creating plans from a photo

Thu, Sep 4, 2003, 7:18pm (EDT+4) [email protected]
(john=A0moorhead) says:
I am building a cradle <snip>

No help on the cradle. But, I figure you would be ahead on making
a rocking chair, instead.

You're gonna have to pick the kid up often, and hold him/her/it.
Not often you're just gonna be able to toss the kid into the cradle,
rock it, and expect the kid to drop off. Then the cradle is going to
rapidly get outgrown, and sit around taking up space. Make a rocker,
hold the kid, and rock whatever to sleep, then you can hang the kid on
the end of the couch if you wanted, and the kid would sleep like a rock.
Then you, or whoever, can sit back and relax in the rocker. And, the
rocker will be useful for years - if it's made well. Yeah, cradles are
a nice idea, and look nice, but I would go for a decent rocker instead.
If you don't go along with this now, wait until you've had a kid or two.

JOAT
Failure is not an option.
But it is definitely a possibility.

Life just ain't life without good music. - JOAT
Web Page Update 2 Sep 2003. Some tunes I like.
http://community-2.webtv.net/Jakofalltrades/SOMETUNESILIKE/

"john moorhead" <[email protected]> wrote in message:
> I am building a cradle from a very small 3/4 (almost) view photo that was
in
> FWW. Do any of you have any input on how perspective for the drawing will
> change in using a isometric photo for a 2 d rendering? I can figger it
out
> well enough, but was wondering if there might be a more elegant approach.

Hell John - I'd just ask JOAT for the free plans! LOL!

Jums (g,r, & d!)

In article <peM5b.352833$Ho3.52909@sccrnsc03>,
john moorhead <[email protected]> wrote:
>Folks -
>
>I am building a cradle from a very small 3/4 (almost) view photo that was in
>FWW. Do any of you have any input on how perspective for the drawing will
>change in using a isometric photo for a 2 d rendering? I can figger it out
>well enough, but was wondering if there might be a more elegant approach.

It _can_ be done "by science", but it requires a whole bunch of information
about the picture that is -not- readily available. e.g., things like
focal length of the lens, dimension of the negative area that is represented
by the photo, camera-to-subject distance, etc., etc., ad nauseum. And you're
_still_ left with 'estimating' the angle of the object to the camera.

Best advice: eyeball it 'til it "looks right", and run with that.

"john moorhead" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:peM5b.352833$Ho3.52909@sccrnsc03...
> Folks -
>
> I am building a cradle from a very small 3/4 (almost) view photo that was
in
> FWW. Do any of you have any input on how perspective for the drawing will
> change in using a isometric photo for a 2 d rendering? I can figger it
out
> well enough, but was wondering if there might be a more elegant approach.
>
> TIA
>
> John Moorhead


A photograph is taken in real world 3D perspective. Isometric is not what
you are seeing when you look at a photograph. Isometric does not have
diminishing view points and the dimensions are equal in relation ship to
height, depth, and length.

If I am making a copy of a piece I try to get a photo only to remind me of
the details and I use my own measurements for the dimensions. You are
probably going to have go with your own dimensions.

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:18:45 GMT, "john moorhead"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I am building a cradle from a very small 3/4 (almost) view photo that was in
>FWW. Do any of you have any input on how perspective for the drawing will
>change in using a isometric photo for a 2 d rendering?

For a cradle ? Just busk it.

For more detailed work, take a look at Jeffrey Greene's
"American Furniture of the 18th Century"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1561581046/codesmiths-20/

Excellent book, and there's a chapter in there on how to produce
accurate drawings from photos.