The thread: Taught, and never measured
One, two and three point are one construction
The names count how many vanishing points sit at a finite place in the picture, and the count is a fact about how the object is turned and the camera is aimed. Nothing about the method changes between them, and a vanishing point does not appear — it arrives from infinity.
Drawn confidentlyThe cube that is a box
The two-point cube every book teaches has a step it supplies no construction for. Place the two far edges symmetrically and the drawing depicts a square plan for free; place them eight points apart — a difference invisible on the page — and it depicts a box 1.4 times shallower than it is wide.
What each system gave upThe picture whose lines spread
In a Byzantine icon the sides of a table diverge with depth. The standard account says the vanishing point is behind the viewer. It is not — it sits below the near edge, in front of the eye, and it is the vanishing point of a direction running down and away.
The other systemsWhat isometric actually means
The three axis scales are equal to each other. They are not equal to one. Every unit along every axis is drawn at 0.8165 of its true length, which is √(2/3), and a great deal of confusion about isometric drawing comes from the word promising something it does not deliver.
Light and mirrorsWhere shadows vanish
The shadows of parallel posts under the sun meet at a point, and that point must lie on the horizon. Under a lamp they meet at the lamp's foot instead. Both are checkable in any photograph, and a picture whose shadows fail the check was not lit by anything.
Where to standWide angle is not distortion
A wide lens stretches shapes at the edge of the frame by exactly 1/cos θ — 3% at 28° across, 41% at 90°. Every bit of that is what a correct rectilinear projection must do, and every bit of it disappears if the picture is viewed from the point it was made for. Nobody views it from there.
Drawn confidentlyDividing depth by eye
Three methods for spacing a receding row, all of them taught, all of them wrong. Read back as distances, the best misplaces a post by 3.5 metres in a row that is supposed to be spaced 1.4. And the obvious way of checking them gives one of the three a perfect score.
Constructing a viewThe measuring point, and the step the method leaves out
Laying out equal depths correctly needs a second vanishing point that most treatments never introduce — the one belonging to the diagonals. With it the construction lands on the projected divisions to eighty femtopixels. Without it, depth is placed by judgement and the drawing depicts something nobody chose.
What a pair is forThe range a pair cannot see past
A stereo rig has a distance beyond which it cannot say "no further than", and the distance is fixed before anything is built. It is the focal length times the baseline divided by the reading precision, and for a human pair of eyes it is fifty-eight and a half metres.
What a machine computesWhat happens behind the eye
A point behind the camera has a perfectly plausible image. Dividing by a negative fourth coordinate flips both signs, so the point lands through the principal point on the far side of the frame, and a segment crossing the eye plane is drawn straight, inside the frame, and running in exactly the opposite direction — a direction cosine of −1.0000.
Constructing a viewThe horizon is at eye level — if the picture plane is vertical
The horizon cuts every standing figure at the same fraction of its height however far away it is, which is the most immediately usable fact in the subject. It holds when the camera is level, and a twelve-degree tilt is enough to spread the fractions by more than a percentage point.
Drawn confidentlyThe sixty-degree cone of vision
Every book says keep the subject inside a 60° cone. Measured, the marginal stretch the rule is nominally about is exactly zero from the station point — 1.000000000000 to 1, over 720 sampled points. The rule is a statement about the reader, and books do not obey it.
Many pictures at onceA chain and an adjustment
Composing pairwise poses along a sequence is supposed to drift. Measured over five links it wanders instead — one chain ends closer to the truth than its own worst link — and the real cost of chaining turns out to be something else entirely.
Mirrors that are not camerasThe one shape that focuses
A paraboloid takes every ray parallel to its axis exactly through one point — 4.8e-9 mm of envelope across a 1.24 m aperture, which is arithmetic. A sphere with the same vertex curvature spreads the same bundle over 184.1 mm. So there is exactly one curved mirror that is a projection through a centre, it is a projection for exactly one bundle of rays, and every telescope in the world is built out of that sentence.
Constructing a viewAlberti draws a pavement, and chooses where the reader stands
The costruzione legittima of 1435 is exact. Run as a construction — with drawn rays and drawn intersections rather than the formula it turns out to satisfy — it agrees with a pinhole camera to six parts in a hundred trillion of a pixel. And it has one free parameter that the recipe never names, which is the distance from the eye to the panel.
What survivesThe circle whose centre moves
The image of a circle is an ellipse, and the image of the circle's centre is not the centre of that ellipse. The gap is 3 or 4% of the ellipse's width in an ordinary view — large enough to see, small enough to be dismissed as a slip by anyone not expecting it, and the reason drawn wheels look wrong.
What a pair is forA turn of the head is not a step sideways
The textbook says a short baseline makes reconstruction ill-conditioned. Measured, the algebra does not notice — a two-millimetre baseline recovers the courtyard to nine digits from exact marks. What fails is the ratio of baseline to reading error, and it fails without refusing.
Many pictures at onceWhere the adjustment stops
Given exact marks the reprojection error falls to a hundredth of a billionth of a pixel, which is arithmetic. Given the same marks read to a whole pixel it falls to a third of a pixel and stays there, and a solver that reached zero on those would be fitting the rounding.
What each system gave upEach system answers its own question
A comparison in which every system wins its own column proves nothing if the columns were chosen after the systems. The test that makes it a result is whether any system wins something it was not designed for — and two of them do.
Drawn confidentlyThe third point put where it looks right
Three-point perspective is taught as two vanishing points plus a third placed by judgement. The third is not free: two points and the centre of the picture fix it exactly. It survives being placed by eye because in the layout a book draws it belongs thousands of pixels off the paper, where 400 px of error costs less than a degree — and in a photograph taken looking up at a tower the same 400 px costs ten.
Measuring from one pictureHow wrong a measurement from one picture can be
The formula divides by a difference of two nearly equal numbers when the object is tall, which looked like the instability and is not. Measured, a taller object is recovered better and a more distant one worse — half a per cent per pixel at six metres and eleven per cent at a hundred and twenty. The argument that was wrong is as much the finding as the curve that replaced it.
Constructing a viewThe distance point is the viewing distance, drawn
There is exactly one place in the whole classical apparatus where the distance from the eye to the picture appears as a length on the page, and it is the offset from the centric point to the distance point. Everything this site exists to compute was drawn in the fifteenth century, on the horizon, and nobody said what it was.
What a pair is forA wrong match is not a small error
Move one correspondence of forty-four by thirty pixels and the recovered geometry is wrong for every other point — the typical one by half a pixel, from a fit that was exact to a part in ten trillion. Least squares has nowhere to put a bad row except across all of them.
Many pictures at onceAnother picture of the same sweep
Going from three views to seven across the same sixty degrees leaves the reconstruction exactly where it started, and at one point makes it worse. What a reconstruction is short of is angular spread, not photographs.