I struggled for ages with this and as I suspected real life is harder than books!!!
(As an aside copying a drawing made me realise how much you miss from not seeing/hearing/touching/feeling the emotion impact… let alone that the visual information has been pre-simplified!… so all in all… a very dry and emotionally unrewarding exercise. Though technically I learnt a lot!!!).
Which, I suppose, is the point.
What I struggled with is that I didn’t know the eye line… so had to guess?!
Remembering that if the eye line is wrong all the perspective will be wrong!!!!!!!
Then, having made a choice about eye line, there were multiple angular vanishing points which I decided were due to: a building not parallel to the others; a slight bend in the road; a house built on a slightly uneven surface (where’s the vanishing point of a building built at an angle, aiming up into the sky… say on a hill… it must be above the horizon, in between the ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ eye line?); or the artist making a mistake.
I struggled to make the vanishing point of the trees work as logically if the road carried on to the horizon, and the trees were parallel to the road, they would eventually meet on the eye line and have the same vanishing point.
By using the top and bottom of the trees I found a vanishing point slightly to the right of my original. I then noticed that some of the angular perspective lines on the building met up… and some didn’t. Hence my conclusion that there were errors or complexities.
It then occurred to me that instead of thinking of the trees as separate objects they could be an extension of the building – a big rectangular ‘space’ with the building, road and trees all included. Just because in real life they are ‘seperate’ doesn’t mean you have to think of them like that.
Thinking of blocks and shapes of ‘space’ rather than millions of individual separate objects would let you manipulate 3D reality space much more easily.
Buildings (and even trees, which could be a sphere on a cone???) – it must be impossible to draw a townscape with accurate perspective by eye, other than within a very narrow field of vision… so, I think I would always use perspective to get it right.
There’s enough human ‘interpretation’ on the rest of the drawing in terms of shape, line, shading, simplification and tone etc for it not to be a photograph or machine print.
Canaletto used a camera obscrura to get his structure right… it was how he painted up his ‘geometrically correct outline’ that was genius.
So, I’m going to use perspective!!!!!!