I have been working on models of real-word objects - mainly fruit and flowers - and I can’t decide whether to work at the ‘default’ scale, where objects are around 1-2 m in diameter or the real scale where they are typically 2-5 cm in diameter.
So far I have opted for creating the objects at the default (larger) scale before instantiating them and scaling down, The large scale is useful as it avoids constantly having to adjust clipping limits etc.
I scale down (so as to help estimate the correct sizes of things) and also because I suspect there might be aspects of rendering/lighting etc that are sensitive to scale.
This has worked well so far until scaling down an object that had been sculpted (with dynamic topology). The scaled down object renders really horribly (see leaves at head of stem in the attached image). Is this a problem with numeric limits on very fine meshes ?
I am not able to apply the scale as the flower head is a group instance and the group opbject also includes particle systems which have their own scaling problems.
I’d appreciate any help deciding how to adjust my methodology.
I have since discovered that the horrible rendering above was all down to a noise texture that didn’t scale as expected and therefore only secondarily to do with units.
I think I will continue to work at ‘real-world’ scales despite some minor irritations. One of the worst of these is the fact that viewport clipping limits are not ‘sticky’. If you switch between object and editing modes for example the clipping limits reset to their default values. (I wonder whether this has been fixed in Blender 2.8)
Clipping limits don’t reset. They stay as you set them for your startup file.
And, there are two settings: one for the 3D Viewport (N-panel > View) and other for Camera (Properties > Lens).
So, if you have those two set differently then, after switching from Camera to Viewport, yes, clipping can cause confusion. But Object VS Edit mode are always keeping their POVs respectively
The only thing in need of fixing here is a PEBCAK issue
I can understand why you’re doing what you’re doing and I’m not knocking it, but if you find yourself working with others at any point I’ve heard that it’s usually a good idea to be used to working in “real-size”.
You probably have more experience than I do though; I’m still relatively new and I haven’t worked with others on any projects yet. The advice was just something that I’d heard.
Maybe there’s an add-on that gets around the clipping misbehaving.
Well that doesn’t appear to work for me. I set clipping limits for the viewport and save a new startup file. When I create a new session (from the startup file) the clipping limits are as they were before.
The behaviour is the same whether I set limits for Object mode or Edit mode either separately (before saving the startup file) or together.
Generally speaking, one of my “painfully real-world experiences” is that “‘scale’ is most-important of all!”
If there is any “real world frame of reference” that applies to your project at all, IMHO it is very critically important that you refer to it throughout your project. *(Yes, it is very nice that Blender now lets you differentiate between “feet” and “meters,” but the essential principle applies just as well to “Blender Units.”)
Basically, I try to depict antique pieces of machinery in antique settings. Okay, so I very definitely have to consider the physical dimensions of those factories and workshops, as well as the physical sizes of the machines. When I look at a “reference photograph,” I have to imagine where the photographer was standing, and what sort of photographic technology (s)he used.
No, I agree. It’s important to be aware of real scale.
My questions simply relate to whether there is a ‘natural’ scale at which Blender works best (1-2 metres for example). Most of the objects I model are measured in centimetres or even millimetres. One way of approaching it is to have in mind that 1 Blender metre is equivalent to 1 real world cm. That would be fine but I am unsure whether physics, lighting etc. all scale in this linear way.
If, as I suspect, there are non-linear aspects to physics and lighting then it would be best to work at the real scale, even if this causes me a few minor annoyances.
The worry about working at real-world scale is that there might be problems arising from Blenders ‘numerical range’. It would be useful to have some reassurance from someone with insight into Blender’s internal structure as to whether this is likely to be a problem.