Optical illusion or just plane butchery?

[Hornbeam]

Using a tape measure for diagonals is a perfectly reasonable approach and provided your sides are equal length and the ends are equal length it is the most accurate method for measuring for square ( alternatively just use a thin batten.
If everything measures out correctly then it is just an optical illusion and it will be fine

 

[Ttrees]

The camera doesn't let that slide though, but perhaps folks just aren't looking.
It clearly sees a longer top rail at the other end.
Visible because the legs in front are plumb, well relative to the photo at least...
whilst appearing to be square, and stock appears to be evenly thicknessed,
so perhaps one can question why the other legs would be anything but vertical.

I notice a bit of bowing on those bottom rails, and question if you flattened out the stock by force
to get your measurement somewhere?
Once again, another need for a hand plane.

Tom

 

[woodchipcharley]

Why are you using a tape measure, that's a builders tool for rough measurements mostly.
Furniture making techniques for your coffee table would be done with a rule and knife marks,
or not measured at all even, but four components planed to better tolerances instead.
You should be able feel within 1 thou of discrepancies. i.e...


The solution to this is having some hand planes for the job, and getting into a whole other realm of
refinement and precision which you couldn't get otherwise (without real expensive kit)

Have a look at the use of the shooting board, with someone skilled regarding the work,
like Rob Cosman for example.
He's as honest as you'll get regarding the work, (that's the important part)
but at the expense of interfiering sales pitches which some can't stand, that's his bag.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are a few prominent gurus on youtube who's income relies on keeping you as unskilled as is possible, but under the pretense of giving the answers,
or fooling you into thinking you already have the correct approach to things.
I won't mention who those guys are.

All the best anyway
Tom

That was the first time I used it tbh everything else was set up using jigs and stopblocks and I used a tape to get the original dimensions to size I don't use a tape to measure everything I cut just for initial setup and make everything else repeatable on the tablesaw

 

[woodchipcharley]

The camera doesn't let that slide though, but perhaps folks just aren't looking.
It clearly sees a longer top rail at the other end.
Visible because the legs in front are plumb, well relative to the photo at least...
whilst appearing to be square, and stock appears to be evenly thicknessed,
so perhaps one can question why the other legs would be anything but vertical.

I notice a bit of bowing on those bottom rails, and question if you flattened out the stock by force
to get your measurement somewhere?
Once again, another need for a hand plane.

Tom

Granted they look it in the photo but I assure you they are dead flat and all stretchers are 90° on ends and equal in length. The stretchers Are actually cut as parallelograms to match the 10°tapper on the front of the legs anyway it's all glued up I am happy enough with the results. I will post a photo of the finished project when done . Thanks again to everyone who helped put my mind at rest.

 

[ajs]

I admit I haven't gone through all the replies but it it measure fine with a square and a tape don't worry about it. Looks like a smartphone pic to me - the lenses have to be compromised to fit into a thin form factor so barrel distortion (which is what this looks like) is one of the tradeoffs than are often made. It's so you can have a phone slim enough to fit in your back pocket instead of an SLR which puts the optics first and foremost.

Amateur astronomer as opposed to photographer but I'll stand by my thoughts.

 

[Henniep]

Always believe the rule and square before you believe the eye. Measuring tools are not influence by light, mood, perception and make believe.

 

[hlvd]

Why are you using a tape measure, that's a builders tool for rough measurements mostly.
Furniture making techniques for your coffee table would be done with a rule and knife marks,
or not measured at all even, but four components planed to better tolerances instead.
You should be able feel within 1 thou of discrepancies. i.e...


The solution to this is having some hand planes for the job, and getting into a whole other realm of
refinement and precision which you couldn't get otherwise (without real expensive kit)

Have a look at the use of the shooting board, with someone skilled regarding the work,
like Rob Cosman for example.
He's as honest as you'll get regarding the work, (that's the important part)
but at the expense of interfiering sales pitches which some can't stand, that's his bag.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are a few prominent gurus on youtube who's income relies on keeping you as unskilled as is possible, but under the pretense of giving the answers,
or fooling you into thinking you already have the correct approach to things.
I won't mention who those guys are.

All the best anyway
Tom

You don’t need all that to build a square frame.
It’s basic joinery and can be done with simple tools.

 

[Adam W.]

So should I reduce the top rail dimensions by a couple of mm or just leave it? Thanks guys

Just leave it and put the top on if it's all square.

 

[J-G]

I admit I haven't gone through all the replies but it it measure fine with a square and a tape don't worry about it. Looks like a smartphone pic to me - the lenses have to be compromised to fit into a thin form factor so barrel distortion (which is what this looks like) is one of the tradeoffs than are often made. It's so you can have a phone slim enough to fit in your back pocket instead of an SLR which puts the optics first and foremost.

Amateur astronomer as opposed to photographer but I'll stand by my thoughts.

You are the most correct in your assesment - the 'problem' seen by the OP is Barrel Distortion. A 'camera' - read 'Smart Phone' - cannot correct in the same way that the brain does. In this case, the brain can only accept what the 'camera' has already interpreted to be the position.

 

[MorrisWoodman12]

when i was a semi-pro photographer , you would see buildings tampering because of the angel of the lens - some cameras had a tilt function to compensate for this - i used photoshop to straighten when i took building landscapes

https://photographyskool.com/why-do...f tall buildings,to the cameras sensor plane.
you photo does not look square on - try taking the photo exactly square

Predictive text is a wondrous thing. I just love the thought of the Angel of the lens tampering with buildings and presumably anything else in view.

 

[Ttrees]

You don’t need all that to build a square frame.
It’s basic joinery and can be done with simple tools.

At least we're agreed that a hand plane and steel ruler is "all that" even if seeing things from the opposite side of the spectrum.

Forgot to add after my tongue and cheek comment, my real agreement with you might be that
it may not be the solution, but that's depending on how equipped the OP is.

The issue I'm speculating stems from the thin stock what might not be flat, deflecting when
against bench/fence and becoming longer when the measurement is taken.
So depending on how that is approached, and the level of refinement wanted, might be a question all on it's own,
My answer is for my eye and budget.

All the best.
Tom

 

[woodchipcharley]

Basic but looks alright

 

[woodchipcharley]

Here is the offending angle