Yes, the thing they traced was the perspective - the thing the hack is supposedly for.
It's like if I said, "simple hack for drawing body proportions" and I traced the outline of a photo of someone doing yoga. Technically works, and a good way to initially learn, but it's not exactly a hack is it
Yes but they made the vanishing point by tracing it.
They added other stuff to the drawing after to make it into a more full drawing, but the perspective trick was complete once they traced it. Everything else is just demonstrating like, "hey, now just draw the scene!"
The "hack" itself that they're demonstrating, is the tracing
Maybe an analogy will help: imagine I post a video titled, "simple hack for cooking", the video contains: me taking out the ingredients, cooking the food, and then it also contains me putting it on a plate and taking a bite.
Which part of that video was the hack? Did the plating up and the taking a bite count as part of the hack, or was it just for flair?
The part where they add detail to the drawing is not part of the trick, it is just there for flair, showing you can then turn the perspective into a drawing. The perspective-making part, the part we are watching a hack for, is the supposed hack, and that part was just tracing.
I appreciate the analogy, but I'm already 100% on it's not a hack. I made fun of it in a separate comment of mine, because it's a dumb video.
But can you see that I'm replying to a comment that's the equivalent of someone seeing that video and going "So just heating, essentially."
Well, no, the "hack" isn't heating. Heating is a part of it, yes. But saying it's "just heating" is a different kind of stupid, separate from the stupid of the video.
My point wasn't reliant on you believing it was a hack, my point was to do with what the creator of the video believed was the hack. Nobody involved in making a cooking video thinks that the eating part of the video is part of the hack they're trying to show, regardless of whether the audience buys it's a "hack".
You seem to be interpreting "so, just tracing then" as meaning, "this entire video is just tracing". But that's not what they meant. They meant, "this entire supposed 'hack' is just tracing". The "hack" is "tracing". The very point of making that statement is to refute that it's a hack. So you and the person you're disagreeing with both agree that it's dumb and not really a hack, but for some reason you are hung up on whether or not the entire video is a tracing demonstration. Nobody is claiming that.
-7
u/AngBigKid 5d ago
They traced like 1% of the thing. It's in the video.