is only acceptable, even to us, within certain narrow limits of application. Though the choice of the distance from which the artist regards his subject, and consequently the distance between the point from which the picture should be looked at and the canvas (which two lengths are the same when reduced to the same scale), must be left to the artist as forming important parts of his personal aesthetic and compositional intentions, still we may say that in ordinary cases it is not possible visually to take in an object unless we are at from two and a half to three times the length of its greatest dimension from it. That is to say, in order to draw a standing human figure, with the intention of giving a natural air to our work, we should place ourselves at some five or six yards distance from it. Having by exercise of judgement fixed the point d (Fig. 30) we draw the line zd. If we now draw lines parallel to yz through all the points of intersection between zd and our perspective tracings of ab, be, &c., these lines will become the perspective views of the lines lm, no, &c. (Fig. 3 1), and so we shall have a perspective view of our ground-plan squares. We are now in possession of all that is really necessary to lay out a sufficiently accurate perspective view of a still-life group, of an interior, or of a landscape. The smaller we make the ground-plan squares the greater precision we shall be able to bring to our result, as will soon be seen. Let us suppose that we wish to represent in perspective the object figuring on the ground-plan (Fig. 30) as l, m, n, o. Of these four points m alone falls on the intersection of two lines. As it does so, its transportation to m in Fig. 30 is perfectly simple, we note that it is four squares inward from zy, and two squares from the side y towards the side z. But l, n, and 0 do not fall exactly either on an intersection or even on a line. It is here that we must introduce the chance of a little imprecision in order to avoid really unnecessary geometrical complication. Unless our squares in perspective (Fig. 30) are much too big, we can
Was this article helpful?