I don't know if you're the same guy posting all these threads, but please take it to the practice or QTDDTOT threads. At the very least stick to the first thread you made, there's no reason to have several for the same few questions

>>2538 >>2491 >>2497 >>2501 >>2516 >>2446 >>2448 >>2454 >>2458 >>2462 >>2469 >>2475 kill yourself

>>2540 is this wrong? do people read such a long thread orz i ll erase the other ones then i guess >>2541 first thing first

>>2542 Are you trying to draw or are you trying get a handle on the matrix operations used in 3D graphics programming? Completely different concerns, and the bridge between the two is narrower than you might expect. Research grade precision and complexity won't help if you can't even tell if you've managed to hit the broad side of a barn, let alone hit it in the first place. If you need accuracy that you can't muster, break the drawing down. Use scaffolding and simpler forms. Can you accurately put down a box that encapsulates the entire car? Can you accurately put down a cylinder on its side that exists in the same perspective space as the former box, and is angled just right to represent the rotation of the tire? If you can, do that first and build the rest of the car on top of that. If you can't, learn how to do that first. Isolate your problems and tackle them in the absence of aesthetic concerns.

>>2581 the question says how many.

>>2581 isolating basic shape IS the basic but when dealing with the actual objects it goes way further to deal wirh miniscule detail. i cant think of anything but math and geometry that will help address micro precision, or is there other things to help make an image looks normal

Ask spergy questions, get spergy answers. Fucking doom tags. >>2584 I wasn't answering the question, I was asking what you are trying to achieve. Correct means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. Correct might mean making sure your straight lines are straight and your curved lines are curved, or it might mean your car is already correct, and it's supposed to be distorted and unclear. It might mean clarity in shapes, communication or intent in the abstract, or making sure your forms follow some system of perspective, linear or otherwise. It might also mean that you draw the thing you want to depict in the exact way you want to depict it, as seen from the exact distance and vantage point you want it seen from, lit in the exact way it needs to be lit, as if the viewer was focused on the exact point the viewer should be focused on, distorted in a way that it matches the specific eye size and any retinal imperfections that your viewer would experience if they were seeing all the details of your image at their intended distances. You got a different eye? Standing an inch too far to the left? You look at the wrong part of the picture? Fuck you, ain't correct. By bringing in heavy math and nuanced projections, you're setting the bar higher than most artists, past or present, have ever achieved, and before you can even draw a passable line. You're setting yourself up for failure. >>2585 There is something that could make your art look "normal" besides superb precision in tiny details. It's called marginally competent precision in the biggest details. Or frankly any precision anywhere. You're worried about hitting a little too close to the edge of the bullseye instead of the very middle while you're shooting into the crowd behind you. The best ammo, tools and knowledge in the world can't help you hit your target better if you can't even tell that you're shooting into the crowd behind you.

Can we stop responding to bait threads? Thanks.

>>2593 But how will I see how much more retarded this can get if I don't bite?

>>2595 >1.20 MB Fuck me I did it again.