Yes, drawing a camera is quite a challenge! Your 2D views are pretty good... Thereâs the lens, which should be a perfect cylinder (so rectangular when viewed from the side or above) and which seems to widen in your drawings. The cover at the end of the lens is too thin! And overall, your camera is too âcubic,â whereas in reality, the shape is very elongated. This is noticeable in your 3D view: it looks a bit like it has inflated. The lens should be a little less wide, and the body a little longer. Overall, the shapes are understood, but thereâs a general issue with proportions that slightly distorts the whole thing. Keep it up!
Hello,
After several months of inactivity, Iâm back and feeling motivated!
This exercise is interesting, but itâs difficult to create something with volume without spending hours (if you follow the lessons chronologically), especially when you donât have a reference for perspective. The most difficult part for me was representing the proportion between the different components with volume. In other words, in 2D, itâs easy to show that the microphone is about the same size as the casing, for example, but when showing it in 3D, I didnât know where to stop the size of my microphone. Should it also be the same size as my casing (in length)?
Also, if I understand correctly, when there is no vanishing point, we are in an isometric perspective? So, would that be the case for all my cameras?
Thank you for your feedback.
So, regarding that little vocabulary point: isometry is a type of axonometric projection (without a vanishing point but with parallel lines) with a specific angle (120°) (e.g., here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Graphical_projection_comparison.png), so technically you did an axonometric projection, not necessarily an isometry! But anyway :D
Your camera angle is good, youâve captured the different volumes well! To answer your question about distances, itâs true that itâs not always obvious. To help you, you can try to âextendâ a plane that serves as a reference, either mentally or physically (with light lines)... for example, here, the cover at the front... This way, you know that, in principle, if an element has to reach the same level or further, it will at least have to touch this imaginary line! Here, what caused you problems is that it wasnât obvious that the microphone is in front of the body (whereas in the reference, itâs quite far forward, it starts halfway along the lens)... And so, by starting it too early, it ended up being too short!
Hello :)
Looking at the corrected version, I realize my mistakes. I should have positioned the screen more to the side in my overhead view, for example.
Otherwise, itâs the same as before; I still have a lot of difficulty with volumes, specifically knowing which direction the lines should go.
Iâm going to redo the exercise with other objects from my home that I can rotate in all directions.
See you later!
Thanks!
Bonjour :)
En regardant la correction, je m'appercois de mes erreurs. J'aurais du placer l'Ecran plus sur le cote sur ma vue de haut par ex.
Sinon, toujours pareil, j'ai pas mal de difficultes avec les volumes, a savoir dans quelle direction les traits doivent partir..
je vais refaire l'Exercice avec d'autres objets de chez moi, que je pourrais tourner dans tous les sens ;)
a plus tard donc
Merci!
Haha, thatâs good, I donât even need to correct it anymore đ
Once again, itâs not that bad. Your 3D perspective is a little off, but the object is recognizable and it makes sense :) Especially the handle part, which isnât exactly something to admire, haha. So itâs not perfect, but with a little practice, youâll do great!
Salut BonnieLi !
Eheh c'est bien je n'ai mĂȘme plus besoin de corriger đ
Iâm having some difficulties with the ellipses on the front cylinder and, above all, with the eye cover. Are there any tips for this, please?
Also, I have a major question regarding the connection of three curved faces. For example, the side face with the buttons, the face that connects to the handle, and the front face of the main parallelepiped. How do we proceed to represent these edges that donât actually exist?!
It all looks good to me! The goal of this exercise is to understand the overall structure and position it correctly in a three-dimensional perspective. Youâre overthinking the details; we donât really care about the exact shape of the eye patch. Youâll see that the correction video simplifies things a lot. As for the edges that arenât visible⊠well, we just invent them in a logical way, and what youâve done seems logical to me! Regarding the ellipses of the cylinder, you need to extend the cylinder to the face where it stops and draw it lightly, so you can erase it later if necessary. Then, Iâve made a little sketch to show you a trick for creating the perspective of a circle: when you inscribe it in a square, using its center and the midpoints of its sides, you can more easily deform a circle in space. I hope Iâve answered all your questions. In any case, I approve of your camera angle, which is very good!
Here is my camera... this exercise is really not easy! I don't have a good grasp of perspective... it caused me a lot of problems with the rear and front views for the microphone and the eyepiece. I look forward to your comments... thank you in advance!
There are some good things here! Camera 1 looks good, but it seems like you only drew a half-body view of it. Even though itâs not very noticeable in the photo, the cylinder at the front of the camera should be in the middle of one face of a parallelepiped (if we simplify the shape), and therefore the other side is missing. The body of the camera needs to be wider. Otherwise, the cylinder is a little too long. The side view is good, but the cylinder is still a little long. For the top view, Iâm a little confused; I think you didnât draw the body of the camera and instead went straight to the end where you look through the lens. Thereâs a rectangle missing to represent the body of the camera between the two!
The front and back views work well. When you create views like this, âdirectly facing,â there isnât really a need for cavalier perspective; it will be more noticeable if itâs viewed slightly from above or the side (you can try that to practice). The difficulty with this type of view is mainly the positioning of the elements, and itâs pretty good here :) Good work overall ^^
The image is a little small, but I managed to zoom in. Itâs good; all the elements are present and well-placed. The details I notice are in the perspective view. It seems like you drew the handle on the side of the camera body rather than in the middle, as you did in your front and top views. Also, you drew the lens circle right at the front of the camera, whereas normally itâs at the bottom of a recess. You clearly indicated that the âcubeâ at the front has depth in your front view, and this should also be the case in your perspective view. To position it correctly, you should draw the rest of your cylinder very lightly and have it stop where the hollow âcubeâ begins. This will allow you to draw the circle of your lens. Then all that will be left to do is draw the lines of the recess of the âcube,â which are a reproduction of the lines you drew in your front view. In any case, I approve of the rest; well done!
This camera is really not easy to use; Iâm a bit embarrassed to post this đ. I need to practice drawing cubes or other shapes (I think the lesson on perspective should help me đ).
Your profile camera is working! It just needs the small screen and the part where you put your eye, but the shape is correct :) We can see that you had some issues with your perspective. Your cylinder is not suitable for perspective, and your elements are not well positioned in relation to each other within the perspective. Make sure your lines are parallel. You also only drew half of the parallelepiped that forms the body of the camera; it should continue behind the cylinder of the lens. You also didn't quite understand how the handle works; it should be positioned in the middle of the camera body. I'm attaching a small tutorial for the cylinder ^^
Here is my camera. I tried to simplify things, but itâs still not that easy. Itâs a bit cramped, and I messed up with the way I used the space on my sheet.
Itâs not bad! From the side view, it makes sense, and from the front view too, but the viewfinder is missing. In terms of perspective, itâs not bad, but there are a few inaccuracies. The viewfinder is also missing. The square part is a bit low compared to the cylinder. If you extend the cylinder to create the lens inside, you can see it. As for the shape of the circles on the cylinder, itâs not rounded enough. Iâm sending you a visual correction, and you can take a look at the cylinder tutorial I posted for Val1121 just above ^^ Regarding the handle, it lacks a bit of precision in perspective. However, I think the camera is understandable, which is good :)
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 21
24/09/2020
... and here is my latest drawing of the 3D camera.
Thank you, and see you soon!
Guillaume. đ
... et voici mon dernier dessin de la caméra en volume.
merci et Ă bientĂŽt!
Guillaume.đ
Want to learn drawing?
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 863
29/09/2020
...The casing of this camera seems to be quite squashed; did you run out of space on your drawing? ;)
...Le boßtier de cette caméra me semble bien écrasé, tu n'avais plus de place sur ta feuille ? ;)
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 6
26/09/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 6
26/09/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 863
29/09/2020
Yes, drawing a camera is quite a challenge! Your 2D views are pretty good... Thereâs the lens, which should be a perfect cylinder (so rectangular when viewed from the side or above) and which seems to widen in your drawings. The cover at the end of the lens is too thin! And overall, your camera is too âcubic,â whereas in reality, the shape is very elongated. This is noticeable in your 3D view: it looks a bit like it has inflated. The lens should be a little less wide, and the body a little longer. Overall, the shapes are understood, but thereâs a general issue with proportions that slightly distorts the whole thing. Keep it up!
Oui la caméra est un exercice difficile !
Tes vues 2D sont assez correctes... Il y a l'objectif qui devrait ĂȘtre un parfait cylindre (donc rectangulaire vu de profil ou de dessus) qui s'Ă©vase sur tes dessins. Le cache au bout de l'objectif est trop fin ! et dans l'ensemble ta camĂ©ra est trop "cubique", alors qu'en rĂ©alitĂ© la forme est trĂšs allongĂ©e. Sur ta vue 3D c'est ce qui se ressent : on dirait un peu qu'elle a gonflĂ©. L'objectif doit ĂȘtre un peu moins large, le boitier un peu plus long. Globalement les formes sont comprises mais il y a un souci global de proportions qui fausse un peu le tout. Courage !
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 1
27/09/2020
After several months of inactivity, Iâm back and feeling motivated!
This exercise is interesting, but itâs difficult to create something with volume without spending hours (if you follow the lessons chronologically), especially when you donât have a reference for perspective. The most difficult part for me was representing the proportion between the different components with volume. In other words, in 2D, itâs easy to show that the microphone is about the same size as the casing, for example, but when showing it in 3D, I didnât know where to stop the size of my microphone. Should it also be the same size as my casing (in length)?
Also, if I understand correctly, when there is no vanishing point, we are in an isometric perspective? So, would that be the case for all my cameras?
Thank you for your feedback.
Apres plusieurs mois d'inactivité me voici de retour et motivé !
Cet exercice est intĂ©ressant mais dur de realiser quelque chose en volume sans passer des heures (si on suit chronologiquement les cours) lorsque l'on a pas de rĂ©fĂ©rence sur la perspective. Ce qui a Ă©tĂ© le plus dur pour moi c'est de reprĂ©senter justement la proportion entre les diffĂ©rents composant avec du volume. C'est Ă dire qu'en 2D il est facile de montrer que le micro fait environ la taille du boitier par exemple mais quand on le montre en volume je ne savais pas ou arrĂȘter la taille de mon micro ? fallait-il la aussi qu'il soit de la mĂȘme taille que mon boitier (dans sa longueur) ?
Aussi si j'ai bien compris lorsqu'Il n'ya pas de point de fuite on est dans une perspective isometrique ? donc ce serait le cas pour toutes mes cameras ?
Merci du retour
Try our courses for free
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 863
29/09/2020
So, regarding that little vocabulary point: isometry is a type of axonometric projection (without a vanishing point but with parallel lines) with a specific angle (120°) (e.g., here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Graphical_projection_comparison.png), so technically you did an axonometric projection, not necessarily an isometry! But anyway :D
Your camera angle is good, youâve captured the different volumes well! To answer your question about distances, itâs true that itâs not always obvious. To help you, you can try to âextendâ a plane that serves as a reference, either mentally or physically (with light lines)... for example, here, the cover at the front... This way, you know that, in principle, if an element has to reach the same level or further, it will at least have to touch this imaginary line! Here, what caused you problems is that it wasnât obvious that the microphone is in front of the body (whereas in the reference, itâs quite far forward, it starts halfway along the lens)... And so, by starting it too early, it ended up being too short!
I hope I could help you :)
Alors pour le petit point vocabulaire : l'isométrie c'est une perspective axonométrique (sans point de fuite mais avec des fuites parallÚles) avec un angle particulier (120°) (ex ici https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Graphical_projection_comparison.png ), donc techniquement tu as fait une axonométrie, pas forcément une isométrie ! Mais bref :D
Ta camĂ©ra est pas mal, tu as bien saisi les diffĂ©rents volumes ! Pour rĂ©pondre Ă ta question au sujet des distances, c'est vrai que ce n'est pas forcĂ©ment Ă©vident. Pour t'aider, tu peux essayer de "prolonger" mentalement ou physiquement (avec des traits pas appuyĂ©) un plan qui te sert de rĂ©fĂ©rence... par exemple ici le cache Ă l'avant... Ainsi, tu sais qu'Ă priori, si un Ă©lĂ©ment doit arriver au mĂȘme niveau ou plus loin, il devra au moins toucher cette ligne imaginaire ! Ici ce qui t'a posĂ© problĂšme c'est que ce n'est pas flagrant que le micro est en avant par rapport en boĂźtier (alors que sur la rĂ©fĂ©rence il est quand mĂȘme trĂšs en avant, il commence a la moitiĂ© de l'objectif)... Et donc forcĂ©ment en le faisant dĂ©marrer trop tot il finissait trop court !
J'espĂšre avoir pu t'aider :)
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 27
28/09/2020
Looking at the corrected version, I realize my mistakes. I should have positioned the screen more to the side in my overhead view, for example.
Otherwise, itâs the same as before; I still have a lot of difficulty with volumes, specifically knowing which direction the lines should go.
Iâm going to redo the exercise with other objects from my home that I can rotate in all directions.
See you later!
Thanks!
En regardant la correction, je m'appercois de mes erreurs. J'aurais du placer l'Ecran plus sur le cote sur ma vue de haut par ex.
Sinon, toujours pareil, j'ai pas mal de difficultes avec les volumes, a savoir dans quelle direction les traits doivent partir..
je vais refaire l'Exercice avec d'autres objets de chez moi, que je pourrais tourner dans tous les sens ;)
a plus tard donc
Merci!
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 863
29/09/2020
Haha, thatâs good, I donât even need to correct it anymore đ
Once again, itâs not that bad. Your 3D perspective is a little off, but the object is recognizable and it makes sense :) Especially the handle part, which isnât exactly something to admire, haha. So itâs not perfect, but with a little practice, youâll do great!
Eheh c'est bien je n'ai mĂȘme plus besoin de corriger đ
Une fois de plus ce n'est pas si mal, ta vue 3D est un poil tordue mais l'objet est compris et ça se tient :) Notamment la partie poignée qui n'est pas une partie de plaisir haha. Donc ce n'est pas parfait mais avec un peu d'entraßnement tu t'en sortira trÚs bien !
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 27
30/09/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 30
30/09/2020
Here is my camera.
Iâm having some difficulties with the ellipses on the front cylinder and, above all, with the eye cover. Are there any tips for this, please?
Also, I have a major question regarding the connection of three curved faces. For example, the side face with the buttons, the face that connects to the handle, and the front face of the main parallelepiped. How do we proceed to represent these edges that donât actually exist?!
Voici ma caméra.
J'ai eu des difficultĂ©s avec les ellipses sur le cylindre avant et surtout le sort de cache Ćil.
Il y a t il des astuces pour cela svp ?
Sinon grosse interrogation pour ma part pour le raccord de trois faces bombées. Ex: la face latéral avec les boutons, la face qui se raccordé sur la poignée et la face avant du paralepipÚde principal.
Comment procĂ©dons nous pour reprĂ©senter ces arrĂȘtes qui n'existe pas !?
Want to learn drawing?
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 1726
08/10/2020
It all looks good to me! The goal of this exercise is to understand the overall structure and position it correctly in a three-dimensional perspective. Youâre overthinking the details; we donât really care about the exact shape of the eye patch. Youâll see that the correction video simplifies things a lot. As for the edges that arenât visible⊠well, we just invent them in a logical way, and what youâve done seems logical to me! Regarding the ellipses of the cylinder, you need to extend the cylinder to the face where it stops and draw it lightly, so you can erase it later if necessary. Then, Iâve made a little sketch to show you a trick for creating the perspective of a circle: when you inscribe it in a square, using its center and the midpoints of its sides, you can more easily deform a circle in space. I hope Iâve answered all your questions. In any case, I approve of your camera angle, which is very good!
ça me paraĂźt bien tout ça ! L'objectif de cet exercice c'est de comprendre la structure globale et bien la positionner en perspective cavaliĂšre. Tu te prends donc la tĂȘte sur des dĂ©tails, on s'en fiche un peu de la forme exacte du cache-oeil. Tu verras que la vidĂ©o de correction simplifie beaucoup ^^ Concernant les arĂȘtes qu'on ne voit pas... Bah on les invente de maniĂšre logique, et ce que tu as fait me paraĂźt logique ! Pour ce qui est des ellipses des cylindre, il faut prolonger le cylindre jusqu'Ă la face oĂč il se stop et le dessiner en lĂ©ger quitte Ă l'effacer aprĂšs. Ensuite je t'ai fait un petit croquis d'astuce de la mise en perspective d'un cercle, quand tu l'inscrit dans un carrĂ©, te sert de son centre et des milieux de ses cĂŽtĂ©s tu peux dĂ©former plus facilement un cercle dans l'espace. J'espĂšre que j'ai bien rĂ©pondu Ă tes interrogations ^^ En tous cas je valide ta camĂ©ra, qui est trĂšs bien !
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 30
08/10/2020
Thank you.
Merci
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 9
02/10/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 1726
08/10/2020
There are some good things here! Camera 1 looks good, but it seems like you only drew a half-body view of it. Even though itâs not very noticeable in the photo, the cylinder at the front of the camera should be in the middle of one face of a parallelepiped (if we simplify the shape), and therefore the other side is missing. The body of the camera needs to be wider. Otherwise, the cylinder is a little too long. The side view is good, but the cylinder is still a little long. For the top view, Iâm a little confused; I think you didnât draw the body of the camera and instead went straight to the end where you look through the lens. Thereâs a rectangle missing to represent the body of the camera between the two!
The front and back views work well. When you create views like this, âdirectly facing,â there isnât really a need for cavalier perspective; it will be more noticeable if itâs viewed slightly from above or the side (you can try that to practice). The difficulty with this type of view is mainly the positioning of the elements, and itâs pretty good here :) Good work overall ^^
Il y a des bonnes choses ! La camĂ©ra 1 est bien mais on dirait que tu n'as fait qu'un demi corps Ă la camĂ©ra. MĂȘme si l'on ne voit pas trop sur la photo, le cylindre de l'avant de la camĂ©ra serait au milieu d'une face d'un parallĂ©lĂ©pipĂšde (si on rĂ©sume la forme) et donc il manque l'autre cĂŽtĂ©, il faut plus de largeur au corps de la camĂ©ra. Sinon le cylindre est un peu trop long. La vue de profil est bien, cylindre encore un peu long. Pour la vue de haut, je suis un peu confuse, je crois que tu n'as pas fait le corps de la camĂ©ra, que tu as mis direct l'embout oĂč on regarde sur le cylindre de l'objectif, il manque un rectangle pour le corps de la camĂ©ra entre les 2 !
Vue de face et de dos ça fonctionne. Quand on fait des vues comme ça "bien de face" il n'y a pas vraiment besoin de perspective cavaliÚre, ça se remarquera un peu plus si c'est vu un peu de dessus ou de cÎté (tu peux essayer pour t'entraßner). La difficulté de ce genre de vue est surtout le positionnement des éléments et là c'est pas mal :) Bon travail au global ^^
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 9
10/10/2020
Try our courses for free
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 54
02/10/2020
Hereâs my camera! Wow! Thanks for the feedback.
Voilà ma caméra ! ouh la la ! Merci pour les retours
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 1726
08/10/2020
The image is a little small, but I managed to zoom in. Itâs good; all the elements are present and well-placed. The details I notice are in the perspective view. It seems like you drew the handle on the side of the camera body rather than in the middle, as you did in your front and top views. Also, you drew the lens circle right at the front of the camera, whereas normally itâs at the bottom of a recess. You clearly indicated that the âcubeâ at the front has depth in your front view, and this should also be the case in your perspective view. To position it correctly, you should draw the rest of your cylinder very lightly and have it stop where the hollow âcubeâ begins. This will allow you to draw the circle of your lens. Then all that will be left to do is draw the lines of the recess of the âcube,â which are a reproduction of the lines you drew in your front view. In any case, I approve of the rest; well done!
Image un peu petite mais j'ai rĂ©ussi Ă corriger x) C'est bien, tous les Ă©lĂ©ments sont prĂ©sents et bien placĂ©s :) Les dĂ©tails que je remarque sont sur la vue en perspective. J'ai l'impression que tu as fait la anse sur le cĂŽtĂ© du corps de la camĂ©ra plutĂŽt qu'au milieu comme tu as bien fait sur tes vues de face et de dessus. Aussi, tu as fait le cercle de l'objectif tout Ă l'avant de la camĂ©ra alors que normalement il est au fond d'un trou. Tu as bien indiquĂ© que le "cube" Ă l'avant avait de la profondeur dans ta vue de face, ça doit aussi ĂȘtre le cas dans ta vue en perspective. Pour bien le positionner il faut dessiner le reste de ton cylindre en trĂšs lĂ©ger et le faire s'arrĂȘter lĂ ou commence le "cube" creux, ça te permettra de dessiner le cercle de ton objectif. Ensuite il te restera Ă faire les lignes du creux du "cube", qui sont la retranscription de ceux que tu as fait sur ta vue de face ^^ Je valide le reste en tous cas, bravo ;)
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 1
Nombre de réponse(s) : 11
03/10/2020
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 1726
08/10/2020
Your profile camera is working! It just needs the small screen and the part where you put your eye, but the shape is correct :) We can see that you had some issues with your perspective. Your cylinder is not suitable for perspective, and your elements are not well positioned in relation to each other within the perspective. Make sure your lines are parallel. You also only drew half of the parallelepiped that forms the body of the camera; it should continue behind the cylinder of the lens. You also didn't quite understand how the handle works; it should be positioned in the middle of the camera body. I'm attaching a small tutorial for the cylinder ^^
Ta camĂ©ra de profil fonctionne ! il lui manque juste le petit Ă©cran et l'embout oĂč mettre l'oeil, mais la forme est comprise :) On voit que tu as eu des soucis sur ta vue en perspective. Ton cylindre n'est pas adaptĂ© Ă la perspective et tes Ă©lĂ©ments ne sont pas bien positionnĂ©s dans la perspective les uns par rapport aux autres. Attention Ă ce que tes droites soient bien parallĂšles entre elles. Tu n'as aussi dessinĂ© que la moitiĂ© du parallĂ©lĂ©pipĂšde du corps de la camĂ©ra, il doit continuer derriĂšre le cylindre de l'objectif. Tu n'as pas bien compris le fonctionnement de la anse non plus, qui doit ĂȘtre positionnĂ©e au milieu du corps de la camĂ©ra. Je te joins un petit tuto pour le cylindre ^^
Interactions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 20
07/10/2020
Want to learn drawing?
See our coursesInteractions
Nombre de sujet(s) : 0
Nombre de réponse(s) : 1726
08/10/2020
Itâs not bad! From the side view, it makes sense, and from the front view too, but the viewfinder is missing. In terms of perspective, itâs not bad, but there are a few inaccuracies. The viewfinder is also missing. The square part is a bit low compared to the cylinder. If you extend the cylinder to create the lens inside, you can see it. As for the shape of the circles on the cylinder, itâs not rounded enough. Iâm sending you a visual correction, and you can take a look at the cylinder tutorial I posted for Val1121 just above ^^ Regarding the handle, it lacks a bit of precision in perspective. However, I think the camera is understandable, which is good :)
C'est pas mal ! Vue de profil c'est compris, de face aussi mais il manque l'embout pour regarder. Niveau vue en perspective c'est pas mal mais il y a quelques imprécisions. Il manque aussi l'embout. Le bout carré est un peu bas par rapport au cylindre. En prolongeant le cylindre pour faire l'objectif à l'intérieur on le voit. Pour la forme des cercles sur le cylindre ce n'est pas assez arrondi. Je te mets une correction visuelle, et tu peux jeter un oeil au tuto de cylindre que j'ai mis à Val1121 juste au dessus ^^ Concernant la anse ça manque un peu de précision en perspective. Je pense en tous cas que la caméra est comprise, c'est bien :)