HOME | DD

Description
Oxford Rexes re-worked a bit from the scratchy drawing. Frankly, I like this version a lot more. There is more to be done, but I think I got the forms alright and the perspectives too.

Let's get something straight here: this is MY version of two T-rexes running, POV behind and very close to the ground. It is definitely inspired by Paul's Princeton rexes and is basically an homage to GSP and these magnificent animals called Tyrannosaurus rex.

Perspective is a tricky subject for many artists. Architects use it as a matter of course, nature artists usually copy from photos or actual models (I often do!) but seldom, it seems to me, is perspective thought about when creating fanciful art, which is art created depicting something we cannot see in front of our eyes, but is about subjects which are real or are once thought to have been real. Any restoration of Dinosaur Jim Jensen's Ultrasauros would fall into the second category, since we now know it is a chimera made from two very different dinosaurs. Paleo King has a lot more info on that. Back to perspective; perspective deals with reality as we PERCEIVE it, not as it is. Yet, it allows us to perceive reality. If perspective did not exist, we would see everything at its true size. Thus, we would not perceive reality at all because everything in sight would be in the way of our vision. Thus perspective allows us to see reality as it IS by showing us a basic distortion: objects farther from the viewer than closer objects look smaller in proportion than said close objects.

Perspective is damned tricky to get even close to correct on a two dimensional surface. MANY artists screw it up badly.
There is forced perspective, which exaggerates various elements in a painting/drawing for dramatic effect. Since certain POV's also can exaggerate proportions WAY out of kilter, forced perspectives CAN be thought of as realistic depending on A: how forced it is, and B: how much leeway we are willing to give the pic in question.

Telescopic lense (non-linear) perspective follows proportions seen through a telescopic lens, which can be forced too, in another direction, skewing actual proportions badly. This can be a very cool effect, but, it is not realistic (linear) unaided human eye perspective. GSP's Princeton Field Guide rexes are telescopic lens forced perspectives. Valid? Yes, but not as realistic art. I do not know of anywhere that Paul claims his Princeton rexes (done WAAAAY before the field guide came out) are done in linear perspective. The man knows how to draw. As stated below, he can use correct perspectives.

Description
Oxford Rexes re-worked a bit from the scratchy drawing. Frankly, I like this version a lot more. There is more to be done, but I think I got the forms alright and the perspectives too.

Let's get something straight here: this is MY version of two T-rexes running, POV behind and very close to the ground. It is definitely inspired by Paul's Princeton rexes and is basically an homage to GSP and these magnificent animals called Tyrannosaurus rex.

Perspective is a tricky subject for many artists. Architects use it as a matter of course, nature artists usually copy from photos or actual models (I often do!) but seldom, it seems to me, is perspective thought about when creating fanciful art, which is art created depicting something we cannot see in front of our eyes, but is about subjects which are real or are once thought to have been real. Any restoration of Dinosaur Jim Jensen's Ultrasauros would fall into the second category, since we now know it is a chimera made from two very different dinosaurs. Paleo King has a lot more info on that. Back to perspective; perspective deals with reality as we PERCEIVE it, not as it is. Yet, it allows us to perceive reality. If perspective did not exist, we would see everything at its true size. Thus, we would not perceive reality at all because everything in sight would be in the way of our vision. Thus perspective allows us to see reality as it IS by showing us a basic distortion: objects farther from the viewer than closer objects look smaller in proportion than said close objects.

Perspective is damned tricky to get even close to correct on a two dimensional surface. MANY artists screw it up badly.
There is forced perspective, which exaggerates various elements in a painting/drawing for dramatic effect. Since certain POV's also can exaggerate proportions WAY out of kilter, forced perspectives CAN be thought of as realistic depending on A: how forced it is, and B: how much leeway we are willing to give the pic in question.

Telescopic lense (non-linear) perspective follows proportions seen through a telescopic lens, which can be forced too, in another direction, skewing actual proportions badly. This can be a very cool effect, but, it is not realistic (linear) unaided human eye perspective. GSP's Princeton Field Guide rexes are telescopic lens forced perspectives. Valid? Yes, but not as realistic art. I do not know of anywhere that Paul claims his Princeton rexes (done WAAAAY before the field guide came out) are done in linear perspective. The man knows how to draw. As stated below, he can use correct perspectives.