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
), 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...
Edited by DOHC, 15 October 2009 - 06:03.