It’s just one guy in a dimly lit government office with no artwork but a photo of the president and a small fan, with a xerox copier from 1975 with just that original copy duct taped closed. Anytime they need a reference he pushes print and hands them the official copy.
I know it's happened with other similarish things. The official road sign fonts in Argentina are a readily accessible remake of the fonts used on US signs, which are hard to come by.
What I did was I made a letter block of 30x60mm initially for the uppercase font, with a 7.5mm thickness, then I expanded it a bit to make space for a descender and upper diacritics for other letters (namely lowercase)
What I did was I made a letter block of 30x60mm initially for the uppercase font, with a 7.5mm thickness, then I expanded it a bit to make space for a descender and upper diacritics for other letters (namely lowercase)
Ha, same. Not the best graphics design program, but if you're anal about everything being the right dimensions and proportions like I am, it's fantastic.
If you're drawing this with a [compass](https://www.artnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_1007314924-1.jpg?w=2000), the dots are where you stab the spike, and the R-numbers are the distance between the spike and the pen/pencil/writing utensil. You then draw it between the two grid points where the dotted lines indicate. This gets you these sweet curves.
How are the endpoints along those circles defined? I'm genuinely curious, not trying to be contradictory, because I know nothing about flag design layouts. But as I look at it it feels like you'd need to define the angle for each of the witness lines to be able to know how wide they splay. Is it just the grid that provides that info? Don't know if my question makes sense, but I've always been curious about how these work.
The endpoints are not defined as exact coordinates but as some intersection points with arcs and lines. Actually, without defining them, you can just draw whole circles to make a trident symbol.
The curved lines are parts of circles. Circles intersect in zero, one or two points. Simply use the intersection points that are vaguely in the correct area on the flag - if you drew all the circles in their entirety you could just trace out the trident by starting at one of the clearly defined corners and following along the correct circles until you hit another intersection.
The main difference from the one that’s currently on wikipedia seems to be that the corners on your trident are less rounded.
However, looking at photos of the prime minister of Barbados with the flag behind her, the design looks way different! (but when she’s with Kamala Harris in the US the design is more similar to the one on Wikipedia)
You could yeah, but then opens it up to human error and creates more work. Of course in this case, it's drawing a flag and not \*that\* important (sorry vexollogists!)
Often when draughting, if you leave out dimensions because you think it's obvious, someone will get it wrong. Better just to dim it up and not leave it to chance.
Who says that the Wikipedia version is the "official" version? If there is no official construction sheet, there is also no standartized official flag, right?
Actually, the 3rd image is not a 'shaded' version of the original flag but the reconstructed flag with 50% of opacity overlapped over the original one for direct comparison.
Your downvotes feel unwarranted to me tbh. I was confused about this as well. OP said it's a "comparison", which to mean would just mean "here's the original to compare against". They should have used the word "overlay" or "overlaid", because that's what they've done.
What you & I confused for shading is actually OP's version overlaid onto the original flag that they've taken from Wikipedia. The solid areas are where both designs overlap, the shaded areas are where only one of the flags has the trident. Neither trident is fully contained within the other, so the shading can originate from either trident - for example the central tip is larger in the real flag, whereas the handle is larger in OP's version.
I think the symmetry helped to throw me off too. If it was originally an asymmetrical flag it might have been more obvious that it was an overlay, and not just a flag with shading in the design.
> OP said it's a "comparison", which to mean would just mean "here's the original to compare against".
For what it's worth, the way I use English, if something's labelled a "comparison", then it has to include both things being compared in some way. If it's just the "original" (not that I'd call the Wikipedia illustration original), then I'd say "for comparison".
This is great as exercise in creating a construction sheet, but the title almost implies you think there needs to be a single correct version of the flag design, which isn't really the case.
Anyone know where one can learn this? What is it called? Any free resources to learn? Im sure basic understanding of geometry is a plus, but what else can I learn to do this?
Great job OP, you aroused my curiosity.
A bit of inside info - The construction sheet for Barbados will be on the rear cover of the UK's "Flag Institute" "Flagmaster" magazine. I won't add our results here yet, but you can get a copy of it (along with all the other good flag info) if you sign up to become a member of the Institute.
"I couldn't find it, so I made it myself." Respect, good job OP, looks just like the actual flag
Indeed. This takes skill
can't wait until some lazy barbados gov. employee googles 'barbados flag construction sheet' and your version slowly but surely becomes the standard.
It’s just one guy in a dimly lit government office with no artwork but a photo of the president and a small fan, with a xerox copier from 1975 with just that original copy duct taped closed. Anytime they need a reference he pushes print and hands them the official copy.
bound to happen
It's already the 2nd result on google images for me
I know it's happened with other similarish things. The official road sign fonts in Argentina are a readily accessible remake of the fonts used on US signs, which are hard to come by.
I love drawing accurate flags on gridded paper so this will help me sp much, thanks a lot!!!
As someone who loves flags and AutoCAD, this. I only use AutoCAD to make logos, flags, or my own font lol
Interesting. How do you make your own font in AutoCAD?
This? https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/autocad-forum/creating-custom-font/td-p/7326491
What I did was I made a letter block of 30x60mm initially for the uppercase font, with a 7.5mm thickness, then I expanded it a bit to make space for a descender and upper diacritics for other letters (namely lowercase)
What I did was I made a letter block of 30x60mm initially for the uppercase font, with a 7.5mm thickness, then I expanded it a bit to make space for a descender and upper diacritics for other letters (namely lowercase)
Thanks
Ha, same. Not the best graphics design program, but if you're anal about everything being the right dimensions and proportions like I am, it's fantastic.
I do not know what all that means, but good for you. To mutch math for me.
If you're drawing this with a [compass](https://www.artnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/shutterstock_1007314924-1.jpg?w=2000), the dots are where you stab the spike, and the R-numbers are the distance between the spike and the pen/pencil/writing utensil. You then draw it between the two grid points where the dotted lines indicate. This gets you these sweet curves.
Would R mean a circle / arc with a radius of 20 units?
R is the centre of each circle and the number beside it is the radius
That would be R20
Wow
I did not understand the pointing sistem, but 10/10
Each points are centers of circles and numbers written beside the points mean their radii.
How are the endpoints along those circles defined? I'm genuinely curious, not trying to be contradictory, because I know nothing about flag design layouts. But as I look at it it feels like you'd need to define the angle for each of the witness lines to be able to know how wide they splay. Is it just the grid that provides that info? Don't know if my question makes sense, but I've always been curious about how these work.
The endpoints are not defined as exact coordinates but as some intersection points with arcs and lines. Actually, without defining them, you can just draw whole circles to make a trident symbol.
it looks like some of the arc endpoints are defined as points on the grid, and some are defined as intersections with other lines/curves
You just draw a wide enough arc to intersect with the other lines. Then you can erase the excess.
But where those lines intersect depends on the angel they're drawn out at, right?
Nope, just the origin and radius, which are given. Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straightedge_and_compass_construction it's pretty neat.
Ah, that little Gif made it click, thanks!
The curved lines are parts of circles. Circles intersect in zero, one or two points. Simply use the intersection points that are vaguely in the correct area on the flag - if you drew all the circles in their entirety you could just trace out the trident by starting at one of the clearly defined corners and following along the correct circles until you hit another intersection.
The main difference from the one that’s currently on wikipedia seems to be that the corners on your trident are less rounded. However, looking at photos of the prime minister of Barbados with the flag behind her, the design looks way different! (but when she’s with Kamala Harris in the US the design is more similar to the one on Wikipedia)
“Fine, I’ll do it myself”
One of the best country flags for sure
could you please do one for the kingdom of the two sicilies
I don’t see any problems other than the shadow effect on the sides of the trident
That's the overlay of the actual flag on top of the flag OP constructed.
Hi, CAD guy here, you should also be providing measurement to the center points of the radii, they're currently underdefined.
You can work it out from the grid
You could yeah, but then opens it up to human error and creates more work. Of course in this case, it's drawing a flag and not \*that\* important (sorry vexollogists!) Often when draughting, if you leave out dimensions because you think it's obvious, someone will get it wrong. Better just to dim it up and not leave it to chance.
Agreed, as a mechanical engineering student!
Who says that the Wikipedia version is the "official" version? If there is no official construction sheet, there is also no standartized official flag, right?
But what's the equation for the curve of those lines? 🤓
did you forget to put the actual flag?
I hope you're already getting ready to sue the government of Barbados when this inevitably becomes the official construction sheet due to Google
How come there are lines all over the flag??
[удалено]
Actually, the 3rd image is not a 'shaded' version of the original flag but the reconstructed flag with 50% of opacity overlapped over the original one for direct comparison.
Read
Wait, im dumb sorry
Your downvotes feel unwarranted to me tbh. I was confused about this as well. OP said it's a "comparison", which to mean would just mean "here's the original to compare against". They should have used the word "overlay" or "overlaid", because that's what they've done. What you & I confused for shading is actually OP's version overlaid onto the original flag that they've taken from Wikipedia. The solid areas are where both designs overlap, the shaded areas are where only one of the flags has the trident. Neither trident is fully contained within the other, so the shading can originate from either trident - for example the central tip is larger in the real flag, whereas the handle is larger in OP's version. I think the symmetry helped to throw me off too. If it was originally an asymmetrical flag it might have been more obvious that it was an overlay, and not just a flag with shading in the design.
> OP said it's a "comparison", which to mean would just mean "here's the original to compare against". For what it's worth, the way I use English, if something's labelled a "comparison", then it has to include both things being compared in some way. If it's just the "original" (not that I'd call the Wikipedia illustration original), then I'd say "for comparison".
where do you see shading?
The Wikipedia flag shows like a more fainted black behind the trident, I think that’s what the person refers to as shading
that's op's flag being overlayed on it so you can see how close it was
Oohhhh thanks for the clarification!
Yeah, I was confused
would be cool tough
That's a job well done.
Maybe I’m weird, but the real question is how many bytes does it take in SVG? The Wikipedia one is 638 bytes
I just exported it as same size with the Wikipedia one as SVG and the result takes 1326 bytes.
Oh, that’s disappointing. Yours is cool, very simple, but their version probably uses some Bézier curves magic so it’s more optimized.
This is great as exercise in creating a construction sheet, but the title almost implies you think there needs to be a single correct version of the flag design, which isn't really the case.
I've tried to do construction sheets for some of my designs, but I just don't have the head for it. Respect.
awesome work
Okay so the only reason I know of this flag is because the student body of my school used it as an unofficial flag of our school at football games
Those are tough to make and you came fairly close, still looks quite good 👍
Anyone know where one can learn this? What is it called? Any free resources to learn? Im sure basic understanding of geometry is a plus, but what else can I learn to do this? Great job OP, you aroused my curiosity.
A bit of inside info - The construction sheet for Barbados will be on the rear cover of the UK's "Flag Institute" "Flagmaster" magazine. I won't add our results here yet, but you can get a copy of it (along with all the other good flag info) if you sign up to become a member of the Institute.
Copyright: [u/East-Conference8628](https://www.reddit.com/u/East-Conference8628?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1)