'Mustangs at Dawn' oil study ...

[Chicoartist]

Hi gang,

Yesterday afternoon I finished the 1/2-scale oil study for 'Mustangs at Dawn', and I just now finished adding the image to my site (shown below). Now that I know how the larger piece will look (only better, I trust!), I am now accepting giclee paper and canvas pre-orders at at pre-publication price of 20% off. Those of you who want a special print number pls get your order in soon. There will be only 150 on paper and 50 on canvas.

All details and ordering links here:
http://wademeyersart.tripod.com/id68.html

Now, it's off to the full size work . . . I already have the 22" x 36" linen stretched and it's gessoed and ready to transfer the image.

Wade

[Mark V]

That is an extremely beautiful painting, well done.

Just a question: my eye is drawn to the shadow lines on the aircraft, they appear identical yet the aircraft are at slightly differing angles of bank (judging by the relationship of their wings to fuselages)?

[Chicoartist]

Just a question: my eye is drawn to the shadow lines on the aircraft, they appear identical yet the aircraft are at slightly differing angles of bank (judging by the relationship of their wings to fuselages)?

Hi Mark,

Sharp eye, you have ... sayeth Yoda or whatever that little dude's name was ...

Actually, the two closest Mustangs were carefully plotted from a single viewer's position (supposed to be your mean eye position as you view the work at the 'preferred' distance of ~54" [150% of the longest canvas dimension - may be proportinal for smaller versions of the work, as this is) from the final canvas as viewed in person), and if you looked at them 'head on', their wings are level (same relative angle of bank) and no. 2's longitudinal axis is 6.3' above leads. Why a 'preferred' viewing distance? No, not everyone will view the work from a certain distance to see the aircraft in 'correct' perspective, but at least there *is* a preferred distance, which conforms to the typical comfortable gallery viewing distance for artwork.

One appears 'banked' more than the other due to the relative position of each as YOU see them from your single position in space. If you were in the rear of a T-6 shooting these two, and lead slid over towards you along the same 'wing line', the closer he got, the MORE of the top surfaces you would see. Conversely, if he slid away from you along the same 'wing line', you'd see less of the closer wing's top surfaces ... the effect is accented because, as I said, no. 2 is acutally a little higher in relative altitude than lead.

I don't say all this to 'boggle your mind with BS' - just to point out that all this is considered when using the "Perspective Projection by Descriptive Geometry" method of plotting aircraft perspective ... I literally wrote a (not "the") book on the subject for aviation artists.

The sun's rays, for our purposes a straight line, will, therefore, "light" each pretty much the same. I actually "tweaked" the way the wing shadow fell on no. 2 a little for a little 'diversity', so to speak. Look at the lower rudder and national insignia, for example.

Notice also, how the longitudinal axes of the two Mustangs begin a tendency to 'converge' to the right (and will eventually meet at the horizon way off to our right if the aircraft are flying level). That's part of the perspective also.

That being said, I'll be sure to take another look at the shadow lines when I work on the final piece ... that's more "art" than science, there being no photograph with this exact view and sun angle; least I couldn't find one!

Wade

[Mark V]

Not BS at all - I think I see what you mean, same angle of bank but viewed from one point in space, with the aircraft at differing altitudes makes them look to be banked differently. Interesting!