Who? What? Where?

>>6742 The last exercise in Fun With a Pencil. You have to recreate this image by finding the perspective of the structures in it, but he never touches on curved structures or mixing one point with two point.

>>6741 I feel like this one is a bit of an oversight on Loomis' part. It really is way too advanced for anything covered in the book-it's maybe something more fitting for someone who'd worked through Creative Illustration

Having said that, FWaP is an excellent book, among the best I personally think.

>>6741 This is rather belated now but I think one thing virtually every resource fails to mention about vanishing points is that the only thing they really do is define which direction something is facing. That is all. Houses are kind of a counterproductive example for demonstrating this since they tend to be built so they align on two axes. You can in theory place a vanishing point absolutely anywhere in an image. This cube, while sloppy as fuck, is technically accurate within this perspective despite having its vanishing point at some random point in the sky because it's facing upwards. Things parallel to each other have the same vanishing point, other things have other ones. The fence has a single vanishing point because it's facing the same direction as the angle of view. It's that simple, my man. Maybe Loomis, like many others, assumed that this is self evident.

>>6796 Good point, and true. While the horizon line is an immutable constant, upon it there will be many "vanishing points" in a given image (including WELL off the bounds of the canvas) and that's something I don't ever see anyone-including Loomis-talk about.