Jump to content


Photo

The cutaway drawing and its artists


  • Please log in to reply
13379 replies to this topic

#8401 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 00:47

THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE AFICIONADOS OF CUTAWAY ILLUSTRATIONS PLEASE AVERT YOUR EYES LEST YOU BE PERMANENTLY BLINDED.

I apologize in advance for putting such a 'muddy' boot forward.


I am neither an aficionado nor an illustrator, but you certainly have that neat engineers handwriting, your sketches still have that nice aesthetic, despite your disclaimer. :up:

Edited by werks prototype, 21 March 2011 - 00:48.


Advertisement

#8402 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 01:06

I have a question for the artists, cutaway and otherwise, reading this topic. How would I go about creating a 3-view from photographs? I would imagine Tony, Tom and the others have had to create perspectives or isometrics from 3-views many times - but how can I reverse the process? Any advice would be most appreciated. I realize this is off-topic and I would welcome PMs on this subject.

Thanks,

Chris



I'm not an illustrator, but, if you can't find a manual solution, to the extent that your project can't even get off the ground. Have you considered using one of the Autodesk programs? Only as a last resort you understand. If you were to trace one of your photo's in one of the view ports, eventually you could obtain geometry for all the views, it would be generated automatically. It would take a bit of tweaking. I have just quickly knocked up an example in Max 2011 for you based on your first photo. If you really have nothing to go on and did the job properly. You would end up with dimensions for everything.

This would only be useful as a last resort though. Below is a very, very rough example.

Posted Image Posted Image


Posted Image Posted Image

Edit: Another process by which you could derive some kind of geometry from just a couple of partial photographs, this example would also enable you to factor in the comparative height of the pilot that you mentioned previously.

http://www.evermotio...-model-building

Only if you have exhausted the classical techniques first though.

Edited by werks prototype, 21 March 2011 - 21:47.


#8403 JoeKane

JoeKane
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 21 March 2011 - 17:36

Joe, this is excellent news. Thank you so much for taking on this incredible labour. :clap:

Hi Tim,
Thanks for the words of encouragement. Although I must get after myself with the whip as I still have a long way to go in archiving the thread.

#8404 JoeKane

JoeKane
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 21 March 2011 - 17:41

What will you do with the final archived document, Joe? It will certainly be a document of a document!

Hi Werks,
I have not a clue at this point. Of course it is no good if it isn't available to those wishing to research, learn and just appreciate this art form. Depending on size of the finished product... and it will be very large... I may put it on dvds or flash drives for those who desire a copy. As I said in a previous post, I need to get cracking as I still have a long way to go.

#8405 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 21 March 2011 - 17:49

I still have a long way to go.

March 21 2011 - page two...

#8406 JoeKane

JoeKane
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 21 March 2011 - 18:02

March 21 2011 - page two...

Well... slightly better than that, but not much.
I think I'm at page 65 for the fully reformatted part. It's a lot more than just copying. :drunk: If I were a smarter lad I could probably figure out a more efficient means.
But at least I've graduated from longhand... :rotfl:

#8407 JoeKane

JoeKane
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 21 March 2011 - 18:52

Joe,

After my last post I'm sure the customs officers of cutaway land have revoked my passport and have issued a shoot on sight order. :|
Ralph

Ralph you're just on a Student Visa like most of us here  ;)

#8408 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 20:24

You don't have to be quite so formal, Ralph!

I don't know about Alan, but I can't remember specifically being taught this method at college - and James Allington didn't use it. It may have been demonstrated briefly, and I took it up much later, and very quickly decided that it was extremely useful. Up until I left JA I was working the same way as him, sketching things out, refining the sketch, then sketching in the internal stuff. Somewhere there is a folder with my college work in it, if I can find it I'll check to see if the 'Sphere Method' features. What will be apparent, I'm sure, is the amount of freehand drawing we had to do, and JA suggested I did life drawing too, which was another evening at college. I have had a flashback of pork pies, Mars bars, sweet tea, cheap cigarettes and noisy, cold bus journeys home in the dark...



Tony,
Interesting hearing how one actually gets trained with the techniques for this sort of thing, but the true players in this kind of work have generally been the ones with the talent to go along with it, not just a bunch of techniques. The techniques will help organize you to get it close, but you also have to train your eye to see what you want there on the board.
I did an illustration, based almost completely on photos (body removed and all that) in early 1973. I moved to New York and then to Michigan, and finally back out to California. I did an illustration in 1978 and a next one in 1987, and that one ended up going into the Smithsonian Institution; just a fluke that it happened.
During that time, I had started to pick up Air Enthusiast and Air International, as has been mentioned in association with Mike Badrocke and his wonderful aviation work. I picked up every issue and really hung on those drawings without ever actually touching a board to do my own, and probably improved my work significantly during that time. I had to figure out how to do a car without having the body removed (the 1978 piece), and then did one after starting them again in the 90s where you literally could not see much under the body even with pics. I used the construction "build book" on the car to accomplish the drawing, as my photos were generally worthless in getting the details.
If you can condition your mind and your eye, the hands will come along with you if you have the basic skills.
That is why I suggest to Ralph that he copy an illustration that approximates what he sees himself doing, just to get a feel for what someone else did. Psychologically, it is called patterning, and it works the same here. It will help give you that feel and coordinate the physical, mental and sensory effort. I think Ralph is getting much too hung up on the actual drawing; you just learn a bit as you go.
As a point, there is a book that was published by Motorbooks a few years ago, and later was reprinted by Barnes and Noble, called How to Draw Cars Like A Pro. My cutaways were featured in both editions, as author Thom Taylor, a very skilled stylist and illustrator, gave lessons in perspective, and illustration that would probably serve you well. The book is probably available, used if not new, through Amazon, just to make it easy to find. Check under Thom Taylor, and his wife who co-authored the book, Lisa Hallett.
By the way, Taylor is now an illustration instructor at Art Center in Pasadena, so he knows of which he speaks ... as do many of these folks trying to help here.
I just think that you are not going to be going to school for this, so you are not going to get a metered course, you are standing in front of a tsunami trying to figure out wave mechanics ... just get into an illustration and see what someone did. The books always felt like I would understand the perspective box concept and all that, then they would, after pages of technical stuff about angles and grids and all of that, end up saying something to the effect ... "Now, just draw your car in the box." That is the damned hard part, and you aren't going to get that without just picking up the pencil or pen and doing it.
Figure on the type of medium you want to use, too; that can be significant, and the Taylor book will help with that, too.
Tom West

#8409 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 20:44

WARNING!!! THE IMAGES BELOW ARE INTENDED ONLY FOR TONY MATTHEWS, ALAN RAINE, TOM WEST, TOM JOHNSON AND TIM.

THEY ARE NOT CUTAWAY ILLUSTRATIONS, THEY ARE NOT ART, THEY ARE FREE HAND VERY VERY ROUGH ENGINEERING SKETCHES MEANT TO SHOW THOSE WHO ARE HELPING ME THAT AT THE VERY LEAST I CAN POINT THE CORRECT END OF A PENCIL TOWARD A PIECE OF PAPER THUS HELPING TO DESTROY ANOTHER TREE!

THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE AFICIONADOS OF CUTAWAY ILLUSTRATIONS PLEASE AVERT YOUR EYES LEST YOU BE PERMANENTLY BLINDED.

To Tony, Alan, Tom W., Tom J. and Tim who have been so helpful I thought you deserved some proof that the person you are assisting does actually put pencil to paper in his daily work. These are very quick freehand sketches that I used to convey an idea for an engineering change to a process engineer at my job. I was looking for something and this was the only thing I had that was scanned into an email.

I apologize in advance for putting such a 'muddy' boot forward.



Ralph,
Please never apologize for work shown on here. I have a personal policy of never letting anyone see my progress or underlay work for a drawing, as I am among the least skilled artists that I know. I can draw the stuff that I do because I am completely literal and will document things with the photos or whatever reference to back up my work. I have mechanical engineering background, and I don't feel like I really want to do that stuff seriously either, so I just do modelkits or diecast cars, and am probably one of the best out there for duplicating bodies because I can't make it up; I have to know exactly what I am drawing or it will completely seize me up mentally and I stop.
As to your sketches, one of my favorite design projects along that line was back when I worked at Aurora during the 1970s. We were going back and updating a few of our series for one of our last years' releases, and one of those series included 12 of the World War I aircraft. I had built some of those as a kid, and they were horrid models, but the only ones available in that scale (1/48). We rebuilt those with new cavities based on my rough dimensioned sketches, complete with calculated heights and angles, etc, and without actual scale drawings which would probably have been more secure. Taking those individual toothpicks (interplane struts) and drawing them into correct U-connected parts so they would be correctly located was a bit scary for a car guy, but they all came out perfectly and never had to be groomed further to fit beyond my initial part drawings. I did the same for a dozen military vehicles and a dozen little hot rods ... oh, and six Antique cars that were completely updated and detailed. And all of it was done with dimensioned sketches that I would not have had the nerve to post somewhere like this.
Your work would have compared very favorably to that, so it that means anything to you ...
Sorry for the delay in responding, I have been out of town for a couple of days.
Tom West

#8410 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 20:47

March 21 2011 - page two...



Seems like the same sensation that I get working on certain illustrations at times ...
That was funny.
Tom West

#8411 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 20:48

Ralph you're just on a Student Visa like most of us here ;)



I am just happy that I haven't been called out for the strange Profile pics that I have been using. Obviously not trying to pass as the subject of the photos here.
Tom West

#8412 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:07

WARNING!!! THE IMAGES BELOW ARE INTENDED ONLY FOR TONY MATTHEWS, ALAN RAINE, TOM WEST, TOM JOHNSON AND TIM.

THEY ARE NOT CUTAWAY ILLUSTRATIONS, THEY ARE NOT ART, THEY ARE FREE HAND VERY VERY ROUGH ENGINEERING SKETCHES MEANT TO SHOW THOSE WHO ARE HELPING ME THAT AT THE VERY LEAST I CAN POINT THE CORRECT END OF A PENCIL TOWARD A PIECE OF PAPER THUS HELPING TO DESTROY ANOTHER TREE!

THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE AFICIONADOS OF CUTAWAY ILLUSTRATIONS PLEASE AVERT YOUR EYES LEST YOU BE PERMANENTLY BLINDED.


How dare you !!!!

I draw stuff like that regularly to get machine shop guys to make what I have in mind
and......
stutter...
getting into a fit.....
you dare say it isn't a form of art ???

Oh gosh...where will I bury myself ?


#8413 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:11

Fit has passed.. rant is over..

In Holland there's an ad on telly by Maggi.....they are the people who sell sachets of
powder soup mixes...
Their ad text goes somewhat like this..
A bit by Maggi and the rest by you.... for a good soup

Well here is a Brian Hatton 1967 Gurney Weslake V12 with a splice repair by me, had to imagine some of it though !



Posted Image



#8414 rwstevens59

rwstevens59
  • Member

  • 55 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:13

Tony,
Interesting hearing how one actually gets trained with the techniques for this sort of thing, but the true players in this kind of work have generally been the ones with the talent to go along with it, not just a bunch of techniques. The techniques will help organize you to get it close, but you also have to train your eye to see what you want there on the board.
I did an illustration, based almost completely on photos (body removed and all that) in early 1973. I moved to New York and then to Michigan, and finally back out to California. I did an illustration in 1978 and a next one in 1987, and that one ended up going into the Smithsonian Institution; just a fluke that it happened.
During that time, I had started to pick up Air Enthusiast and Air International, as has been mentioned in association with Mike Badrocke and his wonderful aviation work. I picked up every issue and really hung on those drawings without ever actually touching a board to do my own, and probably improved my work significantly during that time. I had to figure out how to do a car without having the body removed (the 1978 piece), and then did one after starting them again in the 90s where you literally could not see much under the body even with pics. I used the construction "build book" on the car to accomplish the drawing, as my photos were generally worthless in getting the details.
If you can condition your mind and your eye, the hands will come along with you if you have the basic skills.
That is why I suggest to Ralph that he copy an illustration that approximates what he sees himself doing, just to get a feel for what someone else did. Psychologically, it is called patterning, and it works the same here. It will help give you that feel and coordinate the physical, mental and sensory effort. I think Ralph is getting much too hung up on the actual drawing; you just learn a bit as you go.
As a point, there is a book that was published by Motorbooks a few years ago, and later was reprinted by Barnes and Noble, called How to Draw Cars Like A Pro. My cutaways were featured in both editions, as author Thom Taylor, a very skilled stylist and illustrator, gave lessons in perspective, and illustration that would probably serve you well. The book is probably available, used if not new, through Amazon, just to make it easy to find. Check under Thom Taylor, and his wife who co-authored the book, Lisa Hallett.
By the way, Taylor is now an illustration instructor at Art Center in Pasadena, so he knows of which he speaks ... as do many of these folks trying to help here.
I just think that you are not going to be going to school for this, so you are not going to get a metered course, you are standing in front of a tsunami trying to figure out wave mechanics ... just get into an illustration and see what someone did. The books always felt like I would understand the perspective box concept and all that, then they would, after pages of technical stuff about angles and grids and all of that, end up saying something to the effect ... "Now, just draw your car in the box." That is the damned hard part, and you aren't going to get that without just picking up the pencil or pen and doing it.
Figure on the type of medium you want to use, too; that can be significant, and the Taylor book will help with that, too.
Tom West


Tom West,

I have the Thom Taylor book as well as quite a few others. And you are right, in that the books will go through all the basics in the theory of perspective, ellipses, vanishing points etc. and then just say 'go draw'.

Being a 'mechanical' draftsman all of my life I guess, as you say, I'm hung up on, well, the mechanics of it. In doing mechanical layouts at the board if you have an oblique plane with a hole in it and you want to 'see' what it really looks like you project a couple of auxiliary views or rotate an existing view and you're there, all mechanics. It's all basic descriptive geometry and all method. Nothing very artistic about it. All though I must confess to finding a good draftsman's prints enjoyable to look at. I never said I was normal. :drunk:

I guess I'll just have to let go of my triangles and parallel straight edge and do some tracings and have at it.

Thanks,

Ralph

Edited by rwstevens59, 22 March 2011 - 00:49.


#8415 rwstevens59

rwstevens59
  • Member

  • 55 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:15

I am just happy that I haven't been called out for the strange Profile pics that I have been using. Obviously not trying to pass as the subject of the photos here.
Tom West


I doubt anything has been said because they are being enjoyed by all. :rotfl:

Anyway to get your profile pics to show up as a slide show?? :love:

Edited by rwstevens59, 21 March 2011 - 21:17.


#8416 JoeKane

JoeKane
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:17

I am just happy that I haven't been called out for the strange Profile pics that I have been using. Obviously not trying to pass as the subject of the photos here.
Tom West

Oh really?? It's not you in your various wigs in the avatar pictures? You mean those aren't passport photos?

#8417 JoeKane

JoeKane
  • Member

  • 76 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:19

[quote name='rwstevens59' date='Mar 21 2011, 14:15' post='4904004
Anyway to get your profile pics to show up as a slide show?? :love:
[/quote]
Might be able to do so as an animated gif...

#8418 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:26

I am just happy that I haven't been called out for the strange Profile pics that I have been using.

I just thought "Now I know why he's got a bad back!"

#8419 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:38

Posted Image
Vauxhall GP car. By F.Gordon. Crosby.

Posted Image
1914 GP Vauxhall, front suspension detail. Artist unknown.

Advertisement

#8420 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:40

Fit has passed.. rant is over..

In Holland there's an ad on telly by Maggi.....they are the people who sell sachets of
powder soup mixes...
Their ad text goes somewhat like this..
A bit by Maggi and the rest by you.... for a good soup

Well here is a Brian Hatton 1967 Gurney Weslake V12 with a splice repair by me, had to imagine some of it though !



Posted Image


:eek: The Maggi variant of the 1967 Gurney Weslake V12 with a splice repair by macoran!

:)

#8421 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 21 March 2011 - 21:57

"Now, just draw your car in the box." That is the damned hard part, and you aren't going to get that without just picking up the pencil or pen and doing it.

Absolutely right, Tom, and all this talk of construction is really only a guide as to how to overcome certain problems. Drawing, pure and simple, is the key, and Ralph has shown a good basic skill - you didn't say whether it was from the actual parts, Ralph, or whether you were interpreting them from orthographic drawings, or conjuring them out of thin air. Whatever, they are good, and to turn them into finished art worthy of use in a manual or to accompany a magazine article wouldn't take much. However, you have to master finished linework and perfect ellipses too, but that is not difficult, it just takes practice.

Copying sounds like a cop-out, but it is good practice. Copying three-dimensional objects helps you get sizes, proportions and form right, and copying two-dimensional work will give you a feel of how the original was formed. It is all use of the pencil, too, which is important tutoring for hand and eye.

I think the main point is that all these tips on basic illustrating can help, might help, but eventually you will find a way that suites you, that you feel comfortable with. It does help, however, to have some knowledge of all of them, as you never know when one of them is going to get you out of a hole. I have used model-making tricks, photographic tricks, classroom geometry and technical drawing and stuff from unrelated disciplines at times - everything helps! I still maintain that it does not help to start on something realy ambitious early on. Finishing an illustration in a couple of days to a standard that you are not disgusted by gives you the incentive to try something slightly more complex, and to a higher standard. If you are going to go commercial you also have to get faster!

#8422 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 21 March 2011 - 22:00

Well here is a Brian Hatton 1967 Gurney Weslake V12 with a splice repair by me, had to imagine some of it though !



Posted Image

Brilliant Marc - almost completely invisible! :)

#8423 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 21 March 2011 - 22:32

I thought I had found it........

A love of my life...

The James Allington cutaway of MY MGB. BRG as well !!

Saw the magazine ad on e-bay...

mentioned James Allington cutaway !!!

Ah !!! I'll have that !!!!

magazine arrives ..
rip open the envelope...................

thumb through the magazine


Yep, there is the cutaway !! 4 x 2 inch !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

this is what is looks like scanned at 400 %

Posted Image


Now !!! who is going to get me the Allington MGBs !!
Both of them pleez !! the BRG Coupe and the red softtop !!

#8424 macoran

macoran
  • Member

  • 3,989 posts
  • Joined: August 05

Posted 21 March 2011 - 22:33

Brilliant Marc - almost completely invisible! :)

Thanks Tony ...what do you think of my soup then ?

#8425 rwstevens59

rwstevens59
  • Member

  • 55 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 21 March 2011 - 23:14

How dare you !!!!

I draw stuff like that regularly to get machine shop guys to make what I have in mind
and......
stutter...
getting into a fit.....
you dare say it isn't a form of art ???

Oh gosh...where will I bury myself ?


macoran,

Easy...easy...I apologize. I just wasn't sure how many of the forum members were familiar with the language of the 'shop'. When information needs to be recorded the 'medium' may be anything...paper napkins, paper plate, pizza boxes, unfolded Chinese food boxes or even the palm of your hand. My favorite was when I had to sketch and dimension a broken part in one of our clean rooms where they make you wear those blue latex rubber gloves. I sketched and dimensioned the part on the palm of the glove as there is no paper in a clean room. To my surprise when I got back to my office and removed the glove my sketch and dimensions shrunk out of sight and became unreadable. If anyone had walked by while I was transferring the sketch to paper by staring at my blue glove covered right hand (yep a lefty) I'm sure they would have ordered up one of those sleeveless sport coats from mental health services.

In industry you do what ya gotta do.

Ralph


#8426 rwstevens59

rwstevens59
  • Member

  • 55 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 21 March 2011 - 23:20

Absolutely right, Tom, and all this talk of construction is really only a guide as to how to overcome certain problems. Drawing, pure and simple, is the key, and Ralph has shown a good basic skill - you didn't say whether it was from the actual parts, Ralph, or whether you were interpreting them from orthographic drawings, or conjuring them out of thin air. Whatever, they are good, and to turn them into finished art worthy of use in a manual or to accompany a magazine article wouldn't take much. However, you have to master finished linework and perfect ellipses too, but that is not difficult, it just takes practice.

Copying sounds like a cop-out, but it is good practice. Copying three-dimensional objects helps you get sizes, proportions and form right, and copying two-dimensional work will give you a feel of how the original was formed. It is all use of the pencil, too, which is important tutoring for hand and eye.

I think the main point is that all these tips on basic illustrating can help, might help, but eventually you will find a way that suites you, that you feel comfortable with. It does help, however, to have some knowledge of all of them, as you never know when one of them is going to get you out of a hole. I have used model-making tricks, photographic tricks, classroom geometry and technical drawing and stuff from unrelated disciplines at times - everything helps! I still maintain that it does not help to start on something realy ambitious early on. Finishing an illustration in a couple of days to a standard that you are not disgusted by gives you the incentive to try something slightly more complex, and to a higher standard. If you are going to go commercial you also have to get faster!


Tony,

Those particular rough sketches were from a few years back and were made 'out of thin air' while talking with a process engineer who was describing a particular machine and the problem he was having with it. It is a method I use a lot when trying to get to the root of a mechanical problem and understand the problem myself. 'Thinking with a pencil' I guess you could call it. The final solution to the problem was more elegant as were the drawings made to produce the parts. But the 'idea' of how to solve the problem is still in those coarse sketches.

Ralph


#8427 IrishMariner

IrishMariner
  • Member

  • 212 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 21 March 2011 - 23:28

I have a question for the artists, cutaway and otherwise, reading this topic. How would I go about creating a 3-view from photographs? I would imagine Tony, Tom and the others have had to create perspectives or isometrics from 3-views many times - but how can I reverse the process? Any advice would be most appreciated. I realize this is off-topic and I would welcome PMs on this subject.

Thanks,

Chris


Probably out of context somewhat, but if anyone's got access to CATIA V5 CAD package, there's some really good tutorials available online.

P-51 Mustang (Good tutorial by Mr. Dickson Sham)

or your

Audi R-8:

#8428 rwstevens59

rwstevens59
  • Member

  • 55 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 22 March 2011 - 01:10

...All though I must confess to finding a good draftsman's prints enjoyable to look at. I never said I was normal. :drunk:


Just to clarify the above, I can easily sit and study Leo Goosen's engine sections for hours. I have only seen one published fully rendered external view done by Goosen of the original straight eight 183 cu.in., a black ink wash, I think. I often wonder if he did any others. Although his primary concern was the tremendous output of working drawings to keep Miller, Offenhauser and Meyer & Drake busy.

Just love his manual 'style' as a draftsman.

A little off topic I guess.


#8429 fnqvmuch

fnqvmuch
  • Member

  • 115 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 01:46

Just to clarify the above, I can easily sit and study Leo Goosen's engine sections for hours. I have only seen one published fully rendered external view done by Goosen of the original straight eight 183 cu.in., a black ink wash, I think. I often wonder if he did any others. Although his primary concern was the tremendous output of working drawings to keep Miller, Offenhauser and Meyer & Drake busy.

Just love his manual 'style' as a draftsman.

A little off topic I guess.


that's spooky - my first thought this morning was the wish to see some of Goosens drawings, having been obsessively pursuing the peugeot/miller/bugatti tangle for a few days now and noticing his archive is online, ( http://www.milleroff...m#Drawing_list)
but not yet finding anything in the public domain ... then a Vauxhall pops up and i can see similarities.

not normal either.

Edited by fnqvmuch, 22 March 2011 - 02:46.


#8430 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 22 March 2011 - 07:39

All though I must confess to finding a good draftsman's prints enjoyable to look at. I never said I was normal. :drunk:

I think we all do that! I have an extensive collection of engine drawings, if I had an aircraft hangar or Joe's Wall they'd be framed. As it is they sit in envelopes, in boxes, in my attic. They later ones, CAD drawings, are interesting, but have nothing like the appeal of the human-generated, personalised work.

#8431 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 09:44

I doubt anything has been said because they are being enjoyed by all. :rotfl:

Anyway to get your profile pics to show up as a slide show?? :love:


Just trying to add a bit of a unique flavor to the group ... no complaints, thus far ...
Thanks.
Tom West

#8432 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 09:47

I just thought "Now I know why he's got a bad back!"


Trying to come up with an appropriate comment ... and it just isn't happening.
Will keep changing the pic on occasion, just for a bit of relief .. if that is the right concept here ...
Tom West

#8433 joca7483

joca7483
  • New Member

  • 26 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 22 March 2011 - 10:35

hi friends! nobody of you have one of this sergio barato's drawings in bigger size? wonderfull was to have all!! :lol: :wave:
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image

Edited by joca7483, 22 March 2011 - 10:45.


#8434 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 15:47

hi friends! nobody of you have one of this sergio barato's drawings in bigger size? wonderfull was to have all!! :lol: :wave:
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image


Ibsen, is your man regarding Barato. I think many of these have indeed already appeared within these pages. :up:

#8435 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 15:48

that's spooky - my first thought this morning was the wish to see some of Goosens drawings, having been obsessively pursuing the peugeot/miller/bugatti tangle for a few days now and noticing his archive is online, ( http://www.milleroff...m#Drawing_list)
but not yet finding anything in the public domain ... then a Vauxhall pops up and i can see similarities.

not normal either.


That is a truly great resource! :up: Unfamiliar to me!

#8436 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 15:57

They later ones, CAD drawings, are interesting, but have nothing like the appeal of the human-generated, personalised work.



It is funny, in a way, that you should make reference to that, the concept of the preference for "The personalised work". It is something I have been thinking about a lot lately, and it is a bit of a recurring theme.

I am, I confess a contemporary and classically trained painter. A recent graduate of Goldsmiths. London. And amongst many of the old techniques learned, including even the mortar and pestle construction of pigment. I still don't know, if it is even appropriate that there should be a hierarchy of technique or medium as such.

However, the comment regarding the preference for "human-generated, personalised work" Yes, I know what you mean, but I think to myself, where then does that sort of thinking stop. Well, I have perhaps the answer to that, it reminds me a little, of the way in which my drawing tutors, bear in mind I graduated literally only a couple of years ago, would similarly regard the practitioners of illustration. I remember looking on with interest as one quite notorious (contemporary fine artist/tutor) who would divide his spare time between the Royal College of Art and Goldsmiths, was quite fond (look away now) of describing illustrators rather disparagingly as the "Photocopiers", "Soulless", "Mercenaries." Disparaging terms indeed. Though which perhaps replicate for the classical illustrator a semblance at least, of the resonance of the criticism often used to describe the modern forms/use of the computer for some quite wonderful CAD and Illustration work?

The point, I think, is this, "There is always a bigger fish". And I've never really been comfortable with elitism, especially working the 'other way' round, particularly since many illustrators, either do end up, or aspire to be, at some stage, Fine Artists. That is why I am always cautious in deciding whether or not to embrace or revel in any kind of natural 'artistic' food chain, as it were.

(Just sticking up for the little guys out there)

#8437 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 15:59

Posted Image
Mini Traveller. Theo Page

Posted Image
Austin, Hour-Glass steering box. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
Austin Power Unit Rear End Rubber Mounting. Artist unknown.


#8438 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 16:00

Posted Image
Alta. 2-litre form. H.W.M Team. By Max Millar

Posted Image
1.5 litre, six cylinder, twin ohc. Alfa Romeo Tipo 6C 'Super Sport' 1929 'competion form'. By Max Millar.

Posted Image
Jaguar XK120C. 'First form'. By John Ferguson.

Posted Image
3 litre Bentley chassis. By F. Gordon Crosby.

Posted Image
Jaguar E-Type independent rear suspension. By Vic Berris.


#8439 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 16:00

Posted Image
Ferrari 12-cylinder Vee. 2-litre Formula II engine. By Giovani Cavara.

Advertisement

#8440 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 16:01

Another series of wonderful drawings. Unfortunately, all artist unknown.

Posted Image
BMW. 1.5 litre 6-cylinder tourer. 1934 'Alpine Trial '. By Artist unknown.

Posted Image
BMW Steering and Near-side independent suspension. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
The ignition system of the Benz engine. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
Supercharger. 1926 Aston Martin. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
The induction side of the 1926 Talbot engine. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
The two superchargers on the 1926 Delage straight-eight. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
The G-type E.R.A. Chassis. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
1952 E.R.A. G-type rear suspension.

Posted Image
1921 Duesenberg, front brakes. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
1926 Alvis front assembly. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
1926 Delage. Gear box and servo-motor. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
1926 Talbot. Girder frame construction and underslung rear suspension. Artist unknown.

#8441 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 16:02

Posted Image
3 litre Bentley chassis. By F. Gordon Crosby.

Posted Image
Adler front power unit, drive and transverse springing system. By Siegfried Werner.

Posted Image
Adler. Front wheel drive, rear torsion bar springing. By Siegfried Werner.

Posted Image
The Humber Pullman Six-Cylinder Chassis. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
Solex carburettor. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
Lucas distributor. Exploded view. Artist unknown.

Posted Image
1954 Maserati 250F. Rear end. By Giovani Cavara.


#8442 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 16:08

:) I do believe my cutaway folder may now be empty! :eek:

#8443 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 22 March 2011 - 17:08

It is funny, in a way, that you should make reference to that, the concept of the preference for "The personalised work". It is something I have been thinking about a lot lately, and it is a bit of a recurring theme.

I am, I confess a contemporary and classically trained painter. A recent graduate of Goldsmiths. London. And amongst many of the old techniques learned, including even the mortar and pestle construction of pigment. I still don't know, if it is even appropriate that there should be a hierarchy of technique or medium as such.

However, the comment regarding the preference for "human-generated, personalised work" Yes, I know what you mean, but I think to myself, where then does that sort of thinking stop. Well, I have perhaps the answer to that, it reminds me a little, of the way in which my drawing tutors, bear in mind I graduated literally only a couple of years ago, would similarly regard the practitioners of illustration. I remember looking on with interest as one quite notorious (contemporary fine artist/tutor) who would divide his spare time between the Royal College of Art and Goldsmiths, was quite fond (look away now) of describing illustrators rather disparagingly as the "Photocopiers", "Soulless", "Mercenaries." Disparaging terms indeed. Though which perhaps replicate for the classical illustrator a semblance at least, of the resonance of the criticism often used to describe the modern forms/use of the computer for some quite wonderful CAD and Illustration work?

The point, I think, is this, "There is always a bigger fish". And I've never really been comfortable with elitism, especially working the 'other way' round, particularly since many illustrators, either do end up, or aspire to be, at some stage, Fine Artists. That is why I am always cautious in deciding whether or not to embrace or revel in any kind of natural 'artistic' food chain, as it were.

Perhaps there is a parallel in the attitude of classical musicians to the world of rock 'n' roll! Some years ago George Martin recorded 'proper' musicians playing Beatles numbers - when David Williams tried to play one of George Harrisons solos he was completely flummoxed, just couldn't get it, so George H was asked to help. His response was that it was simple, just re-tune the guitar like so... There was once a series of programmes featuring Stephane Grappelli and Yehudi Menuhin, YM enthusiastically fiddling gipsy-influenced jazz. Embarrassing. Willie Nelson and Julio Iglesias, anyone? I'm not a Willie Nelson fan but please! It's different, it's not better.

Most modern art leaves me cold, not because it is 'difficult', 'intellectual' or 'not what I like', but because mostly it is pretentious rubbish, part of a scam to make a lot of money by flogging the Emporor's Clothes to death. Artists, dealers and critics work hand-in-hand to milk the easily-impressed wealthy who wish, in turn, to impress. How many times do you hear that stock phrase from art critics - "I think what the artist is trying to say...". Well, try a bit harder, chum. David Hockney is one of the few current artists that I really like, his approach is invigorating, the finished work captivating and, for me, moving. Lucien Freud is more than competent, and has produced some terrific work - but he's a one-trick poney.

The point is that there are many illustrators who are better at drawing and painting than many 'artists', and who are not concerened that their work is commissioned for commercial purposes. Quite how that is different from a crude, multi-million pound/dollar sculpture commissioned by a large bank to erect on their fore-court I cannot see. I appreciate that drawing and painting skills do not have much bearing on what is art, and art, or Art, has moved on from a mix of skill and imagination to more pure intellectualising, but it doesn't prevent a lot of it being grim.

I have some sympathy with the view that grinding your own pigments may have little to do with the intended profesional career path, but surely it doesn't hurt to know, it doesn't waste years of your life, and if similar groundwork is left out of other courses there is an outcry. Like the measuring-point perspective, you'll probably never use it, but it doesn't hurt, in fact it can help, to have learned it.

I want to paint, not because I want to be known as, or think of myself as, a Fine Artist - I just want to paint, probably landscapes more than anything, because if you have an artistic, creative temperament that is not given some freedom, I don't think you can ever be truly happy. Well, happy is probably not the right word, but happier than otherwise. To my mind true artists appreciate artistic endevour in every walk of life, not just their own narrow field.

Edited by Tony Matthews, 22 March 2011 - 17:09.


#8444 TWest

TWest
  • Member

  • 1,580 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 18:40

It is funny, in a way, that you should make reference to that, the concept of the preference for "The personalised work". It is something I have been thinking about a lot lately, and it is a bit of a recurring theme.

I am, I confess a contemporary and classically trained painter. A recent graduate of Goldsmiths. London. And amongst many of the old techniques learned, including even the mortar and pestle construction of pigment. I still don't know, if it is even appropriate that there should be a hierarchy of technique or medium as such.

However, the comment regarding the preference for "human-generated, personalised work" Yes, I know what you mean, but I think to myself, where then does that sort of thinking stop. Well, I have perhaps the answer to that, it reminds me a little, of the way in which my drawing tutors, bear in mind I graduated literally only a couple of years ago, would similarly regard the practitioners of illustration. I remember looking on with interest as one quite notorious (contemporary fine artist/tutor) who would divide his spare time between the Royal College of Art and Goldsmiths, was quite fond (look away now) of describing illustrators rather disparagingly as the "Photocopiers", "Soulless", "Mercenaries." Disparaging terms indeed. Though which perhaps replicate for the classical illustrator a semblance at least, of the resonance of the criticism often used to describe the modern forms/use of the computer for some quite wonderful CAD and Illustration work?

The point, I think, is this, "There is always a bigger fish". And I've never really been comfortable with elitism, especially working the 'other way' round, particularly since many illustrators, either do end up, or aspire to be, at some stage, Fine Artists. That is why I am always cautious in deciding whether or not to embrace or revel in any kind of natural 'artistic' food chain, as it were.

(Just sticking up for the little guys out there)



I am sure that a lot of you in C'awayland have been into building models of some level. This discussion of technique and technology reminds me of what was seen there.
The whole thing started out with guys taking a block of wood, or whatever material, picking up information and making their own drawings and all of that.

This became fairly popular so guys started printing out the plans, and the original block and drawing guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then, they started producing the kits with the block sort of precut and the plans included in a single package, and the Plan and block guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then, the kits came with the precut wood and formers and molded plastic detail parts, and the block kit guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then the first modelkits came out with molded parts and at least a shape that approximated the actual subject, and the precut kit guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then the later super-detailed modelkits came out, and the early modelers looked down on that as "cheating."

Then the Snap Together kits were brought out and everyone looked down on them for "cheating."

Then, the diecast market hit and all the modelers looked down on that as "cheating," but started collecting them anyway because they could actually display things easily.

This is just the way this stuff goes ...
Tom West

#8445 theglenster

theglenster
  • Member

  • 33 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 19:12

describing illustrators rather disparagingly as the "Photocopiers", "Soulless", "Mercenaries."


as i will sell myself to anyone, i personly think of myself as the whore of the art world ;)



#8446 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 21:44

as i will sell myself to anyone, i personly think of myself as the whore of the art world ;)


:)

#8447 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 March 2011 - 21:53

I am sure that a lot of you in C'awayland have been into building models of some level. This discussion of technique and technology reminds me of what was seen there.
The whole thing started out with guys taking a block of wood, or whatever material, picking up information and making their own drawings and all of that.

This became fairly popular so guys started printing out the plans, and the original block and drawing guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then, they started producing the kits with the block sort of precut and the plans included in a single package, and the Plan and block guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then, the kits came with the precut wood and formers and molded plastic detail parts, and the block kit guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then the first modelkits came out with molded parts and at least a shape that approximated the actual subject, and the precut kit guys looked down on them for "cheating."

Then the later super-detailed modelkits came out, and the early modelers looked down on that as "cheating."

Then the Snap Together kits were brought out and everyone looked down on them for "cheating."

Then, the diecast market hit and all the modelers looked down on that as "cheating," but started collecting them anyway because they could actually display things easily.

This is just the way this stuff goes ...
Tom West


I think you present a really good analogy there, Tom. Especially in using that particular example, derived from the 'model making' specialism, and the accompanying notion of the 'cheat'/'cheating' and 'looking down' upon a thing.

As my dad, a draughtsman, who then went on to adopt CAD, basically, in order to feed me and my sister, is prone to suggesting :stoned:, even the process of drawing from life, is essentially one of 'copying', from reality.

As I said above, I still don't know, if it is even appropriate that there should be a hierarchy, a natural 'artistic' food chain of technique or medium as such.

But you sum it up well and with a real-world example, involving an actual process. If you are going to look down, you will occasionally be made to look up. That is the way of the world.

Edited by werks prototype, 23 March 2011 - 02:39.


#8448 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 22 March 2011 - 23:21

I am sure that a lot of you in C'awayland have been into building models of some level. This discussion of technique and technology reminds me of what was seen there.
The whole thing started out with guys taking a block of wood, or whatever material, picking up information and making their own drawings and all of that.

This became fairly popular so guys started printing out the plans, and the original block and drawing guys looked down on them for "cheating."
.
.
.
This is just the way this stuff goes ...
Tom West

Very good point, well made Tom.

#8449 10kDA

10kDA
  • New Member

  • 22 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 23 March 2011 - 00:19

I'm not an illustrator, but, if you can't find a manual solution, to the extent that your project can't even get off the ground. Have you considered using one of the Autodesk programs? Only as a last resort you understand. If you were to trace one of your photo's in one of the view ports, eventually you could obtain geometry for all the views, it would be generated automatically. It would take a bit of tweaking. I have just quickly knocked up an example in Max 2011 for you based on your first photo. If you really have nothing to go on and did the job properly. You would end up with dimensions for everything.

This would only be useful as a last resort though. Below is a very, very rough example.

Posted Image Posted Image


Posted Image Posted Image

Edit: Another process by which you could derive some kind of geometry from just a couple of partial photographs, this example would also enable you to factor in the comparative height of the pilot that you mentioned previously.

http://www.evermotio...-model-building

Only if you have exhausted the classical techniques first though.



Thanks for this, and thanks to all for suggestions and help. I'm going to try the classical techniques rather than digital as I don't really feel like spending the limited time I have to put toward this project on learning to use a new tool. I feel confident that the tried-and-true methods (aka analog) will give me good results. BTW, looking at the "modelled" images above, I can understand how some actual models created by this virtual method end up looking the way they do.

Thanks again,

Chris

#8450 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,587 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 23 March 2011 - 00:26

Thanks for this, and thanks to all for suggestions and help. I'm going to try the classical techniques rather than digital as I don't really feel like spending the limited time I have to put toward this project on learning to use a new tool. I feel confident that the tried-and-true methods (aka analog) will give me good results. BTW, looking at the "modelled" images above, I can understand how some actual models created by this virtual method end up looking the way they do.

Thanks again,

Chris


:up: Good!