Why is there a need for straight vertical lines in visualization

I think its time to discuss such important issue in presentation. Bakit nga ba kailangan nakavertical na straight ang sides ng mga buildings sa presentation?

If you have listened carefully to your teachers in perspective class, you will probably agree with me easily on this. Though I admit that there are limitations and exceptions to this rule. Here are some points why is this so:
1. 1-point and 2-point perspectives show good hint of height of structure.
2. It shows an architectural character
3. It's neat and formal.
4. It is an architectural presentation.

And here are the exceptions:
1. Artistic shots or an impression of something. (Worms Eye View)
2. Aerial Views
3. Spot details
4. Non-architectural visualization.

These are just some explanations why we need to use the vertical correction in presentation. You may also share your views on this, but please make this a good discussion for our reference. Thank you.

Sir neil, about the exception, on number 4. non-architectural viz. what are you reffering to? yun po ba minsan sa interior dining area naka focus ang cam sa mga abobot tulad ng plate, bottle, etc.? thanks po.

My personal input; there is actually no need for it since there are exceptions. It will always be the creators prerogative whether to use it or not; a case to case basis, so to speak. Not to mention the market the piece caters to... Personal preferences pa rin ang papasok dyan, no matter what my critics say, if I don't want to use it I won't feel a need for it. Its not a prerequisite for a good render.

arjun_samar wrote:Sir neil, about the exception, on number 4. non-architectural viz. what are you reffering to? yun po ba minsan sa interior dining area naka focus ang cam sa mga abobot tulad ng plate, bottle, etc.? thanks po.

architectural pa din yun. pro pwede na hindi i-cam correct yun kasi spot details na. non-architectural meaning, cars, character, basta hindi architectural etc.

sa tingin ko ung ibang presentaion din is ang camera ang reference, like an ordinary shot sa totoong camera, or ung ibang pwdeng gawin sa camera, tulad ng fisheye or other distortion na pwedeng gawin lyk sa vray cam.. anyway lahat pa rn maganda depende sa tumitingin...

I say its better to practice it. It adds class to an ordinary render. And it looks gazillion times professional.

bokkins wrote:I say its better to practice it. It adds class to an ordinary render. And it looks gazillion times professional.

i agree! graphics 101!

In the early days, when presentations where done manually via straight edges, such as the T-square, and the triangle, verticals where always straight, most specially if you where using the methodical system of creating a perspective. By this we mean, the projection point on the left is 2 times the width of your reference plan and the projection point on the right is 4 times the depth of your subject or plan (whew...hope it got that one right). I guess, it has been the norm in architectural presentations, to have the verticals straight, because:

1. Most clients can better understand it, because the forms, shape and appearance of your product are more discernible, as opposed to something that is skewed at one side, or distorted, or has an considerable amount of distortion overall. Unless your customer has an inclination towards art or artworks in general, then this method is the best option.

2. It is more professional looking, although, visualizations which are not camera corrected looks cool in an artistic sense, but practicing this is on your images, will convey a better feel of the perspective or relationship between your shell structures and the other entities that you have be it inside for interior spaces, or outside for exterior spaces.

However, if your aim is to present it in the non-traditional way, then not following the general rule of thumb is accepted. But for most architectural presentations, straight vertical lines is preferred by many.

This is based from what I have experienced with working with some of the architects in the country.

But to most 3d visualizers, a subjective matter, or it all boils down to ones personal preference.

i follow a simple rule:

i dont like views as if my head is in an awkward position.

this is why in a normal upright stance, we always view verticals as verticals.

this is the reason why i also dont normally like obliquely angled views (ung mga compositions that tilt the camera sideways.) you get my drift

but again this is strictly my preference when doing architectural stuff.

As an architect, I still feel to present my client a professional work by following the vertical lines as perfect vertical. I did a lot of perspectives or 3Ds with different camera angles and distortions but its just for my personal preference and just curious how theyre doing but not to the extend of showing the client. Thats why im also fan of 1 point perspective,this shows horizontal a perfect horizontal line and vertical a perfect vertical..More professional and very architectural for me..
And yes DESIGN 101!

celes wrote:i follow a simple rule:

i dont like views as if my head is in an awkward position.

this is why in a normal upright stance, we always view verticals as verticals.

this is the reason why i also dont normally like obliquely angled views (ung mga compositions that tilt the camera sideways.) you get my drift

but again this is strictly my preference when doing architectural stuff.

And that's why 3DMax and Vray created camera corrections!

For me, the reason is because of scale and proportion specially if it's 2 point perspectives and this is only true if we are doing 1 point or 2 point perspective.
But there's also 3-point perspectives which defy this rule. we use to do this in school last time, it has more artistic element than 2 or 1 point perspectives.
heres an example of a 3-point perspective: (links from the net)
http://artintegrity.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-vanishing-points.jpg
http://www.atpm.com/9.09/images/design-three_point.gif
http://www.andrewdiec.com/Perspective/3Point.jpg

Perfect example:
http://www.cgpinoy.org/architectural-f3/pa-try-naman-po-ng-interior-t6027.htm

There's really no strict rules on when to use it...
But 2 or 1 point perspectives are more popular coz it's easier, it's easy to show the scale and proportion specially if its architectural. Clients like it more 'coz it show more of the normal/usual view that they wanted to see.

Presentation is really up to the artists and clients... well of course most of the time we give what the client wants.
I have to agree with cloud and arkied, it's more of a personal preference AND client's preference...

Makisali nga po dito!!! Alam niyo mga bro para sa akin lang naman hah never talaga akong gumamit ng
vertical lines sa Perspective kahit pa sabihing mali kasi parang 'Badoy' kasing tingnan ang vertical
lines... .

Well mga tol sa akin lang naman palagay to hah sa tingin ko depende yan sa Mata
most of the time mas may tiwala ako sa Mata ko kaysa Camera Correction eh. Parang Tsam-Pective ba
na mas okey pa kaysa sa pina Plot mo na plano. Para bang gigil na gigil ka sa camera mong hawakan
at i-drag sa view na gusto mong mangyari yung tinatawag nilang Artist Perspective. I believe na basta
maganda sa mata at maganda tingnan overall that is Good Perspective for me. Accurate nga ang pag plot
mo at naka vertical lines nga pero Pangit naman tingnan di ba?Yung lang naman sarili kung
opinion ko diyan mga bro.
God Bless!!!!!!

ARCHITHEKTHURA wrote:

celes wrote:i follow a simple rule:

i dont like views as if my head is in an awkward position.

this is why in a normal upright stance, we always view verticals as verticals.

this is the reason why i also dont normally like obliquely angled views (ung mga compositions that tilt the camera sideways.) you get my drift

but again this is strictly my preference when doing architectural stuff.

And that's why 3DMax and Vray created camera corrections!

exactly also observe almost all the stunning archiviz renders in any forum, they usually follow this rule kasi mas professional tignan. even architectural photography follows the same principle.

celes wrote:

ARCHITHEKTHURA wrote:

celes wrote:i follow a simple rule:

i dont like views as if my head is in an awkward position.

this is why in a normal upright stance, we always view verticals as verticals.

this is the reason why i also dont normally like obliquely angled views (ung mga compositions that tilt the camera sideways.) you get my drift

but again this is strictly my preference when doing architectural stuff.

And that's why 3DMax and Vray created camera corrections!

exactly also observe almost all the stunning archiviz renders in any forum, they usually follow this rule kasi mas professional tignan. even architectural photography follows the same principle.

And thats why TILT SHIFT LENSES are soooooooo Expensive! Too bad at may mga lens correction na sa photoshop.

silvercrown wrote:For me, the reason is because of scale and proportion specially if it's 2 point perspectives and this is only true if we are doing 1 point or 2 point perspective.
But there's also 3-point perspectives which defy this rule. we use to do this in school last time, it has more artistic element than 2 or 1 point perspectives.
heres an example of a 3-point perspective: (links from the net)
http://artintegrity.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-vanishing-points.jpg
http://www.atpm.com/9.09/images/design-three_point.gif
http://www.andrewdiec.com/Perspective/3Point.jpg

Perfect example:
http://www.cgpinoy.org/architectural-f3/pa-try-naman-po-ng-interior-t6027.htm

There's really no strict rules on when to use it...
But 2 or 1 point perspectives are more popular coz it's easier, it's easy to show the scale and proportion specially if its architectural. Clients like it more 'coz it show more of the normal/usual view that they wanted to see.

Presentation is really up to the artists and clients... well of course most of the time we give what the client wants.
I have to agree with cloud and arkied, it's more of a personal preference AND client's preference...

You will see that all the examples are of special purposes. that's the exception.

AUSTRIA wrote:Makisali nga po dito!!! Alam niyo mga bro para sa akin lang naman hah never talaga akong gumamit ng
vertical lines sa Perspective kahit pa sabihing mali kasi parang 'Badoy' kasing tingnan ang vertical
lines... .

Well mga tol sa akin lang naman palagay to hah sa tingin ko depende yan sa Mata
most of the time mas may tiwala ako sa Mata ko kaysa Camera Correction eh. Parang Tsam-Pective ba
na mas okey pa kaysa sa pina Plot mo na plano. Para bang gigil na gigil ka sa camera mong hawakan
at i-drag sa view na gusto mong mangyari yung tinatawag nilang Artist Perspective. I believe na basta
maganda sa mata at maganda tingnan overall that is Good Perspective for me. Accurate nga ang pag plot
mo at naka vertical lines nga pero Pangit naman tingnan di ba?Yung lang naman sarili kung
opinion ko diyan mga bro.
God Bless!!!!!!

You will notice na napupunggok ang mga buildings bro. No client would want a short 40-storey building, everybody wants it tall and proud.

isa lang ang masasabi ko: para sa clients visualization lang,
na they are comfortable and formal way of presentation.

I agree with straight vertical lines. Professional presentation client will buy it!

Honestly po ngaun kolang nalaman ang kaalaman na ito. Hindi po kc ako archi. Pro love ko visualization... Tnx sir

bokkins wrote:

silvercrown wrote:For me, the reason is because of scale and proportion specially if it's 2 point perspectives and this is only true if we are doing 1 point or 2 point perspective.
But there's also 3-point perspectives which defy this rule. we use to do this in school last time, it has more artistic element than 2 or 1 point perspectives.
heres an example of a 3-point perspective: (links from the net)
http://artintegrity.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-vanishing-points.jpg
http://www.atpm.com/9.09/images/design-three_point.gif
http://www.andrewdiec.com/Perspective/3Point.jpg

Perfect example:
http://www.cgpinoy.org/architectural-f3/pa-try-naman-po-ng-interior-t6027.htm

There's really no strict rules on when to use it...
But 2 or 1 point perspectives are more popular coz it's easier, it's easy to show the scale and proportion specially if its architectural. Clients like it more 'coz it show more of the normal/usual view that they wanted to see.

Presentation is really up to the artists and clients... well of course most of the time we give what the client wants.
I have to agree with cloud and arkied, it's more of a personal preference AND client's preference...

You will see that all the examples are of special purposes. that's the exception.

Well i guess you're only refering to the normal view (man's eye), the camera at normal distance and lens used at normal focal point (not too much distortion) and all other factors are normal. (Too much distortion is not normal at all)
If that's the case, there's No issue at all... vertical lines should be observed...

silvercrown wrote:

bokkins wrote:

silvercrown wrote:For me, the reason is because of scale and proportion specially if it's 2 point perspectives and this is only true if we are doing 1 point or 2 point perspective.
But there's also 3-point perspectives which defy this rule. we use to do this in school last time, it has more artistic element than 2 or 1 point perspectives.
heres an example of a 3-point perspective: (links from the net)
http://artintegrity.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-vanishing-points.jpg
http://www.atpm.com/9.09/images/design-three_point.gif
http://www.andrewdiec.com/Perspective/3Point.jpg

Perfect example:
http://www.cgpinoy.org/architectural-f3/pa-try-naman-po-ng-interior-t6027.htm

There's really no strict rules on when to use it...
But 2 or 1 point perspectives are more popular coz it's easier, it's easy to show the scale and proportion specially if its architectural. Clients like it more 'coz it show more of the normal/usual view that they wanted to see.

Presentation is really up to the artists and clients... well of course most of the time we give what the client wants.
I have to agree with cloud and arkied, it's more of a personal preference AND client's preference...

You will see that all the examples are of special purposes. that's the exception.

Well i guess you're only refering to the normal view (man's eye), the camera at normal distance and lens used at normal focal point (not too much distortion) and all other factors are normal. (Too much distortion is not normal at all)
If that's the case, there's No issue at all... vertical lines should be observed...

Exactly. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Yup exactly. Normal Views. As simple as that, yet still a lot of people do not follow by this simple reference.

bokkins wrote:Yup exactly. Normal Views. As simple as that, yet still a lot of people do not follow by this simple reference.

One with a good eye will immediately see for him/herself that a skewed render in a normal view is ugly plain & simple. The abnormality will register at first glance. Therefore the author most certainly sucks at what he does.
Now a self-accomplished artist with a good eye will try to bend the rule; but ever only so slightly discernible that the abnormality wont surface. Instead a sense of "there's something different about this picture" kind of feeling comes up.

A lot of the first time posters here mangle their otherwise beautiful works with a false sense of "artistic freedom". Artsy-fartsy dung... Learn the basics first... Master the art... THEN experiment all you want; at least if you boff it you can go back to the basics that you have learned in the first place...

Tama po ba mga masters?...

cloud20 wrote:

bokkins wrote:Yup exactly. Normal Views. As simple as that, yet still a lot of people do not follow by this simple reference.

One with a good eye will immediately see for him/herself that a skewed render in a normal view is ugly plain & simple. The abnormality will register at first glance. Therefore the author most certainly sucks at what he does.
Now a self-accomplished artist with a good eye will try to bend the rule; but ever only so slightly discernible that the abnormality wont surface. Instead a sense of "there's something different about this picture" kind of feeling comes up.

A lot of the first time posters here mangle their otherwise beautiful works with a false sense of "artistic freedom". Artsy-fartsy dung... Learn the basics first... Master the art... THEN experiment all you want; at least if you boff it you can go back to the basics that you have learned in the first place...

Agree. Architectural perspectives are really meant to show scale and proportion in relation to its surrounding environment. That's why we are encourage to put elements such as cars, tao, trees etc... Scale and proportion are elements that shows formality in our presentations, and most of the time we can achieve it using the "normal view"
Bending the rule that distortion is slightly or not at all discernible is ok, it adds realism...
Too much distortion plus vertical correction is devoid of scale and proportion... (according to cloud, it's an "Artsy-fartsy dung")
Of course i'm not saying that distortion is bad, distortion is a wonderful artistic tool if used properly or sometimes flamboyantly...

AUSTRIA wrote:Makisali nga po dito!!! Alam niyo mga bro para sa akin lang naman hah never talaga akong gumamit ng
vertical lines sa Perspective kahit pa sabihing mali kasi parang 'Badoy' kasing tingnan ang vertical
lines... .

Well mga tol sa akin lang naman palagay to hah sa tingin ko depende yan sa Mata
most of the time mas may tiwala ako sa Mata ko kaysa Camera Correction eh. Parang Tsam-Pective ba
na mas okey pa kaysa sa pina Plot mo na plano. Para bang gigil na gigil ka sa camera mong hawakan
at i-drag sa view na gusto mong mangyari yung tinatawag nilang Artist Perspective. I believe na basta
maganda sa mata at maganda tingnan overall that is Good Perspective for me. Accurate nga ang pag plot
mo at naka vertical lines nga pero Pangit naman tingnan di ba?Yung lang naman sarili kung
opinion ko diyan mga bro.
God Bless!!!!!!

You will notice na napupunggok ang mga buildings bro. No client would want a short 40-storey building, everybody wants it tall and proud.[/quote]

Hahaha!!! Sir Boks no arguments hah...joke hahahahaha kaya sabi ko depende po sa mata so malalaman mo naman kung napupunggok ang building mo o hindi. Kaya minsan mahirap din ipaliwanag ang artistic side ng isang tao dahil may nakikita
siyang kagandahan sa isang bagay na iilan lang ang nakakakita.Im not against in Vertical lines kasi natutunan ko rin yan sa School

I believe na kung ano maganda sa Mata mo ay lalong mas maganda sa Client hindi lang yan basta basta ginawa mo dahil
gusto mo as my experience po hah .. Syempre minsan alam mo rin yung limitation mo para sa client at mga bagay na hindi
niya maiintindiahan no argument din po dito I agree po.Hope naiintindihan niyo po my side hahahaha!!!
Thanks good topic mga bro..............................................God Bless