Feet and inches: they need to be together

Not sure if this is the correct place to beg, but…

Any way we can get the distance a few different ways?
Instead of just inches, next to that have 1.9166" and next to that 1’11"?
It’s a real pain to have just one option and have to calculate things when one changes between all of them when putting in measurements.

Thank you

Hi Izabela- this is the place to beg… but I am not sure I understand exactly what you are asking for - perhaps having the output format match the current dimension style format, would that do it?


1 Like

for me, that’d be sweet to use dimension style instead of just model units… (though maybe Izabela is suggesting 3 or more ways to see the dimension)

it’d be great to see this :point_down: when using something like the Length command… equally good (or maybe more) would be seeing it at the bottom right(mac) when doing something like drawing a line.

I’d love to see it in the different ways. When I work in feet, some things are feet, some things are inches… it’s a pain to have to convert to feet when some little detail is in inches and vice versa. There is already a place with plenty of space (the screen shot I took) for this request, and the way Jeff put it on his blue box is also great. I don’t use Rhino for video games or things like it, I use it for real life design, with real measurements. Thank you:)

that’s not a mockup… it’s a dimension using the _Dim command…
you can already customize your dimensions and include an alternative measurement to be shown (ie- in Inches and Centimeters if you wish… etc.)
File-> Settings-> Dimensions

what pascal was saying is it might be possible to use the file’s dimension settings for feedback elsewhere in the program (such as the location in your first post)

I realize that it’s a dimension, maybe I’m not using the correct terminology, sorry. What I am saying is that what ever I do and no matter where ever the sizes pop up, for them to be displayed in three different ways: 3’3-5/8", 39-5/8", and perhaps .625 for the ending. That way if someone says to me to build something that is 4’, and that this thing has an 11" piece somewhere, when I ask for dimensions it will give them to me in several ways so that I don’t have to keep calculating back to feet.
When I want to make a line which is 11.125", and then later I ask for the dimension of that line, and I’m working in feet, what I get spit back out to me is 0.93
If, on the other hand, I chose to see everything as 11.125", and in my notes I had .093, I would have to calculate again as to what the heck 11.125" is. I go between how numbers are described all the time.
That is the most annoying thing I have ever seen in this world and it takes up a whole lot of time to figure out what that simple little measurement actually is.
If the measurements were displayed three different ways, no matter what’s on your mind, it would always show up.

You’ve made the argument for switching to the metric system.

Those of us that have worked with fractional and decimal Imperial units (feet, decimal feet, inches, fractional inches, decimal inches, etc.) eventually memorized them, To me 0.625 and 5/8 are the same. I’m comfortable with either one. That took some time. When I see “oddball” decimals I figure they are generally converted metric measurements.

for me, wanting to see feet&inches and inches at the same time has to do with making cutlists…

somewhere above the 6’-8’ area, people (at least people on my crew?) generally think in feet&inches instead of inches… i’ll make cutlists which have some stuff written as 43 1/4 then other stuff like 12 - 7 1/2… when on site, i’m constantly doing the conversion in my head…

one less thing to worry about if rhino just said both :wink:

as far as decimals go, i don’t use them except for inputing dimensions (into software)… it’s just faster to type… but yeah, all of the 16ths are ingrained and i can switch between them without thinking.

I’m happy that you are both happy with how Rhino works for you (and yes, cm would be great, but they are not the thing everyone uses in the US, unfortunately), but that, again, unfortunately, is not my life. I have to deal with all three ways on a single project all the time:(
I’m sure that I am not the only one, which brings me to my original point… who and where do I have to beg to make this simple little thing happen so that the lives of many can be changed for ever… hehehe

That’s specifically why Rhino has and extensive and rich SDK.
Someone with software development skills could write a plug-in tool that could potentially do what you want. There just has to be enough people willing to pay for the tool that the developer is attracted to the project.

I see. I guess that answers my question… too bad really… I think it would have been a great addition:)

hmm… maybe i’m mumbling when i type but…
i agree with you. i think it’s a great suggestion. i would use it too. etc.

i’m not sure what you think i’m saying

Not necessarily.
That’s one the the hidden advantages of this forum.
It gives us a measure of tools, improvements, and changes that benefit the most number of users. We have to prioritize development to stretch our limited resources to help the most number of people. This also is adjusted based on how difficult the project is to do.

Poke this topic from time to time and see what kind of response you get. If a bunch of people chime in that this would be very helpful, then it’s more likely to rise to the level of getting done and put in core Rhino.

Don’t take this wrong, I’m not trying to raise your hope with respect to this specific change, just generally how we use this forum.

So far, I count two for and none against. I don’t count since I work here.


1 Like

Make good use of the Options - Units tools as well as Options - Modeling Aids - Cursor ToolTips.

Yep… When you’re used to a system that has inflicted pain and suffering upon you since birth, you have a tendency to consider it “normal”… :smile_cat:


1 Like

it’s not always so bad… imperial has 2x4s then 4x8 plywood etc… how do you say those in metric?

Wood sizes are always odd, and a 2 x 4 isn’t 2" x 4". When I started out they were 1-5/8" x 3-5/8", and I remember them reducing it to 1-1/2" x 3-1/2" in the 60’s sometime.

So here, there are all sorts of dimensioned lumber sizes and there is no real “standard” like a 2 x 4. They don’t build timber-frame houses here like they do in the US.

But back to your question, a 2 x 4 here would be 5 x 10 (cm) but most people would state smaller lumber sized in mm, so 50 x 100. But that would be finished lumber sizes… On the other hand, sheet wood comes in completely odd sizes here.


when i work in europe, i’m dealing with 1220x2440 etc… but i guess if the imperial system wasn’t around to begin with, ‘standard’ sizes wouldn’t be based of feet&inches…
so maybe a piece of plywood would be 1200x2400 etc.

(fwiw, i’m not defending the imperial system as a whole… metric makes way more sense)

What’s great about metric is that you can change scales virtual instantly, going from millimeters to centimeters to meters to kilometers just by moving a decimal point. But of course, the main thing is it’s all base 10. Whereas English/US is various combinations of base 2 and 12, plus some oddballs like 3 feet to the yard and 5280 feet to the mile…

And, of course, as soon as you get involved with measuring things other than distance - like area, volume, weight - it all goes completely pear-shaped…


tell me about it… if you’re not a construction builder and go to try and find anything you’re actually looking for, you simply won’t find it… the entire thing makes zero sense.