ViewCaptureToFile missing multiplier


(Willem Derks) #1

Hi,

I’m missing an option to simply multiply the current viewport resolution:

V5:

-Willem


#2

Isn’t that the Scale drawing thickness checkbox above?
Never used that one, I guess it refers to scaling lineweights?)

–Mitch


(Willem Derks) #3

If so, it’s a bad choice of wording :wink:

-Willem


#4

No, on second thought, it’s not the same, sorry…

You are correct, not present in V6 anymore apparently, we have the other one as a new option, however the Help item doesn’t describe it at all…


(Pascal Golay) #5

Hi Willem - so, setting a height or width in pixels and locking to the viewport aspect… is not more convenient and useful? I think the old scale was an easy way for the user not to have to worry about keeping the aspect ratio when manually entering image size numbers. It always seemed like a cheap way out, to me, I thought the new way was far better, myself…

-Pascal


(Willem Derks) #6

Well If I count the steps to take to set it up with scaling, it’d be

-Click multiply field to activate
-Keyboard Type multiplication number
-Click Save/OK

Or Better:
-Click click click multiply spinner
-Click Save/OK

V6 current dialog:

  • Dropdown choose Custom
  • Click check aspectratio
  • Click x or y Size field field to activate
  • Keyboard Type resolution number ( spinner is no real use there)
  • Click Save/OK

This brings to light a problem: The choosen settings in V6 are not maintained between commands.
So I need to go through the hoops each time I.

I’d say a simple as this:

It would be as easy as

  • ViewCaputureToFile
  • Click click multiply to 3
  • Click OK

-WIllem


(Pascal Golay) #7

HI Willem, I do get it… they are not mutually exclusive either, I think we were trying to keep the UI as simple as possible. But - now I’m just curious as well - as a rule, do you think in terms of a multiple of the vierwport rather then a desired pixel size, or is that a legacy effect of it being too inconvenient to set pixels in the past?

-Pascal


(Willem Derks) #8

Hi Pascal,

For me it’s pure convenience in not having to think specific numbers:
I want a larger screenshot because it’s better for obvious reasons
I do not care about exact sizes and it’s actually distracting because I would need to think about what number to input.

With a multiplier it’s just hit and go, let Rhino do the math and if need bee I multiply it an extra time.

-Willem

*Did you note the remark about settings not being kept inbetween commands in V6?
I’d say custom settings should be kept at least for the duration of the session.


(Pascal Golay) #9

Hi Willem -

ok, I see thanks.

If settings are saved, how does one handle changing viewports or modifying the vp size - what would carry through if you had things set to Custom and Lock viewport aspect ratio? Right now the settings are remembered, but not in a useful way - that is, if he viewport changes aspect ratio the checkbox stays checked but the numbers do not change so they no longer match the vp ratio… I guess it should update the numbers to the current vp size and not the custom size entered, or, possibly keep the numbers and uncheck the checkbox… Needs some more smarts…

-Pascal


(Willem Derks) #10

Yes difficult and never good for all.

I’d go for a multiplier to be saved regardless ( it’s just a multiplication for the viewport)
Also because: Once a user chooses a custom resolution, the multiplier is greyed out.

If aspect ration is not fixed it should remember the resolution regardless of VP change

If aspect ratio is fixed than there should be an update on the capture resolution.
I’d say the viewport size in x or y that changed (relatively) the least should be leading here.

My thinking is that a viewport adjustment on an width edge is to widen of narrow the view.
The height will likely be desired to remain, So that number is kept and the width updated.

Does that wording make sense?
In other words If a view is changed, the side that changed relatively the most, will likely be the side that is added to or cropped off from. So the other side that stayed more equal will maintain the custom size

-Willem


(Pascal Golay) #11

Hi Willem - it makes sense, I’ll run it by Rajaa on YotTrack - I don’t know how feasible it all is…

https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-37030

thanks,

-Pascal