I can tell that you understand some things, but the explanations regarding the other aspects are still very brief, almost like a summary. If you could provide more details, that would be great :3
Apart from the sixth one, which was completely flattened. Here, itâs a matter of logic: from above, you know they are circles, from the side, you know they are rectangular, so they are two cylinders in the middle of your shape. A round/elliptical base that then rises straight up.
But for this one, weâre doing pretty well ^^
If youâre having trouble, donât hesitate to redo this exercise with other objects. Itâs really very important and useful: 3
Hello everyone! Iâve included my work for this exercise below. I tried to approach it from three different perspectives, and at the end, I attempted a three-dimensional view by synthesizing the three perspectives to see if I had understood everything correctly. However, I realize that I included too many details. ^^ Thank you in advance for your feedback!
However, in his top view, he resolves the inconsistency of the narrower circle by drawing the base slightly obliquely, which doesnât seem to match the photo.
So, I still wonder which interpretation is correct because I have trouble seeing the cylinder getting thicker towards the base in the photo, and I wonder if there isnât (also) an optical effect related to the perspective?
I see both interpretations in the studentsâ exercises, and in my opinion, both are equally valid. *How can one not take a side?*
More seriously, itâs difficult to answer this question definitively without having the object in front of me. It could be an optical illusion, or it could be a different interpretation because the viewing angle doesnât allow for a clear and unambiguous answer. Ultimately, whatever interpretation one has, as long as the overall result works and is coherent, then everything is fine :)
And in your case, everything is fine, I approve đ
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 7
04/02/2020
Attached are my observational drawings of the robot (done before watching the correction video).
Thank you.
Ci-joint mes dessins d'observation du robot (fait avant visionnage de la vidéo correction).
Merci.
Want to learn drawing?
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
09/02/2020
Sounds good to me đ
C'est bon pour moi đ
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 3
20/03/2020
Thank you for your corrections and valuable advice.
Best regards,
Nicolas
Merci de tes corrections et précieux conseils,
Bien Ă toi,
Nicolas
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
22/03/2020
I can tell that you understand some things, but the explanations regarding the other aspects are still very brief, almost like a summary. If you could provide more details, that would be great :3
Je sens qu'il y a des choses comprises, mais ça reste trÚs succincts sur les autres vues, presque schématique. Si tu peux détailler davantage, ce serait chouette :3
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 2
Nombre de réponse(s) : 12
24/03/2020
The hardest part is imagining the invisible shapes; Iâm really struggling with that.
The exercise is great, and here are my attempts.
What do you think?
Le plus dur c'est d'imaginer les formes invisibles, j'ai vraiment du mal avec ça.
L'exercice est top et voici mes tentatives.
Qu'en pensez vous ?
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 2
Nombre de réponse(s) : 12
24/03/2020
After the correction, he still hadnât fully grasped the exercise.
Itâs still difficult to define all the volumes.
Post correction, he n avais pas saisi lâexercice sous tous ses angles ;)
Encore Difficile de définir tous les volumes
Try our courses for free
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
29/03/2020
Apart from the sixth one, which was completely flattened. Here, itâs a matter of logic: from above, you know they are circles, from the side, you know they are rectangular, so they are two cylinders in the middle of your shape. A round/elliptical base that then rises straight up.
But for this one, weâre doing pretty well ^^
If youâre having trouble, donât hesitate to redo this exercise with other objects. Itâs really very important and useful: 3
A part le 6 effectivement qui a été passé sous un rouleau compresseur. Ici c'est une question de logique : de dessus tu sais que ce sont des cercles, de profil tu sais que c'est rectangulaire, donc ce sont deux cylindres au milieu de ta forme. Base ronde / ellipse et qui montent tout droit ensuite.
Mais pour celui-lĂ on est pas mal ^^
Si tu as du mal, n'hésite pas à refaire cet exercice avec d'autres objets, il est vraiment trÚs important et trÚs utile :3
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 3
27/03/2020
I went there complaining, but I still went (victory!). And in the end, it turned out to be quite a fun exercise!
J'y suis allĂ©e en rĂąlant, mais j'y suis allĂ©e quand mĂȘme (victoire !). Et finalement c'Ă©tait plutĂŽt fun comme exercice !
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
29/03/2020
The method of using numbers to keep track of things is pretty good ;p
Pas mal la méthode des chiffres pour s'y retrouver ;p
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 16
30/03/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
18/04/2020
Itâs working well ^^
As long as you understood, thatâs the most important thing ;p
Ăa fonctionne bien ^^
Du moment que tu as compris c'est le principal ;p
Want to learn drawing?
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 16
12/04/2020
In my first top view, you can see that I wanted to draw the second cylinder smaller than the first. Clearly, it was undersized, but I realized, thanks to the plastic edge of the kind of base, that the two cylinders should have roughly the same diameter (with a small difference) because thereâs the same thickness of plastic around the base of both. However, when we look at the top of the cylinders in the photo, the second one seems thinner than the first. I realized afterwards that the cylinder in the back simply had a base that was slightly wider than its top⊠which is what GrĂ©goire actually depicted in his third drawing.
However, in his top view, he resolves the inconsistency of the narrower circle by drawing the base slightly obliquely, which doesnât seem to match the photo.
So, I still wonder which interpretation is correct because I have trouble seeing the cylinder getting thicker towards the base in the photo, and I wonder if there isnât (also) an optical effect related to the perspective?
On voit sur ma premiĂšre vue du dessus que j'ai voulu dessiner le deuxiĂšme cylindre plus petit que le premier. Bon clairement c'Ă©tait sous-dimensionnĂ©, mais j'ai rĂ©alisĂ© grĂące au bord en plastique de l'espĂšce de socle, que les deux cylindres devaient faire relativement le mĂȘme diamĂštre (Ă un chouĂŻa prĂšs) car il y a la mĂȘme Ă©paisseur de plastique qui entoure la base des deux. Or, quand on regarde le dessus des cylindres sur la photo, le deuxiĂšme semble plus fin que le premier. J'ai rĂ©alisĂ© aprĂšs coup que le cylindre du fond devait simplement avoir une base lĂ©gĂšrement plus large que son haut⊠ce qu'a effectivement reprĂ©sentĂ© GrĂ©goire dans son troisiĂšme dessin.
Pourtant dans sa vue du dessus, il résout l'incohérence du cercle moins large en dessinant le socle de maniÚre légÚrement oblique, ce qui ne me semble pas correspondre à la photo.
Du coup j'en viens quand mĂȘme Ă me demander quelle interprĂ©tation est la bonne car j'ai du mal Ă voir sur la photo le cylindre s'Ă©paissir vers la base et je me demande s'il n'y a pas (aussi) un effet d'optique liĂ© Ă la perspective ?
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
18/04/2020
More seriously, itâs difficult to answer this question definitively without having the object in front of me. It could be an optical illusion, or it could be a different interpretation because the viewing angle doesnât allow for a clear and unambiguous answer. Ultimately, whatever interpretation one has, as long as the overall result works and is coherent, then everything is fine :)
And in your case, everything is fine, I approve đ
Plus sĂ©rieusement, c'est difficile de rĂ©pondre de maniĂšre absolue Ă cette question sans avoir l'objet sous les yeux ^^ Ca peut ĂȘtre un effet d'optique, ça peut ĂȘtre une interprĂ©tation diffĂ©rente car l'angle de vue ne permet pas d'avoir une rĂ©ponse claire et nette sur la question. Au final, quelle que soit l'interprĂ©tation qu'on en fait, du moment que l'ensemble fonctionne et est cohĂ©rent, alors tout va bien :)
Et dans ton cas justement, tout va bien, je valide đ
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2
12/04/2020
Here are my first drawings before I made any corrections. I feel like Iâm taking a lot of time to draw, but Iâm not giving up.
Thank you for these lessons đ đ
Voici mes premiÚrs dessins avant la correction. J'ai l'impression de prendre beaucoup de temps pour dessiner, mais je ne désespÚre pas.
Merci pour ces cours đ đ
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2
12/04/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
18/04/2020
Wow, this ladybug has really, really long legs!
A small hint: you can clearly see the legs in the reference photo because the perspective is from a low angle.
Also, be aware that your ladybug looks a bit flat in the front view. Simply adjust the legs in the other views, and it should be fine.
Eh bien dis donc elle a de trĂšs trĂšs longues pattes cette coccinelle !
Petit indice : on voit beaucoup les pattes sur la référence photo, car on se situe suffisamment bas ^^
Attention aussi, ta coccinelle est un peu plate sur la vue de face. Corrige simplement les pattes sur les autres vues et on devrait ĂȘtre bon đ
Try our courses for free
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 3
13/04/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 3
Nombre de réponse(s) : 2508
18/04/2020
It works well, so I approve it âïž
Ăa fonctionne bien, je valide donc âïž