quite like that offered for sale, although it wouldn't surprise me if someone did sell them; perhaps a cottage industry for some keen carpenter, provided there are enough people around who want to perfect their perspective. There are quite a few books on the subject, though - as well as YouTube videos. One I remember - and have - is Anatomy and Perspective for the Artist: I hope it's still in print because it gets straight down to the point and offers good examples. I know I've said this before, in effect, but I really am fairly cavalier about perspective - maybe that wouldn't be so if I painted more buildings, machinery, or still life, but happily trees and the open countryside aren't usually a problem from a perspective point of view. Basically, I try a few lines, and if they don't look right I paint them out - but I painted roofs and buildings for a commission a little while ago (I didn't share it here, partly because I neglected to get a good photo, and partly because I really didn't like it much: and I admit I did have trouble getting the perspective right. I used to have a simpler device than the one to which you linked - just two straight lengths of card, joined together by a rivet enabling me to move the two arms - and I've lost it; and missed it, on that one recent occasion.
It might actually solve your problem, though - our sadly missed member Derek Snowden was good on perspective, and because of tactile limitations used card very often to plan and paint his pictures. I expect you can imagine what I have in mind, but if not, I'll draw it - or make another and post the photo: it's basically a two straight edges which can be shifted to the angle you want; and the vanishing point doesn't matter very much - it is often right out of the picture plane anyway.
Posted
Keora, Thanks a lot for the links. That´s very interesting. Be careful about using reference photos which do not say specifically that they are free to use. The one you posted appears in many variations. You will find the original of the photo you posted right here. When you click on it, it will take you to a blog enabling you to contact the person who took it.
