This video is sorely missing you drawing something using this method. I understand a decent amount of the concept, but I'm missing a lot without seeing how this applies. especially to a full scene vs individual objects. If you haven't already, I think people would really appreciate a sequel where you rough in some buildings using this method
I know a Krenz Cushart student when I see one. For those who are confused, the gist of this perspective mindset is that you can "derive" everything you need from a square floor tile. Need a bigger floor? Use the mirroring method to mirror the initial plane. Need a different rotation? Connect the dots to create inner planes rotated at 45⁰ or 22.5⁰. You can do all of this without ever explicitly plotting vanishing points. We can calculate everything we need with reasonable accuracy using just floor tiles. It's not as precise as actually plotting VPs, but it's amazingly intuitive.
I believe I understand the concept of this video, but with out any knowledge of perspective, this can be highly confusing. Thanks for the insight. I like the ability to use the square to subdivide and rotate the object (square) on the squares axis. I think its the title that can make this a bit confusing, but I did learn something and I appreciate it.
Hm it might be! I just think that starting from vanishing points won't make things easy, especially because it will make it impossible to add a set for every rotated thing in the picture. I'm gonna talk about it more in detail when my perspective course is out, indeed a video might be too short (trying to keep them short) for this. I wanted it to be more of an introduction and a way to start seeing things differently. The standard system is too rigid and i could never use it for anything
@@theartofnemo this did make me think differently and I do have a "decent" although not thorough understanding of perspective. I agree with everything you said in this.
Glad it was helpful! Yeah I am trying to keep them short and find a good balance between speed and clarity. Less time watching means more time to draw :)
dynamic sketching is also a way to go around it its based a lot on observation studies and your artistic intuition but it sketching though cant really create art masterpieces with it but its hella quick
I understood your explanation because I studied perspective before. I get why people are confused though. This is more of how to measure boxes in perspective and it lacks the examples you show in the beginning. I do think it would be more valuable to show how you work and break down things (references) so it makes more sense. I get it that you want to sell your class, but people might tend to not buy it because this video is confusing if you don't know anything about perspective. I think an example is missing and how you would use it to break down something like a vehicle or figure in different perspectives. That's why maybe people find it confusing.
I really want to encourage people to stop thinking they have to start with an horizon and vanishing points, because once they get that (it's easy) they will be stuck forever. Good luck trying to figure out how to rotate things with that system, it's basically impossible unless you draw a bajillion converging lines
@@theartofnemo i completly get that and why you prefer to make shorter youtube videos, that wasn't meant as an offense. but i think especially for beginners it's even harder this way to approach perspective and it might be off-putting so they won't buy your class, you know? I just wanted to share this with you so you might be able to get a better view why people are confused and why it might influence your sales. And I didnt want to come up as rude or something.
Oh, you didn't, no worries. This wasn't really meant to sell the mentorship, I just thought it's a good idea to mention it every now and then. It was also not meant for complete beginners to learn perspective from 0, but rather to offer an alternative approach. I am probably going to make a video that goes in depth on how to properly use it at some point
I think your video makes sense but for super beginners, I think they need a little foundation in working with 1st, 2nd and 3rd point perspective. I’m taking a class in perspective and I find this technique useful. Could you do a simple demo using the technique to construct something like a car or a person? I think that would be very helpful for many to see it in practice.
@@theartofnemo much appreciated! And just so I think I got the concept - this method helps us create a grid - starting with a square plane - we can use to set things up in perspective and rotate them without having to set up vanishing points the traditional way?
Yeah pretty much! Also if you do it for like 1 month, you will start being able to gauge the grid without actually having it. It's really useful for training your mind to do stuff like Kim Jung gi!
This is to learn to think, you do it long enough to NOT need to use it in a drawing (like Kim Jung Gi) because you are able to use the lines in place to infer the rest of the perspective
I thiiink I follow @theartofnemo, but I’m with @fanartfanatic4345 - it’d be cool to see how to use those base shapes to create a figure, or multiple objects with multiple coordinate systems. Otherwise I’m left feeling like you felt in the beginning of the movie - looking at some shapes that feel a bit overwhelming because I don’t understand how to use them. I love your work btw keep it up thx! ❤
Cuz it too complicated? unlike bg with building with random size you can draw what ever u like and it alway turn out good if the work follow perspective, i mainly on drawing figure with alot part that rotate in space and i have to caculate the part that far away or closer too, if it closer/ faraway how should that part lool bigger/ smaller but still proportional? Not too distored that look too long
@@ToanLe-pf9xb its not complicated, people just dont want to do stuff that is not a drawing, understanding perspective helps you with almost everything, I study alot, and the hardest part is getting used to it, or something like curvilinear, the rest is just following guide lines, literal lines in the page that you follow, thats something I can see too in the artist side, if its not a character drawing or a face, anything like that, they instantly dont want to learn and end up saying is absolutely impossible, with digital art perspective got even easier, I really cant understand where yall find the issue in that, just learn 2 point perspective and be happy with it, its not hard
@@davisousaki well 2 point perspective sur is simple, but when we consider COV, FOV, focal length things it start so complicated, all my sketch with rlly high perspective distortion alway look awful, the silhouette too distort make it hard to draw intutively and only get convincing when the work come to coloring, shading stage. In the nutshell i agree simple perspective is easy to learn, in this stage i can rely on my intuition to draw but when it come to low focal lenght, cov 90,... the shape got perspective distored so much that it rlly hard to draw with only rely on intuition.
@@ToanLe-pf9xb all your problems would be solved if you made grids 💀 you have ways to make out of the page grids with easy techiniques, you can make it digitally and print out, you can try to practice how things converge and try to master early perspective without grids, many many things you are problably not doing, like im saying, people just dont want to learn because they arent actually drawing something they want, its like hands, people hate it and say its the hardest thing, but if you get the structure in mind and try to simplify, you can easily do most of the poses you need, trust me, its not hard 💀
i think the hardest part of perspective is rotated boxes. a fully rotated box in perspective is very hard to draw. and i think there is no good resources in you tube that cover that.can you cover that
At 3:30 , thinking of each plane having its own set of coordinates does feel like an eye opener. So just to reiterate, to make a square in perspective, it needs an angle of 45 degrees? How do you measure that accurately?
You don't need to, it's already a square as long as both sides are the same, you just decide the convergence (like how much fisheye lens effect you want) by making the top shorter :)
How do you think your method to rotate objects is easier than the circle method that I think is generally used ? Your new process has insane potential but it’s missing the little spark that makes it make sense. Maybe you could try finding the example that perfectly illustrates it. I think many of us would love to understand your vision. Either way, great job for innovating
You cannot infer the vanishing point with the ellipse method. You can draw one line, but not the other. This way you can draw both, so you find the convergence and have literally created another set of VPs. That said, I didn't invent it. Krenz did. I just put it together with what I know from Scott Robertson and also added the cross at the beginning to make sure you get an actual square at 45degrees. I can make another video that's slower and goes more in depth into this
I always have a hard time with perspective lol 😂 it's oddly complex but simple at the same time. It's strange, the more I use it, the more I think "Oh yeah, that is common sense." I think it's taking complex forms and simplifying them by laying down groundwork, boxes and being able to warp them.
@@xoxo_insane Oh, that's just semantics :D you don't need to know that part, it's just an example that I use to justify why you shouldn't call the horizon "horizon", since every object has its own
The video is not about that kind of rotation really, I must have phrased it wrong. Any free rotation like that is okay as long as the basic principle (the cross with the same convergence) is satisfied. The only rotations here are when I use the 16 squares grid
Well 😢!” It means I will never be able to draw properly, no criticism just being realistic “. I suffer from math anxiety 😬 that’s why I don’t give up and just keep drawing as a hobby!!!. Thanks anyway “
Oh no why! This is easier than the highly mathematical method that's usually utilized! I actually suck at math so that's why I prefer this over the VPs thing!
which part is harder? it hass less lines and it allows you to rotate things. With the traditional method it's just plain impossible and it's useless for figures. This can be applied to anything
Reading the comment replies, I think the trouble you ran into is your intro. It sounds like this is much more for single objects, but all your examples of the harder to use perspective method showed city scapes and buildings mostly, aand that is most of what people use those for. This video is moreso focusing on how to use what a lot of people call 'box method' it seems. I think you set up expectations that this is teaching something you weren't actually teaching which may be where a lot of confusion comes from. 'How do I apply this to my cityscapes?' Will be a prominent thought due to the intro being a little misleading. Unless I'm wrong? But this video doesn't really explain how to place a lot of things along the ground that all have to be in perspective to each other if that's the case
You are right in your analysis in that this is made mostly for single objects, but the point of it is to expand it into scenes starting from the main block. I am not an environment designer, I do characters, vehicles and creatures. Most people have trouble with drawing characters in perspective rather than buildings, but you're right in that I should have used another method. The problem is that most people think the building method should be used for characters too and get stuck when they can't rotate an arm
@@theartofnemo Yeah, I came to this video from the recommended page, so I’m willing to bet a lot of people who are confused did the same, not knowing your area of specialty. Knowing the context helps me to better understand your focus on rotation etc. I didn’t realize people were trying to use traditional perspective techniques on things like that, sounds miserable
@@theartofnemoBecause it’s only about the construction of a square in perspective and how to rotate it, whereas the title reads:”A better approach to perspective for characters and objects.” Which is a topic much wider than the content of the video.
@@maurotombolini6904 But this is the foundation to it, it's literally how to start building the framework /world into which to place everything. I use the square as a starting point for characters, vehicles and even buildings (you can see some of them as timelapses here). I don't see how it's different from what the title says
@@theartofnemo I don’t mean to start an argument and I thank you for the video, which I’ve appreciated but I couldn’t see anything of what you mentioned, you said that you use the square as a starting point and that is all what the video is about. Looking forward to more in depth content that will explain your approach. Thanks
Why not? If you practice seeing the lines for less than a month you'll be able to draw any hard surface without a grid. With the traditional system you can't even rotate anything without vanishing points
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
This video is sorely missing you drawing something using this method. I understand a decent amount of the concept, but I'm missing a lot without seeing how this applies. especially to a full scene vs individual objects. If you haven't already, I think people would really appreciate a sequel where you rough in some buildings using this method
I don't have a clue either.
I know a Krenz Cushart student when I see one.
For those who are confused, the gist of this perspective mindset is that you can "derive" everything you need from a square floor tile.
Need a bigger floor? Use the mirroring method to mirror the initial plane.
Need a different rotation? Connect the dots to create inner planes rotated at 45⁰ or 22.5⁰.
You can do all of this without ever explicitly plotting vanishing points. We can calculate everything we need with reasonable accuracy using just floor tiles. It's not as precise as actually plotting VPs, but it's amazingly intuitive.
Busted! :D Great summary btw. yes, the strength of this is that when you DO get a hang of it, it's got unlimited potential
Omg Nemo, you're a blessing to this community
haha thanks!
I believe I understand the concept of this video, but with out any knowledge of perspective, this can be highly confusing. Thanks for the insight. I like the ability to use the square to subdivide and rotate the object (square) on the squares axis. I think its the title that can make this a bit confusing, but I did learn something and I appreciate it.
Hm it might be! I just think that starting from vanishing points won't make things easy, especially because it will make it impossible to add a set for every rotated thing in the picture. I'm gonna talk about it more in detail when my perspective course is out, indeed a video might be too short (trying to keep them short) for this. I wanted it to be more of an introduction and a way to start seeing things differently. The standard system is too rigid and i could never use it for anything
@@theartofnemo this did make me think differently and I do have a "decent" although not thorough understanding of perspective. I agree with everything you said in this.
I really like how you made it short and simple. Makes it so much easier to process. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful! Yeah I am trying to keep them short and find a good balance between speed and clarity. Less time watching means more time to draw :)
Holly crap, what a video!! This is crazy, thank you so much!! Will be applying this from now on! 🙌
dynamic sketching is also a way to go around it its based a lot on observation studies and your artistic intuition but it sketching though cant really create art masterpieces with it but its hella quick
Sorry but I'm soo confused, I guess what works for you just doesn't work for me xx
Which part is confising?
I understood your explanation because I studied perspective before. I get why people are confused though. This is more of how to measure boxes in perspective and it lacks the examples you show in the beginning. I do think it would be more valuable to show how you work and break down things (references) so it makes more sense. I get it that you want to sell your class, but people might tend to not buy it because this video is confusing if you don't know anything about perspective. I think an example is missing and how you would use it to break down something like a vehicle or figure in different perspectives. That's why maybe people find it confusing.
That is way too complex to make it into a
It's also why the video is called "a new approach" and not "a thorough lesson on this other method I use for perspective"
I really want to encourage people to stop thinking they have to start with an horizon and vanishing points, because once they get that (it's easy) they will be stuck forever. Good luck trying to figure out how to rotate things with that system, it's basically impossible unless you draw a bajillion converging lines
@@theartofnemo i completly get that and why you prefer to make shorter youtube videos, that wasn't meant as an offense. but i think especially for beginners it's even harder this way to approach perspective and it might be off-putting so they won't buy your class, you know? I just wanted to share this with you so you might be able to get a better view why people are confused and why it might influence your sales. And I didnt want to come up as rude or something.
Oh, you didn't, no worries. This wasn't really meant to sell the mentorship, I just thought it's a good idea to mention it every now and then. It was also not meant for complete beginners to learn perspective from 0, but rather to offer an alternative approach. I am probably going to make a video that goes in depth on how to properly use it at some point
I think your video makes sense but for super beginners, I think they need a little foundation in working with 1st, 2nd and 3rd point perspective.
I’m taking a class in perspective and I find this technique useful.
Could you do a simple demo using the technique to construct something like a car or a person? I think that would be very helpful for many to see it in practice.
Yeah I will have one soon :) But anyway this video is really not meant for complete beginners
@@theartofnemo much appreciated! And just so I think I got the concept - this method helps us create a grid - starting with a square plane - we can use to set things up in perspective and rotate them without having to set up vanishing points the traditional way?
Yeah pretty much! Also if you do it for like 1 month, you will start being able to gauge the grid without actually having it. It's really useful for training your mind to do stuff like Kim Jung gi!
@@theartofnemo I’ll practice this method then! Thank you! Keep up the informative videos!
Once you try it it clicks somehow, thanks Nemo ❤
Glad you found it useful!
Would it be ok if you can give a small demo implementing this technique into an actual drawing please... Cause i was completely lost...
This is to learn to think, you do it long enough to NOT need to use it in a drawing (like Kim Jung Gi) because you are able to use the lines in place to infer the rest of the perspective
I thiiink I follow @theartofnemo, but I’m with @fanartfanatic4345 - it’d be cool to see how to use those base shapes to create a figure, or multiple objects with multiple coordinate systems. Otherwise I’m left feeling like you felt in the beginning of the movie - looking at some shapes that feel a bit overwhelming because I don’t understand how to use them. I love your work btw keep it up thx! ❤
I learn by visuals so I feel your pain for the demo fam🐱😥
You are a God send
Very nice. Looks simpler than others . I’ll be using this right now…… thank you.
Glad it helped!
I dont understand why so many people hate perspective, I damn love this subject
Cuz it too complicated? unlike bg with building with random size you can draw what ever u like and it alway turn out good if the work follow perspective, i mainly on drawing figure with alot part that rotate in space and i have to caculate the part that far away or closer too, if it closer/ faraway how should that part lool bigger/ smaller but still proportional? Not too distored that look too long
@@ToanLe-pf9xb its not complicated, people just dont want to do stuff that is not a drawing, understanding perspective helps you with almost everything, I study alot, and the hardest part is getting used to it, or something like curvilinear, the rest is just following guide lines, literal lines in the page that you follow, thats something I can see too in the artist side, if its not a character drawing or a face, anything like that, they instantly dont want to learn and end up saying is absolutely impossible, with digital art perspective got even easier, I really cant understand where yall find the issue in that, just learn 2 point perspective and be happy with it, its not hard
@@davisousaki well 2 point perspective sur is simple, but when we consider COV, FOV, focal length things it start so complicated, all my sketch with rlly high perspective distortion alway look awful, the silhouette too distort make it hard to draw intutively and only get convincing when the work come to coloring, shading stage. In the nutshell i agree simple perspective is easy to learn, in this stage i can rely on my intuition to draw but when it come to low focal lenght, cov 90,... the shape got perspective distored so much that it rlly hard to draw with only rely on intuition.
@@ToanLe-pf9xb all your problems would be solved if you made grids 💀 you have ways to make out of the page grids with easy techiniques, you can make it digitally and print out, you can try to practice how things converge and try to master early perspective without grids, many many things you are problably not doing, like im saying, people just dont want to learn because they arent actually drawing something they want, its like hands, people hate it and say its the hardest thing, but if you get the structure in mind and try to simplify, you can easily do most of the poses you need, trust me, its not hard 💀
That was as clear as mud.
😮 brooo this makes rotation sonmuch easier 😭 🙏🏿
i think the hardest part of perspective is rotated boxes. a fully rotated box in perspective is very hard to draw. and i think there is no good resources in you tube that cover that.can you cover that
Uh? Did you see the part where I rotate the plane? I also linked my other video where I cover box rotations, the base method is the same
At 3:30 , thinking of each plane having its own set of coordinates does feel like an eye opener. So just to reiterate, to make a square in perspective, it needs an angle of 45 degrees? How do you measure that accurately?
You don't need to, it's already a square as long as both sides are the same, you just decide the convergence (like how much fisheye lens effect you want) by making the top shorter :)
After this tutorial i will end up with a very scary grid or being genius in drawing boxes thanks.
lol! Hopefully the grid ends up in your head so you don't need to have it on paper :D that's the point
4:06 at this point I was starting to falling in a sleep... URH! (waking sound)
Your thumbnails are pretty good especially the dragons
Thank you! You can find some timelapses of me drawing dragons on the channel
Youve saved me
Glad it helped! More to come on the application/use of these
krenz cushart method but what is the source of all those images you showed first
oh found smth is it feng zhu school of design?
The complex perspective? Yes, they're from FZD
How do you think your method to rotate objects is easier than the circle method that I think is generally used ?
Your new process has insane potential but it’s missing the little spark that makes it make sense. Maybe you could try finding the example that perfectly illustrates it.
I think many of us would love to understand your vision. Either way, great job for innovating
You cannot infer the vanishing point with the ellipse method. You can draw one line, but not the other. This way you can draw both, so you find the convergence and have literally created another set of VPs. That said, I didn't invent it. Krenz did. I just put it together with what I know from Scott Robertson and also added the cross at the beginning to make sure you get an actual square at 45degrees.
I can make another video that's slower and goes more in depth into this
I always have a hard time with perspective lol 😂 it's oddly complex but simple at the same time. It's strange, the more I use it, the more I think "Oh yeah, that is common sense." I think it's taking complex forms and simplifying them by laying down groundwork, boxes and being able to warp them.
Yeah modeling skills (simplkify down to a box, then edit the box) are the absolute foundation of drawing
Couldn't get it was confusing tbh ;-;
Which part?
@@theartofnemo 3:01 it got bit tricky to understand what you were doing
@@xoxo_insane Oh, that's just semantics :D you don't need to know that part, it's just an example that I use to justify why you shouldn't call the horizon "horizon", since every object has its own
The video is not about that kind of rotation really, I must have phrased it wrong. Any free rotation like that is okay as long as the basic principle (the cross with the same convergence) is satisfied. The only rotations here are when I use the 16 squares grid
@@theartofnemo not only that but from 3:01 I couldn't grab anything whatever you said, explained
Is there a specific name for this method?
Not really, I learned a lot from Krenz but this is also my interpretation of a lot of things I studied in general
Scott Robertson ?
YES! This is similar to his. I am a fan of his approach, the book is just a little hard to read.
Thank you this might help me alot.
Thanks to you for watching!
Woah, slow down there Scott Robertson, 1:21 care to explain yourself? xD
You mean Merchant? lol
@@theartofnemo I don't remember you drawing fishfolk lol
@@DigitalinDaniel He's from Daigan :D My at-some-point-to-be-released IP
Well 😢!” It means I will never be able to draw properly, no criticism just being realistic “. I suffer from math anxiety 😬 that’s why I don’t give up and just keep drawing as a hobby!!!. Thanks anyway “
Oh no why! This is easier than the highly mathematical method that's usually utilized! I actually suck at math so that's why I prefer this over the VPs thing!
Wow! Now I can draw a grid!
How does that help me draw Godzilla, the predator, serial designation N, and monsters?
this looks harder.
which part is harder? it hass less lines and it allows you to rotate things. With the traditional method it's just plain impossible and it's useless for figures. This can be applied to anything
@@theartofnemo you could also use less lines on the traditional method.
Reading the comment replies, I think the trouble you ran into is your intro. It sounds like this is much more for single objects, but all your examples of the harder to use perspective method showed city scapes and buildings mostly, aand that is most of what people use those for. This video is moreso focusing on how to use what a lot of people call 'box method' it seems. I think you set up expectations that this is teaching something you weren't actually teaching which may be where a lot of confusion comes from. 'How do I apply this to my cityscapes?' Will be a prominent thought due to the intro being a little misleading. Unless I'm wrong? But this video doesn't really explain how to place a lot of things along the ground that all have to be in perspective to each other if that's the case
You are right in your analysis in that this is made mostly for single objects, but the point of it is to expand it into scenes starting from the main block. I am not an environment designer, I do characters, vehicles and creatures. Most people have trouble with drawing characters in perspective rather than buildings, but you're right in that I should have used another method.
The problem is that most people think the building method should be used for characters too and get stuck when they can't rotate an arm
@@theartofnemo Yeah, I came to this video from the recommended page, so I’m willing to bet a lot of people who are confused did the same, not knowing your area of specialty. Knowing the context helps me to better understand your focus on rotation etc.
I didn’t realize people were trying to use traditional perspective techniques on things like that, sounds miserable
Grids? Pff, grids are for _squares._
This is literally just using a grid with more steps. You even call it a grid like 5 times.
It's a contextual grid vs a giant, constricting one. The process is inside out rather than outside in
Nah
You over complicated the concept for me
How so?
The title of the video doesn't reflect the content at all
Perche' no?
@@theartofnemoBecause it’s only about the construction of a square in perspective and how to rotate it, whereas the title reads:”A better approach to perspective for characters and objects.” Which is a topic much wider than the content of the video.
@@maurotombolini6904 But this is the foundation to it, it's literally how to start building the framework /world into which to place everything. I use the square as a starting point for characters, vehicles and even buildings (you can see some of them as timelapses here). I don't see how it's different from what the title says
@@theartofnemo I don’t mean to start an argument and I thank you for the video, which I’ve appreciated but I couldn’t see anything of what you mentioned, you said that you use the square as a starting point and that is all what the video is about. Looking forward to more in depth content that will explain your approach. Thanks
1 MINUTE AGO AHAHHAAHHAHHAHAHAH
Why does this have a Google Translate tab that changes nothing? xD
What? This is no way easier
Why not? If you practice seeing the lines for less than a month you'll be able to draw any hard surface without a grid. With the traditional system you can't even rotate anything without vanishing points
3:20 this is just not true...
How not so? Where Are the VPs of a rotated/tiltes object?