The Theory and Practice of Perspective Part 6

HOW TO DRAW PAVEMENTS, &C.

Divide a vanishing line into parts varying in length. Let _BS_ be the vanishing line: divide it into 4 long and 3 short s.p.a.ces; then proceed as in the previous figure. If we draw horizontals through the points thus obtained and from these raise verticals, we form, as it were, the interior of a building in which we can place pillars and other objects.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 56.]

Or we can simply draw the plan of the pavement as in this figure.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 57.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 58.]

And then put it into perspective.

XVII

OF SQUARES PLACED VERTICALLY AND AT DIFFERENT HEIGHTS, OR THE CUBE IN PARALLEL PERSPECTIVE

On a given square raise a cube.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 59.]

_ABCD_ is the given square; from _A_ and _B_ raise verticals _AE_, _BF_, equal to _AB_; join _EF_. Draw _ES_, _FS_, to point of sight; from _C_ and _D_ raise verticals _CG_, _DH_, till they meet vanishing lines _ES_, _FS_, in _G_ and _H_, and the cube is complete.

XVIII

THE TRANSPOSED DISTANCE

The transposed distance is a point _D_ on the vertical _VD_, at exactly the same distance from the point of sight as is the point of distance on the horizontal line.

It will be seen by examining this figure that the diagonals of the squares in a vertical position are drawn to this vertical distance-point, thus saving the necessity of taking the measurements first on the base line, as at _CB_, which in the case of distant objects, such as the farthest window, would be very inconvenient. Note that the windows at _K_ are twice as high as they are wide. Of course these or any other objects could be made of any proportion.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 60.]

XIX

THE FRONT VIEW OF THE SQUARE AND OF THE PROPORTIONS OF FIGURES AT DIFFERENT HEIGHTS

According to Rule 4, all lines situated in a plane parallel to the picture plane diminish in length as they become more distant, but remain in the same proportions each to each as the original lines; as squares or any other figures retain the same form. Take the two squares _ABCD_, _abcd_ (Fig. 61), one inside the other; although moved back from square _EFGH_ they retain the same form. So in dealing with figures of different heights, such as statuary or ornament in a building, if actually equal in size, so must we represent them.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 61.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 62.]

In this square _K_, with the checker pattern, we should not think of making the top squares smaller than the bottom ones; so it is with figures.

This subject requires careful study, for, as pointed out in our opening chapter, there are certain conditions under which we have to modify and greatly alter this rule in large decorative work.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 63.]

In Fig. 63 the two statues _A_ and _B_ are the same size. So if traced through a vertical sheet of gla.s.s, _K_, as at _c_ and _d_, they would also be equal; but as the angle _b_ at which the upper one is seen is smaller than angle _a_, at which the lower figure or statue is seen, it will appear smaller to the spectator (_S_) both in reality and in the picture.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 64.]

But if we wish them to appear the same size to the spectator who is viewing them from below, we must make the angles _a_ and _b_ (Fig. 64), at which they are viewed, both equal. Then draw lines through equal arcs, as at _c_ and _d_, till they cut the vertical _NO_ (representing the side of the building where the figures are to be placed). We shall then obtain the exact size of the figure at that height, which will make it look the same size as the lower one, _N_. The same rule applies to the picture _K_, when it is of large proportions. As an example in painting, take Michelangelo's large altar-piece in the Sistine Chapel, 'The Last Judgement'; here the figures forming the upper group, with our Lord in judgement surrounded by saints, are about four times the size, that is, about twice the height, of those at the lower part of the fresco. The figures on the ceiling of the same chapel are studied not only according to their height from the pavement, which is 60 ft., but to suit the arched form of it. For instance, the head of the figure of Jonah at the end over the altar is thrown back in the design, but owing to the curvature in the architecture is actually more forward than the feet. Then again, the prophets and sybils seated round the ceiling, which are perhaps the grandest figures in the whole range of art, would be 18 ft. high if they stood up; these, too, are not on a flat surface, so that it required great knowledge to give them their right effect.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 65.]

Of course, much depends upon the distance we view these statues or paintings from. In interiors, such as churches, halls, galleries, &c., we can make a fair calculation, such as the length of the nave, if the picture is an altar-piece--or say, half the length; so also with statuary in niches, friezes, and other architectural ornaments. The nearer we are to them, and the more we have to look up, the larger will the upper figures have to be; but if these are on the outside of a building that can be looked at from a long distance, then it is better not to have too great a difference.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 66. 1909.]

These remarks apply also to architecture in a great measure. Buildings that can only be seen from the street below, as pictures in a narrow gallery, require a different treatment from those out in the open, that are to be looked at from a distance. In the former case the same treatment as the Campanile at Florence is in some cases desirable, but all must depend upon the taste and judgement of the architect in such matters. All I venture to do here is to call attention to the subject, which seems as a rule to be ignored, or not to be considered of importance. Hence the many mistakes in our buildings, and the unsatisfactory and mean look of some of our public monuments.

XX

OF PICTURES THAT ARE PAINTED ACCORDING TO THE POSITION THEY ARE TO OCCUPY

In this double-page ill.u.s.tration of the wall of a picture-gallery, I have, as it were, hung the pictures in accordance with the style in which they are painted and the perspective adopted by their painters. It will be seen that those placed on the line level with the eye have their horizon lines fairly high up, and are not suited to be placed any higher. The Giorgione in the centre, the Monna Lisa to the right, and the Velasquez and Watteau to the left, are all pictures that fit that position; whereas the grander compositions above them are so designed, and are so large in conception, that we gain in looking up to them.

Note how grandly the young prince on his pony, by Velasquez, tells out against the sky, with its low horizon and strong contrast of light and dark; nor does it lose a bit by being placed where it is, over the smaller pictures.

The Rembrandt, on the opposite side, with its burgomasters in black hats and coats and white collars, is evidently intended and painted for a raised position, and to be looked up to, which is evident from the perspective of the table. The grand t.i.tian in the centre, an altar-piece in one of the churches in Venice (here reversed), is also painted to suit its elevated position, with low horizon and figures telling boldly against the sky. Those placed low down are modern French pictures, with the horizon high up and almost above their frames, but placed on the ground they fit into the general harmony of the arrangement.

It seems to me it is well, both for those who paint and for those who hang pictures, that this subject should be taken into consideration. For it must be seen by this ill.u.s.tration that a bigger style is adopted by the artists who paint for high places in palaces or churches than by those who produce smaller easel-pictures intended to be seen close.

Unfortunately, at our picture exhibitions, we see too often that nearly all the works, whether on large or small canvases, are painted for the line, and that those which happen to get high up look as if they were toppling over, because they have such a high horizontal line; and instead of the figures telling against the sky, as in this picture of the 'Infant' by Velasquez, the Reynolds, and the fat man treading on a flag, we have fields or sea or distant landscape almost to the top of the frame, and all, so methinks, because the perspective is not sufficiently considered.