Just for fun

[Gezzer]

This is a Penrose triangle and for the life of me I don't know where to bevel 

[Handstitched]

 

1 hour ago, Gezzer said:

I don't know where to bevel

I had to google that,  I had no idea what it was. But you're right, where do you start to bevel ?? 

Maybe , stare at an image of  ' Penrose Triangle ' for a while and blow your mind, but I would think the desired effect would be in the colouring & shading  as well bevelling in all the right places. 

As an old mate of mine once said, " what a head f**k  !!  "  

Good luck

HS

[chuck123wapati]

bevel the one side of just the three sharp points  in the middle where they appear to be a square rod. My guess!!! jeeze you come up with some doozies lol.

[Stewart]

To me, you bevel like Chuck said  making  the backgroun inner triangle look lower. You belvel toe is toward you. You will see at top and sidelike the A is out of  a picece of wood. Then that inner line i yhink you double bevel definning a top and side but You Better try on a scrap or say good by  to the orginal

[DwightT]

I'm going to have to try one (or two, or three) of those and play with it, but I would think you would do a "faded" bevel where you start heavy at one end of the line and fade out towards  the middle.  Then you fade in on the other side, ending heavy at the other end of the line.  But I think Handstitched is right: most of the effect will come from proper coloring & shading - which is something that I personally am horrible at.

    /dwight

[FishEggStew]

Just my opinion, but I would bevel the three places I have marked with red lines in this picture.  They are inside corners of the optical illusion and would be behind the longer line next to them.  I would not bevel those longer lines because they are outside corners.  I'm thinking this is what Chuck123wapati said, too.  

As it is, it looks great.  I can see the illusion without too much effort.

Aubrey

 

[fredk]

I would use a fine V beveller lightly along each line

A B997 or a F121

[chuck123wapati]

18 minutes ago, FishEggStew said:

Just my opinion, but I would bevel the three places I have marked with red lines in this picture.  They are inside corners of the optical illusion and would be behind the longer line next to them.  I would not bevel those longer lines because they are outside corners.  I'm thinking this is what Chuck123wapati said, too.  

As it is, it looks great.  I can see the illusion without too much effort.

Aubrey

 

yup those are the places.

[Gezzer]

Thank you all !!

Like the title says  " just for fun " .  I will come clean and admit I was through beveling when I took the pics . Like the illusion it's all about prospective  , first as an old carpenter  I don't see 3 beams at first glance . I see 3 framing squares ( minus the markings ) which in itself is strange as a framing square is 90 degrees , that 90 is a 60 degree corner in the triangle . But whatever one might see  to me none of the  3 is in the foreground and yet all are in the foreground .    YES I might be loosing it 

I guess my thinking is no matter what problem you may be looking at there are always 359  more views 

[FishEggStew]

It's funny how things happen...You post this great piece, then I stumble across this video.

[Gezzer]

@FishEggStew Nice  video , I had seen a graphics model of the same thing on a turn table once . 

[YinTx]

I'd say bevel the shaded areas...wider as shown.  Similar to the answer already given.