Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Why is perspective so hard?
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
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
Okay, first off, almost everyone will tell me that it isn't hard, and maybe once learnt it isnt, but my question then is this: why does it even need to be learnt? I see perspective every second of every day, yet trying to draw it requires skill and patience. I have just had a week of lectures and I tried to record some of my experiences as drawings and sketches, yet the first attempt had the lecturer talking to a group of people ranging from normal size to dwarves: all because my perspective and eye level were WAAYYYYYY off. When I say down and worked it out over an hour or so I got a very acceptable reproduction. But it took effort to put on paper what I had been seeing for days!
Why? Whats the psychology behind this tuff? Anyone know? Simple answers only please...its been a long week and I have only just returned..
D
Posted
It is difficult. Not even Caravaggio (1571-1610), who specialized in it, could get it right. Look at Jesus's right hand and the disciple's left hand. They should be much bigger, no? /Mats
Wikipedia: Caravaggio
Wikipedia: CaravaggioEdited
by MWinther
Posted
In fact the disciples right hand is too big, its actually larger than his left hand which is nearer. David...you can look at books re perspective and read about "how to do it " and there is a lot tof great info in books etc. But as you found out for yourself actually doing it , spending time , observing , making mistakes and you ended up getting better at it. There are some fairly obvious rules like the further away it is the smaller it is and things are paler in the distance. But just getting out there and looking and making mistakes (does it matter how many mistakes you make) surely the best way of finding out for yourself.
Mats example above is a great way of learning. Looking at picture in galleries and seeing how someone else has done it. Really sorry no one has invented a magic wand yet to wave and there you are ...you are a master of perspective.
Posted
Mats is right - absolutely right; it's NOT easy - it's fiendishly difficult. It could be argued that Caravaggio deliberately distorted perspective to get his result in this painting..... maybe he did. Let us give him that credit. (But I'm not convinced.)
Don't beat yourself up over this - we all find perspective difficult, I think. Some people seem to deal with it without much problem, others feel the need to draw a careful grid and take a set-square to it. And then others consciously avoid the problem altogether, and paint simple scenes which don't present the more complex issues of perspective (some love them, by the way: the study of perspective drives some artists to paroxysmal glee - which I don't pretend to understand, but have observed: I think it's the challenge.....).
I became aware that my own sense of perspective was a touch lacking when a non-painter pointed out to me that a rabbit I'd included in a painting would have to be the size of a medium-build of dinosaur to be observable from where I'd painted it. And I don't know if this is the reason, but as soon as I painted out the rabbit-cum-Triceratops, I sold the painting. By the way, I think my perspective is normally not very far out, so .... this was a lesson.
There are many books on the subject - I've read a couple of them; trying to remember the title of the best..... it's here somewhere! Anatomy, Perspective, and Composition for the Artist - it's on a presently inaccessible bookshelf, but I'll pull it out and give you the author if you really want it and send me a Private Message: Dorling Kindersley publishing, anyway, the title should find it. The subject is worth a study, many books have been published on it and that alone should tell you how complex it can be.
It's also worth adding that artists didn't always concern themselves with it at all - there are fine paintings from the middle ages and a bit later in which perspective is quite plainly lacking - it wasn't a concept that had been invented. Maybe there's scope for artists who would go back to that period and simply disregard it - someone almost certainly has; Chagall, for instance, had a brusque and dismissive way with perspective. El Greco, a painter I much admire, distorted it to such an extent it's been suggested he had an eyesight defect - perhaps he had, but I prefer to think his elongated figures were an artistic choice. The "primitive" painters, eg Grandma Moses, were so-called largely because they simply ignored, or were unaware of, the principles of perspective - you don't have to be a slave to it if you don't want to be, but maybe these days it's best if you can claim you've deliberately abjured the tyranny of perspective, rather than admit you don't know the first thing about it........
Anyway, I digress (I often do). It's not easy; you just need to study it and get the basics right and much will flow from that - if it were easy, M C Escher wouldn't have been able to take such baffling liberties with it: you must have seen his fantastic drawings: you just couldn't do that if the subject were simple and straightforward. I doubt there's an artist out there, alive or dead or like me, half way in between, who hasn't fallen foul of perspective at some point, so you're in good and highly populous company.
Posted
Glad it was a bunny and not a Robert Ratty. . You explain stuff so well Robert , that is not meant with anything but admiration go take a bow. Another ignore er of perspective is Raoul Dufy well I think he does. He tends to dot items all over the place. Nah David relax , enjoy and you will be up there with the best of them.
Posted
Ah yes, Raoul Dufy. Rubbish by any perspecitveers standards. But a cracking artist!
Interestingly you mention "photographic" as an insult. I recall going round the Dali gallery in Figueres, Spain. I was unimpressed by his abstract stuff (my fear is that it can be used to mask poor control of brush and paint), then I walked into another wing where he slayed all doubt: photographic quality paintings proved, and if nothing else at all , they proved, masterly brush control. So don't run down praise for your photographic paintings; relish the unconscious praise for your dexterity.
D
Posted
Ah the Dali museum in Figueres - one museum of art I could never tire of visiting - he is one of my artist heroes. Although much of his work assumed a photographic accuracy, his subject matter was far removed from photographic realism - oh that I could emulate his vision and competency. And Dufy - another artist in my top 10.
Posted
Robert, Thanks for pointing out http://www.mcescher.com/gallery/
His incredible perspectives are both perfect and imaginative. Here is a video on some of the rules of perspective if anyone is interested https://landscapeartblog.wordpress.com/2014/05/23/how-to-work-out-one-point-perspective-art-tuition-video-no-165/
Posted
DavidG4YVM (4/3/2016)[hr I see perspective every second of every day (We all do) yet trying to draw it requires skill and patience. I have just had a week of lectures and I tried to record some of my experiences as drawings and sketches. By the time you reach the back of your sketch book - or maybe the second - you should see a marked improvement in your skill. Keep on practicing you'll get there. Far to much is made about using optical aids. Vermeer, amongst others used his camera obscura if he had the modern camera he would have been over-the-moon, no doubt, so why shouldn't we. Some views we see can be quite transient so, in my opinion, the use of a photograph as an aid to finish a piece of art in all its glory, makes sense. Carry on the good work, D
Posted
I don't know whether or not this helps:
"Turner, though he was Professor of Perspective to the Royal Academy, did not know what he professed, and never, as far as I remember, drew a single building in true perspective in his life; he drew them only with as much perspective as suited him."
Elements of Drawing - John Ruskin - (about perspective) P. 17
John
Posted
It's one of those things that gets easier the more you practice. For me, at least. I love playing with perspective but I don't do it so often these days so it can take a lot of working out.
When I was at school I did a lot of perspective drawing; I had a good teacher that explained it all clearly and I was a big fan of Escher's work. I remember one of the drawings I did was of a staircase, that curved round in an arc and twisted in the middle, all in perspective. I couldn't do that today, it would take a lot of concentration. I need to get myself a book on the subject as I'd love to be able to do that kind of thing again.
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2