|
|
Post by pff on Jun 12, 2009 6:59:22 GMT -5
Of Interest Alamo drawings/sketchs at www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/adp/history/alamo_images/images.htmlIn Bollaert 1843 sketch of the Alamo-why in the sketch of the main gate/Low Barracks which faces south-why is the church front also facing south toward the viewer when it should be facing west? Also-in the Eastman sketch of 1848-1849-was this the site of Travis Headquarters and the tree in background-is that the tree that was outside the northwest corner of the Alamo Plaza? on the Star Trek Wiki-is a scene of a model of the Alamo {reference only} See:  memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/AlamoPossibly the model makers based the west wall on Walter Lord reconstruction drawing in "A Time to Stand"  |
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Jun 12, 2009 10:46:36 GMT -5
Of Interest Alamo drawings/sketchs at www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/adp/history/alamo_images/images.htmlIn Bollaert 1843 sketch of the Alamo-why in the sketch of the main gate/Low Barracks which faces south-why is the church front also facing south toward the viewer when it should be facing west? Also-in the Eastman sketch of 1848-1849-was this the site of Travis Headquarters and the tree in background-is that the tree that was outside the northwest corner of the Alamo Plaza? on the Star Trek Wiki-is a scene of a model of the Alamo {reference only} See: memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/AlamoPossibly the model makers based the west wall on Walter Lord reconstruction drawing in "A Time to Stand" While many people assume that the artist was standing due south of the low barrack, it is clear from the drawing's perspective, that he was instead standing somewhat west of due south. For this reason, the Alamo church, which is some 115 feet farther to the east that is the east edge of the low barrack, and even farther than that from the artist, seems to be seen from a "full-frontal" perspective. In reality, it only seems that way. When a rectangular object is observed from something along the lines of a 45 degree angle, if the artist is not very careful, he'll tend to draw it as did Bolleart, appearing almost full-on. The tree in the Eastman sketch is too far to the south to be the pecan tree, which was significantly farther to the north. |
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Aug 19, 2009 12:46:08 GMT -5
An additional reason for the church's flat-on appearance is that the artist was concerned solely with line and totally ignored elements of shading. Had he added shadow for the sun angle, the visual perspective would make sense. The farther you are from something, the more it all seems two dimensional. But if you look at the church, the west face is MUCH narrower than it should be for its height, whereas all the other walls facing the artist are correct height-width perspective. This is because you ARE looking at the facade from a 45 degree angle. It is not facing you, as are the other walls.
Check out Craig Covner's painting on page 105 of Frank Thompson's The Alamo to see the exact copy of Bollaert's drawing with color and shading added, and you will have no question of the direction the church faces.
|
|
