Based on my own observations, it seems to exist.
go kill yourself
Just draw
There's a difference between trying to draw accurately and trying to draw mathematically (which is retarded). Don't waste your time trying to understand the existance of shit, this isn't physics.With that said, I like to think of third vp as the gravity line. It indicates the direction that is "down". That is the extent to which you need to understand it.
>>7972433pyw
>>7972423If two of your vanishing points are on the horizon line (as you have drawn) the third VP (if it exists) must lie on a vertical line that passes through the center of view. The center of view is the point on your page that is directly in front of the artist's eye (also called the station point). This vertical line is sometimes called a vanishing line as it is the set of possible vanishing points.Your drawing is possible (the center of view would exist slightly to the left of the green line) but the green line itself as drawn is meaningless.There's a fella in the stupid questions thread asking about the mathematics of perspective. He seems to be getting a pretty decent understanding of it. You could ask him.Also, you could be clearer about what you mean by a "second horizon line".
>>7972434Jesus. I mean... if you wanna see 3 point perspective porn, sure, but Im not saying anything radical here. Do you WANT to study the quantum effects of light to be able to paint, too?
>>7972423Your horizon line(when it comes to drawing) is your eye levelThe 1 point in one point perspective is in between your two eyesThe 2 points for two point perspective lie at the furthest point of your vision until it comes off. Its hard to describe in words but the way I pinpoint where they go by holding your arms forward and raising your pointer fingers up, have it align between the middle of your eyes(the 1 point)and then move your arms to your side. When you can no longer see the tops of your pointing fingers, thats where the 2 points in your 2 point perspective would be. They would still fall on your horizion line though cause your eye level is that horizon line.3 Point perspective still relies on what your eye level is. Your eye level is still your horizon line. The third point for 3 point perspective is the arbitrary point where you look up(worms eye) or where you look down(birds eye). There is no second horizon line cause you only have that one eye level. Not to mention that where you place the third point is arbitrary. 1 and 2 point perspective there is accurate mathematical ways to do that kind of drawing(architecture and shit) but for 3rd point shit is gonna end up being warped no matter what, theres no avoiding that, and the area that is less warped is of course the shit thats closer to your actual eye level. Thats also why aside from the general rule of placing the 3rd point in the middle for convenience you can place that shit anywhere you want cause where you decide to look up or down is up to you.Thats how Ive come to understand it anyway.
>>7972474I mean you say that but learning how light bounces off of objects and how it grabs and reflects part of whatever it is bouncing off of due to electron energy states unironically helped me understand both reflections and light in general much better.Not the other guy btw just a rando, but you could've given literally any other example lmao.
>>7972423Yeah WTF is OP pic even describing here? The eye level is your horizon line for the image overall. If you're determined break your brain, yes, every object that has a rotation in the image that doesn't follow the initial perspective setup DOES adhere to some other set of V.P.s, but the horizon line is eye level, its your viewers eye level, and having multiple at once is like giving drawing from the viewpoints of 2 people, 1 ducking and 1 standing up. In any case, your job is to learn how to ESTIMATE the shift in the V.P.s for objects that are off rotation, don't be drawing out a new set of guides for every individual thing. You draw a box based on you 1 set of perspective guides, and within that box you draw your object while sort of imagining where the perspective points are for that object.Picrel, the second box doesn't make any sense given the initial perspective piece unless you're doing some kind of trippy bullshit or a poster with unrelated elements.
>>7972495Not wrong, but there's a limit to this where you're not doing art anymore. It's wasted effort when all you really need to know (for color let's say) is "what is warm and what is cool?". It's unnecessary to then go into the frequencies of waves and why infrared light shines in the penumbra or whatever the fuck... this is a kind of retardation unto itself no matter how intellectual it makes you feel while doing it.More power to you if it really did help you though.
>double horizon lines deniers in this thread
>>7972539is the double horizon line higher or lower on meme tier than the ligameme
>>7972423yes thats the point of 4 point and curvilinear perspectives, ask things to ai eventually you will piece everything together.
>>7972423I wanted to dunk on the stupidity of this thread, but im glad you're actually learning OP.Have you ever heard of pic related? It's related to your question....
Horizon...Horizontal...Vertical...VERIZON.... OMFG ITS HAPPENING
>>7972423holy retard
>>7972423are you talking about this? anything that's not level with your eye level like a slope will have vanishing points at a different level than the horizon(i.e. eye) line
just eyeball it bro
>>7972423I think I actually get what you're asking because I've had similar questions myself recently and have been doing a bunch of my own experiments like this. Pic related (I did eventually figure out how you figure out the third point btw it just requires a bit more set up)I wouldn't say your third vanishing point is necessarily on it's own horizon line alone, but what we call a "horizon line" actually exists between each set of two points. So, if you drew those all out in a three point perspective image it would look like a triangle. I recommend you download blender and start tracing cubes at different angles including angles where the cube isn't parallel to the ground and you'll see what I'm talking about.
>>7972710The notes I took in general are kind of just autistic rambling because they were really only made for myself, but here is another image to show what I'm talking about with the triangle more clearly without all the cone of vision stuff making things all messy
>>7972500>It's wasted effort when all you really need to know (for color let's say) is "what is warm and what is cool?"What about how different colored light sources effect the other colors of an image. What happens to your colors on an overcast/cloudy day? Is green warm or cool? What about inherent values of colors? What about relativity to other colors present in the image? Does distance effect color? What happens under artificial lights like maybe under a neon green lamp in a dark room?Basically your take is retarded. There's a wealth of questions you can ask and learn from when it comes to any topic in art if you're actually willing to pursue them. Yeah you don't have to learn absolutely everything, it's up to you, but producing things at a high level of technical skill is often really a display of the sum of an experienced artist's knowledge. If pursuing knowledge when it comes to this stuff is just a joke to you, you might as well just be asking Grok or whatever to just make slop for you because it's clear you don't have any respect for the craft or anyone that's put the work in
>>7972423what? Isn't the answer verifiable? What is this thinking and observation shit, the answer should be already documented in these books you guys keep pushing.
Yall realize there's perspective books for this right?
>>7972720Ok dude. Carry on doing it the hard way and making no progress at all.
https://x.com/simodasketch/status/1499695670223327232
