Failure: What I learned about Photo References...

If you're trying desperately to find the vanishing point, so you can nest a referenced pose properly into a given drawing, you need guide lines to the vanishing point. To consistently keep your drawing in the correct perspective, guide lines are essential; but can't be had if your reference is staged in front of a cloth that's white as a slice of wonder bread! Looking at you, every photographer on the planet!

 Small tangent: if you're a photographer, why are you flattening your pictures by refusing to put anything in them that could represent depth? Like people don't live in a three dimensional space with physical objects, be they props or chairs or just wood floors with clearly visible lines of movement? Here's a tip to contextualize this tangent:

If you are, in fact, a photographer who wants their work to be trafficked far and wide across the internet, you need to make your photo as easy for artists to reference as possible. There's a reason this model--

Became a meme, alright? And it's not because she's hot (she is). No, it's because of this--

Do you see it? Look closely at the picture.

Do you see those lines everywhere? Those picture-book-easy-to-read lines? I see those on anything I'm trying to reference, and I go:

Why? Because they make finding the perspective  simple, which means, when I reference that pose, my drawing won't look like a goddamn Picasso painting.

 It doesn't matter how incredible a reference is, if I can't find the perspective it's worth exactly jack and shit!  I spent all last night trowling for alternative references, references that're actually valuable, because the amazing pose I had all picked out, and spent an hour re-watching tutorials on perspective to understand, and nearly two hours to try to map with the line tool on PS, was molten garbage. Absolutely useless and a complete waste of time. Because some artiste did this:

Yeah: great pose but try to find any guide lines, there. Go ahead, I dare you...! Unless your name starts with Mark and ends with Brunet, it's going to be a challenge; and, to an amateur like me, a needless challenge, when you're on a schedule, is a pointless waste of time. There are better references to chose from, much better! Case in point:

(See those lines to the left of his right sneaker? How they're racing off into the distance, effortlessly lending perspective and depth to the shot? And they're not alone, y'all! All those ledges and door frames are gorgeous points of reference gift-wrapping the horizon line for any artist looking for it. ) Here's another example:

I know. Stop looking at her ass, and look at that big beautiful line under her ass. That extra detail, photographers, will make the difference between people sharing and popularizing your photo and it wallowing on an art blog somewhere.

  I'm never going to use this!

It doesn't matter how much I love the pose, or the clean silhouette, or the stark lighting, because I can't. find. the perspective. I will never use this pose for anything, at any time, not in the next few weeks, or the next few months, and maybe not even in the next few years; because why would I waste my time with a reference, with a perspective, that demands so many extra steps to use? When photos like this are at my fingertips?

I don't have to spend hours scowling at this picture to divine where the lines are going; they're already calling to me, 'This way! The horizon line is this way!'

The take away is simple: if you're a photographer, it's in your best interest, if you want people to share your pictures as widely and quickly as possible, to give them two, just two lines that intersect, so other artists can find  their horizon line.

Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.