Does anyone model to scale 1:1

[Cesar R]

I was wondering how you guys model furniture and stuff that is not imported from archcad or acad in C4D. If you notice when you create a box in C4D its standard dimension is 500x500x500 feet, so what is you want to model something that is only 2 ft, like a kitchen sink.. what do you do?

 

this is the only thing that really bothers me about C4D

[STRAT]

just change the PREFERENCES > UNITS option over to mm.

 

i ALWAYS model at a scale of 1:1 1 unit = 1 mm

never ever had not 1 problem importing either. just make sure that C4D is set up to the same unit values as acad and archicad

[charlemagne]

Yep, me too,

 

I change it to cm, and model 1/1 scale! It would be too confusing if you were not!

 

(Quote) this is the only thing that really bothers me about C4D (/quote)

 

you're a lucky man!

 

 

charlemagne

[Ernest Burden III]

My feeling is you MUST model 1:1

 

Unfortunately AutoCAD, MAX and C4D do not share my real-world values. They only use 'units'. How big is a unit? How big would you LIKE it to be?

 

Even so, assume the fiction and set your units to something that you understand and stick with it. Most of my work is modeled in feet/inches, but when I am working on a non-US project I work in meters (I cannot work in mm as my grasp of metric is so poor I can only understand meters). My CAD program can switch in and out of unit types without conversion, but with C4D you are locked in, so choose well before you start a project, or learn the multipliers (I have a conversion chart taped to the wall next to me).

 

So the bottom line is, C4D does not care what units or scale you work in, but you should.

[Jeff Mottle]

Unfortunately AutoCAD, MAX and C4D do not share my real-world values. They only use 'units'. How big is a unit? How big would you LIKE it to be?

 

AutoCAD doesn't force you to choose units. If you are working in decimal the units are generic. Have I been missing something all these years. I just typed "UNITS" into autocad and was still using decimal.

 

This from the ACAD help file:

 

"

Units

Indicates the format in which you enter and in which AutoCAD displays coordinates and measurements. Several formats are available in AutoCAD. Two of them, Engineering and Architectural, have a specific base unit (inches) assigned to them. You can select from other measurement styles that can represent any convenient unit of measurement. "

 

To answer your question, I've always modelled in 1:1, and you'd be crazy not to do so. In AutoCAD at least that is what Paperspace is for, scaling 1:1 drawings.

[STRAT]

i cant see why there's even a question to ask in the first place.

 

choose your prefered unit settup and make sure all your apps run the same. easy peezy.

 

a scale of 1:1 is preferable tho. as i say, i use 1 unit = 1 mm and never had 1 problem in 15 years. i've never even had to think about scaling issues in all this time either.

autocad, c4d and max all perform perfectly together. i didnt even had to set anything up, it came 1 unit=1mm as default. altho, i think we europeans get it easier than you yanks with ur funny feet and inches scales. what a polava.

[Ernest Burden III]

AutoCAD doesn't force you to choose units. This from the ACAD help file:

 

Units

Indicates the format in which you enter and in which AutoCAD displays coordinates and measurements

 

Where the issue comes in is when you are working in metric and want to put in parking spaces in feet, because you know they are 9' x 18', so ask AutoCad to swith to Imperial units and it will politely ask you if you want to scale your drawing. C4D will simply change units, but then you go back to metric and find you just put in spaces of 9m x 18m.

 

Jeff--think about how Lightscape handles it--set units to inches and make a texture 12 x 12, change to feet and re-visit the texture and it now says 1, change to meters and it will say about .3--objects have real sizes even when you change your ruler.

 

Try that in Autocad, or MAX.

 

Well, some rulers would have it that 2+2=5, but that is a different book.

 

And I think it was a perfectly reasonable question, and I'm glad it was asked. We have many people who read this forum who are new to the field and even basic questions are important to address.

[salf]

ol......im lucky im in southamerica and we use the metric system.

[alanmac]

In the UK when I was at school we were taught in feet and inches (yes I'm that old) we have gone over to using the metric so its metres (please note correct spelling) etc.

My kids are taught metric and I tend to think in both measurements. Our currency went over to "metric" years ago.

 

It's slightly off subject, and it's not a intended knock at you American folks but I'm always surprised that the most technologicly advanced country in the world still uses arcane measurements etc. Feet, inches, gallons. Strange that your currency is based on units of ten, etc. like our currency.

 

I heard a story, something to do with space program, were something didn't fit or didn't work because the units got mixed up between suppliers. As time goes on I think you'll find most of the world will use and expect everybody to use metric measurements.

 

The old imperial dimensions seen somewhat strange and illogical to me now. One and five sixteenths of an inch for example.

[Frosty]

That was th Hubble. It ended up needing corrective lenses to straighten that out.

[Ernest Burden III]

That was th Hubble. It ended up needing corrective lenses to straighten that out.

 

There was also a recent Mars probe that missed Mars because the contractor provided some vector data in metric while NASA was expecting English.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist*...oh, wait, maybe it does.

 

 

*fortuitous opportunity to use a cliche

[alanmac]

Yes, you see Ernest the English measurement to me is metric, because I'm English and the measurement we use is metric.

 

Love your work by the way. Took a look at the web site. Out of interest the computer rendering method has great advantages for quick changes and alterations, but from a time scale point of view do you find any speed advantage to using computers to create your illustrations ?

 

I find I'm having to include much more detail than before. The hand drawn visuals I used to produce for my work, exhibition stand and display design, didn't take this long !! But I could not give the client the option of relatively quick changes, different viewpoints and walkthroughs along with that much used expression "photo realistic" rendering. My style was much, much looser than yours. You could get away with a swiggle for non essential detail, now they expect to see the keys on the computer keyboard!

 

All the best

 

Alan

[Ernest Burden III]

Yes, you see Ernest the English measurement to me is metric, because I'm English and the measurement we use is metric.

 

That's gonna cause a little confusion, mind if we just call you Bruce?

 

I know, that was a goof on Ausies, it just seemed to fit, somehow.

 

OK we won't call it English, we will call it by its other name 'Imperial'. Hummm, English, Imperial. I wonder how those two words ended up together?

 

How do you measure angles mostly? We Americans (US Americans anyway, the other two may differ) usually use degrees, minutes, seconds, a 360:60:60 system. Dividing an angle into 6 equal parts makes working with inch fractions seem almost too easy. Oh, well, we have CAD, it does the heavy mental lifting for us.

[alanmac]

Getting back to the measurement thread. I come from a manual draughting background so most of the time I would have chosen a scale to fit my drawing sheet, A4,A3,A2,A1, or A0. I use Vectorworks for my CAD work and I do the same with this.

 

I know I'm going to have to print the drawing out at some stage so I pick the print area in the page set up menu, select my size if its different to my default paper size,and start drawing. I check my plan fits on the page, and if need be adjust the scale to fit my work on the page, 1:25, 1:50, 1:75 etc.

 

I was recently working for a shopfitting company and the guy uses Autodesk programs, Mechanical Desktop to be precise.

 

You work 1:1 of course he said, we all do. No I said I work in scale to fit my drawing sheet. He then proceeded to explain why I should be working 1:1 but I'm afraid I couldn't grasp what he was driving at. You don't have to work out the measurement in scales he said.

 

But I don't anyway I replied, I draw a line etc the size I want it, the computer does the scaling part. If the lines 3 metres long I use the programs coordinates to show me when its that long, or type in the size, in actual size not the scale size. The program works out what that line will be in the scale I've chosen when it prints it out.

 

Am I being dumb but I just don't get it, why should I work in 1:1, it's no more accurate, I can't see it 1:1 without zooming in on things, the screen merely shows a representation of my drawing the size relative to my chosen view. You don't physically put a ruler across the screen and take a measurement.

 

As far as I can see I've just transfered my everyday good old hand drawn way of things to the computer. He sayes all architects draw 1:1. and I'm wrong.

 

So what's the story, am I right or wrong, but I'll still keep on doing it my way whatever.

 

Alan

[Ernest Burden III]

You work 1:1 of course he said, we all do.

If the lines 3 metres long I use the programs coordinates to show me when its that long, or type in the size, in actual size not the scale size. The program works out what that line will be in the scale I've chosen when it prints it out.

Am I being dumb but I just don't get it, why should I work in 1:1...

 

As you explain it, you ARE working 1:1 if you create a 3 meter line (oh, and if in the US a metre is, in fact, a meter) by typing in 3m at whatever angle. Your program is simply using a version of what AutoCad calls 'paperspace' to relate what you draw to a sheet via a chosen scale. But your brain is working in real sizes--a door is 7 feet high, a car 16 feet long, etc. That's real-world size.

 

Don't let those Autocad guys push you around.