is essential to go back studying the principles of perspective, since Alberti, Piero, Vignola, Leonardo, Pozzo, and many others,
since most of them still are valid. A step forward would be to put all these principles together within a model through which
the universal validity of each one of them has to be demonstrated. In other words, it seems that the next step is to propose
a unify theory of perspective.
study of the course of the events relating cultures, places, patrons, treatise writers, artists, and works of art is the aim
of perspective history. In this context, we also have to study how perspective has influenced in the development of other
sciences, in which many instruments based in perspective were produced. As we know, some instruments were invented to survey,
as those used in the Middle Age with military purposes, while some others were strictly invented for representation, as the
modern scales employed for perspective outlining. On the other hand, the recent geometrical analysis of several masterpieces
strongly suggests that perspective practice went often beyond of the known treatises at the time.
We have to use the term ‘representation’ carefully
because it relates both artistic works or works without aesthetical purposes. For instance, a perspective sketch of a building,
or a drawing to reconstruct a masterpiece, do not have any aesthetical meaning but representation. Techniques of representation
are of many types including computer graphics and those yet to come. However, as in the past, practice cannot innovate without
theory. The best example of the aforesaid is the actual practice of street painting that compels artists to learn anamorphic
perspective, otherwise their works would fail to get il buon effeto, as Leonordo
advised the painter to look for always.