That’s easy:
The camera lens is an important element when it comes to ‘how big something looks’. If you don’t know that (or don’t know how to change the camera lens), it is not a stupid question.
The camera lens value is meant in millimeters, and that would physically correctly correspond with a scene that is built with 1 Blender Unit = 1 Metre?
I don’t know if this a question or meant to make fun of me (That should make you think…)
All I want to say is that the impression of size in 3D has to do with the camera lens. The extreme case of an orthogonal camera leaves no feeling of size at all. I don’t know exact values for the lens settings.
umm, no. the impression of size comes from relations of objects (we know) to each other. the lens setting simulates different - well, camera lenses, but in blender they don’t care how big the structures shown are. and this is completely irrelevant, as the impression of size comes only with some “hints” you give the human eye/brain.
The reason that the camera lens matters is that we have expectations based on photographs and cinema. E.g. microscopes and telescopes have pretty shallow depths of field, and/or they have a lot of curvature to the lens.
By the way, is there a way to get Blender to display unit numbers with the grid in the 3D view though? I find myself creating reference 1x1x1 cubes all over the place…
(I know that the grid spacing can be set… but it’s infinitely repeating!)
the grid is almost the same as before (it loks a bit different). it used to be and is still infinite in an iso viewport, and has user-definable bounds in a perspective veiwport. what madness are you talking about??
Solmax: If you look closely, you will notice that it’s impossible to see how much 1 Unit actually is in ortographic views, as the grid provides no indication as to “how far” it is zoomed out or in.
In previous versions, it would turn dotted or simply disappear if zoomed too far out/in.
agree. however, i never bothered with measurements and units… which makes me quite sure that one of the next jobs WILL require axactly that … how about using precise blueprints?