Nothing really special, I scan with HP 4500C and photograph with a little Sony Cybershot 10.1 mP.
Of course I use them both at full blast settings.
With the camera lighting is the most important, and I use macro settings to shoot a cutaway..........and tripod + 1000W worklamp from 2metres @ 45 *.
With the scanner I use a solid dark background plastic layer interface. The scanner itself has a white padded cover, which I think isn't really good
because the scan light will shine through the scanned object and pale the image against that white cover. Also, you don't want to pick up too much of the
verso side while scanning.
I feel using a dark background sheet hardens the lines and gives more body to the scan. I use settings up to 24.000 if the damn laptop can handle it, .........
.........which it can early on in the evening.
Luckily I have kept all the trash I have air-conditioned through the years, but still a lot of the Autocar/Autosport and Motor stuff has discoloured through
the years because of the trashy quality paper,............and..............smoke damage.

Not that I know of.
Theo Page did 56 Indy
Skip Barber did 56B F1
I think...I got that the right way round.
I have posted them previously, but can mail them to you if U want

Scott ?

Oh well 1 more to get us to 3000 sooner, cos I dread the next 500 scans.

I found both and both are nice.

Another Ferrari, Bruno Betti's 1965 512 12 cylinder

Vic Berris 312T2

QUESTION !

Has anybody ever seen or have a colour cutaway of the original (pre GLTL) Lotus 49....the green one !!

Maserati Bora by Bruno Betti



Ibsen

Very nice Ibsen, one of my favourite sports cars. I have some good material on the Bora, but I'll post it on a dedicated
thread.

Meanwhile I'll post another Ferrari.
Jim Allison's Dino 246

lovely detailing, just the scan isn't very good.

Well, here is my first attempt at posting an image. It is the 917/10 factory blueprints I asked for a few posts ago. I know it was in one of my old Porsche books (now stored away), but found a great site with TONS of images and drawings (Scale Model Cars). Everyone probably already knows about it, but it was a new find for me. It has probably every car ever made on it (both street and racing). Quality is quite varied depending on the image and who or how they scanned it in . Here is the link for it:

http://www.smcars.net/




I'll seen what other contributions I can make to this thread, since it has been a great pleasure to me.

I had forgotten that site

Here is Werner Bührer's two page spread drawing of the 49 from Road&Track September 1967

Thanks to Robin Fairservice for the scans

Lotus 9 - no signature



Lotus 17, 19 and 23 by James Allington



Ibsen

From the Lotus 7 owner's manual

artist unknown

Lotus 16 by Theo Page

If memory serves me correctly, scan was sent me by David Beard some years ago

ME! My first car cutaway, with some input from Jim.

WooHoo! Congratulations, Tony! Wonderful to see your very first effort here.

Thanks Ibsen, I haven't seen these for years - in fact I don't think I have ever seen the Lotus 17 as it was done some time before I started working for Jim. There was a big stack of finished cutaways in the garage/workshop that was used as a studio in the early days, and it may have been in amongst the others, but I don't remember it.

The 19 was used, I think, in Automobile Year, as a three-colour illustration - the line shading was done on two overlays, one for dark green bodywork and one for silver chassis bits. What a lot of effort! So much easier nowadays, although you would go straight to full colour rather than mess about with coloured line-work.

You can understand how I was knocked out as a 16-year-old to walk into Jim's crazy studio and see this sort of artwork being produced, and suddenly realizing that this was something I wanted to do, and felt that I could do, eventually.



It was a slow, painful, nerve-wracking yet exciting process producing that cutaway! I had a lot of experience by then of doing simple, mainly exploded drawings, but a complete car was another story! I have searched to no avail to find the cutaway of a Mills 75 model aeroplane engine that I did immediately after meeting Jim, but no luck yet. Still got the engine, though...

When I first saw it I thought "could it be ?" "might it be ?" "well maybe he did it", but then I said to myself "don't be silly it isn't".
Next time maybe I should air my suspicions openly

If I remember correctly the Daily Express had a feature on the Lotus 49 for its preview on the 1967 British Grand Prix under the heading 'Is this the Ultimate Grand Prix Car?'. Unusual for the time it featured a coloured drawing of the car, can't remember if it was a cutaway though.

Does anyone know how to bring up a copy of this article from probably july 14th?

If your luck is anything like mine, Marc, the more sure you are, the more wrong you will be!

I found a Brian Hatton B&W job in Motor w/e July 15th 1967

Low resolution cutaways - I hope someone have better copies.

Lotus 49 by Theo Page



Lotus 49 - Unknow artist.



Ibsen

Every time i see a Lotus 49 from this point of view ( rear , 3/4 , high ) it produce on me the same ( almost !) effect than looking under the mini skirt of a terrific babe from a ground point of view !
Me vicious ?! No , M.Phillipe and C.Chapman were !

You don't walk around with little mirrors glued to the noses of your shoes do you ??
hehe , just kidding !!
But your remark does remind me of a friend of mine who used to say that he would get a .... .. when looking at some snazzy new sports car.

Marc! wash your mouth!
What? I didn't say anything ! my friend did.

If you refer to the drawing at the botom by 'unknown artist' I have to admit it looks very sexy but i think it's a very useless perspective unless you blow it up very(!) big. You can't make out any details of the front of the car...

I agree, D-M, it is all very well using a view like that, but you can't do it and show everything! I used to worry that my illustrations were a bit predictable in viewpoint, but my role, as I saw it, was to show as much as possible of the detail and structure - from the pedals to the back axle - and there are very few choices of viewpoint if you want to reach that goal. Jim Allington's cutaways are similar in that respect, I think an early cutaway of his Bugatti T35 taught him a lesson, as he never again used such extreme perspective...

I've to admit that maitre Toine explanantion is very clear and that some.....girls....have some very nice....lungs too , and a sexy nose , and gorgeous teeth , fine wrists but.............



Arrrrrrrg !!!!, the devil is in me , arrrrg !!!! Haaaa, what a pain ! he control me and speak trhough my mouth .....Aaaaarg ! Flavio get out of there !

He's in us all, Daytona, in different proportions...

If one were allowed to rate the three Lotus 49 cutaways, I'd say that --

1) Hatton's drawing is "exciting", on account of the perspective, which feels like you're standing next to the car, although it doesn't reveal all details. It does reveal the "personality" and "style" of the car, however, in an excellent way. Another smart little detail about Hatton's work is that he uses the bright-coloured areas as "optional" see-through areas. Like the white roundel -- you could either see it as the roundel, or a hole in the panel, where you can take a peek into the cockpit. He pulls the same trick with the windscreen/deflector. I just love Hatton's drawing -- it's artistic, smart, stylish, balanced, revealing, technically interesting, quite complete in the way it caters to every interest.

2) Theo Page's drawing is quite "conventional" (for a rear angle) and reveals the details one would hope for, but it is not as bold and exciting as the Lotus 49 was once thought to be. It has generous detail, is beautifully done, but lacks that dash and verve I find in Hatton's drawing.

3) The last one, however, I find a bit puerile in its extreme approach. The perspective is unnatural, the front wheels are angled in an awkward way, and the image doesn't convey the feeling of standing next to a Lotus 49. Can't help it, the drawing is a bit "ridiculous" to my eye. Although I completely lack the talent to make anything even remotely as good myself (even back in the day when I used to draw F1 cars), I still think that if the artist's name is lost, it is not a great loss. Both Hatton and Page are far superior in my view.

The rear perspective of the Lotus 49 was spectacular for its times, and it might have been tempting to draw it in such a way that its lines were enhanced or even exaggerated. I recall to this very day when I first laid my eyes on the rear view picture of Hill pushing his brand new 49 at Zandvoort after retiring, on the 4th of June 1967, as published by Competition Year 1967, by the magazine Sports Car Graphic (1968), see p. 15. That car was just spectacular, back then. I think the rear end of the 49 was simply considered as extreme, with its engine in full sight (what's the use of cutaways? The car was a cutaway! ), and suspension bolted on to the engine. In addition, the tires had become ever more extreme and were conspicuously fat. And then the car still retained the "old-style" exhaust pipes, with heavily chromed tailpipes of generous length, following some nice Sperex-painted plumbing... It was gorgeous!

I still have my copy of that review in my bookshelf. I seem to recall that Don Capps wrote about that survey some ten years ago (or more) in here, before it really became TNF.

Just a personal, amateur's view, maybe not shared by the aficionados, but it's my 2c...


Edit: corrections of misspellings, and a few added opinions, after dreaming of vanishing points...

Discussing viewpoints, perspective and the showing, presentation of as much detail as possible, here is a good
rendering by Theo Page of a 65 BRM.

It shows a lot front to rear, but somehow seems a bit bent, as well as having a questionable wheelbase/front overhang ratio.
See also the front pick-up of the lower rear radius rod, was it really at half cockpit ?
Exhausts also seem to be leaning more to the right of the car
It is a scan, not a photograph...so no lens distortion.
Probably a combination of a lot of discrepancies in the divergence of vanishing points creating a twisted look to the drawing.
I wonder if even Tony understands what I am trying to say.

......No, no...I just opened the bottle !

Very interesting, Marc - and DOHC - I'll have to respond tomorrow as I'm knackered...

I am always amazed, and as an Eng Lit student donkeys years ago, I still am searching for the real answer.
to what you ask....
well knackered, knee, knock, know......

Good knight Tony

Knight knight Marc, and everyone in Cutawayland...I shall dream of vanishing points.

Just don't travel down one !!

Another point of view.

BRM P261 by Bruno Betti



Ibsen

While googling for something else I came across this cutaway index of published cutaways. As can be seen by the examples in this thread, this index is not authoritative....

http://www.xs4all.nl/~robdebie/models/cutaway.htm#racecars

VWV,,

A list is a nice thing, but definitely not a help when it comes to accessing something. I'm always disappointed when I Google something, and it looks promising, but turns out it is just someone's list of something. Thank goodness for the sites that actually have content.

doug

Doug, I think you are missing the point here. All that index tells you is what book or magazine to go to for a particular cutaway, not links to a download. If you want something you can always get it if you know the title of the source.

Too many folks think that the internet is instant gratification. Fortunately I come from a generation that actually knows how to look for a particular book in a library. I'm actually surprised how many of those books & magazines on that list I actually own.

Not authoritative, but very useful and interesting, thanks VWV.

I understand, Marc. I don't like to comment critically on other illustrators work, but there are a few problems with this drawing. The perspective is not as flattering as it could be, and, if you ignore any castor and/or camber, the wheel/tyre ellipses should progressively become 'fatter' from RR to LF, and LR, RF could almost be the same as they are so close together. In fact the LR is much fatter than RF, which doesn't help. However, the most confusing thing, visually, is the actual 'cuts', they are completely random, and are giving conflicting clues to the shape of the car.

A cut should, I believe, always nearly follow a lateral or longitudinal section, and help to show the real shape of that part of the vehicle. The exception is when the cut follows a panel line, such as an engine compartment or door shut. In this case the cuts on the nose are going all over the place!

Edited as I got a tyre designation wrong. Sorry!

I agree, you picked the winner, DOHC! There are two ways to approach a technical illustration - major on the technical detail, or go for a viewpoint that grabs you, not necessarily the optimum for showing the detail, but show what you can. My only problem with Brian Hatton's drawing - while I'm in 'critical bastard' mode - is that the perspective is so extreme that the RR brake disc should be 'fatter' than the outside wheel-rim ellipse, but it looks the same to me, and slightly odd. BH changed his style slightly all the time, always recognisable as his, but I sometimes had the impression that he was a bit bored!

As I have said before, my attitude, like Jim Allington's, was a bit pedantic. I felt that, as far as possible, everything should be visible, unless a viewpoint was demanded by the client that made this impossible. My cutaway of the PC 26 just about worked, but the shape of the front bulkheads is not easy to decypher, and some items dead amidships are almost in plan form. However, Marlboro demanded a different view from what I had been providing for a few years, and as far as I know were happy with the result, but then their expectations were probably very different to mine! The customer is always right.

I have done other cutaways that used too much perspective, but once again this was either asked for, was the easy solution or was unavoidable. Inevitably price, deadline and available information affect outcome. I have also used the PC 26-style viewpoint for the Essex hospitality coach, Benetton wind tunnel and a Shelvoke & Drewry chassis, it is sometimes the best overall solution.

Reading this thread does the same effect on me as a glass of great wine fresh milk does.......it provide pure satisfaction and really add a moment of happiness after a long day at work.

Merci , merci beaucoup

Well Tony, while we're in the nit-picking mode, one also notes that Hatton took some artistic liberties with the tyre tread pattern. The Firestones Lotus ran on in 1967 had 6 grooves front and 8 grooves rear. Hattons drawing, however, has 10 grooves LR, 9 grooves RR, 6 grooves LF, and 7 grooves RF! At least he got one tyre right!

I was being gentle...

Tony,

You've probably already answered this a dozen times before, but I'm curious do you (and most artists) still use old school techniques to create your drawings, or have computers become more prevalent. I can do a few reasonable things with the aid of a computer (and the right software) that I never could a few years back with the old pen and paper.


Thanks.

doug

For the thirteenth bloody time... !

I don't illlustrate any more, Doug, but if I did I would still use traditional techniques, as I get very little pleasure from using a computer for anything other than posting meaningless, error-strewn posts on this Forum. You will find that every other technical illustrator that posts here, and was taught to use a pencil, Rotring pen and airbrush is now using a computer, and Tom Johnson has posted a couple of very interesting, teasing pix of work in progress. If you ask him nicely I'm sure he'll post a few more - I'd certainly like to see more!

I'm still illustrating - a bit.

Although it's about 70% computer based, I still use most of the skills picked up with the old pen, pencil and brush. I have a customer who has another part of the company that produce their own artwork, but it's all generated from CAD style packages and they are ******* awful. I've had a few interesting meetings when all parties are present and I've managed to keep my temper, but more importantly my dignity

It ain't the same is it was.

I wonder, Alan, if a traditional grounding, not necessarily the whole shooting match, is a help when using a computer. I ask having seen a short article on TV about architecture students having free-hand drawing lessons to aid them in visualizing. Drawing was spoken of as if it is a lost art - perhaps it is, or soon will be. I can't imagine that Technical Graphics is taught any other way than straight-to-software, if there are indeed any courses still running. It may have been you that said - many, many posts ago - that there are no courses now.

Looking through the source guide in post 2588 I see that Cimarosti offers a cutaway of the Bugatti T251 in his Complete History of Grand Prix Racing. I have posted my interest in the T251 previously and I would very much welcome a hi-res scanned copy of the T251 cutaway for my files if anyone can oblige and send via e mail. Please PM me if you can help. I have only ever seen a small photo of the crossover rear suspension, subsequently changed for massive vertical coils, qv at the Schlumpf, and nothing of the original or subsequent front end arrangements.
Many thanks
Roger Lund