Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

camera eye level?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
    #1

    camera eye level?

    On a current project we are experiencing some odd camera eye level behavior.

    When placing a camera, we set the current workplane to Level 1.

    By default, cameras normally come in with eye level at 5'-6".

    However, in our project, they come in at 7'-8" by default. In the render settings of such a new camera view, we double checked and Ground Plane is set to Level 1.

    I have checked the Project Base Point, which is correct at 100' which = Level 1.

    If we start a new project, and insert a camera it comes in as expected at 5'-6".

    So--there's something in our project that's causing it--just not sure what?
    Cliff B. Collins
    Registered Architect
    The Lamar Johnson Collaborative Architects, St. Louis, MO
    Autodesk Expert Elite
    Tags: camera, level, workplane
    #2
    Maybe there's an option I don't know about, but even when I start with a brand new OOTB template, the eye level is at 5'-6" + Level height.

    (I tried looking up "camera" under the "Help" - another massive FAIL for the 2011 help system).

    Comment

      #3
      Originally posted by iru69 View Post
      (I tried looking up "camera" under the "Help" - another massive FAIL for the 2011 help system).
      Can you elaborate on that? I found a bunch of stuff with the search string "camera"

      http://docs.autodesk.com/REVIT/2011/....html?q=camera

      I did have to add "eye level" to the search string to find where it is controled.

      http://docs.autodesk.com/REVIT/2011/...mera+eye+level

      None of these help pages address the problem Cliff was describing but it does explan how the camera positioning is done. So I am trying to understand why you are considering your search of the help a "fail"? I am not saying it was not I just want to know what you were expecting to find that you did not?
      Jeff Hanson
      Sr. Subject Matter Expert
      Autodesk, Revit - User Experience

      Comment

        #4
        Hi Jeff, I appreciate your interest.

        I simply tried to search for "camera"... and was unable to find what I was looking for... an explanation of how the camera's eye height is established. I saw "Adjusting the camera position", but nothing else looked relevant.

        I tried looking at the "index", but didn't see anything appropriate under "camera".

        Most often when I'm looking for documentation "help", I'm looking for an explanation of the options and fields in a specific dialog box... and how they are controlled, work, etc.

        The link you provide to "3D View" indicates that the "Eye Elevation = "Height of the Camera". Yep, uh, thanks.

        And if "camera eye level" brings up a section that "camera" doesn't - that's a MAJOR problem (though in this case, I think you're incorrect - "camera" does show "3D View Properties".

        Jeff, I know we've discussed the "Help" before at length (as I know you've discussed these issues with a LOT of users ), so I'm not going to do a lot of "repeating" - it just doesn't work very well. Almost every time I try to look something up, I end up even more frustrated. I don't know if it's just that there's a lot less detailed info in there then a couple versions ago, or whether the UI to the help is an obstacle to finding the information.

        :beer:

        Comment

          #5
          Jeff,
          the problem as I see it is this.
          In a good search, fewer search terms means MORE results, so you add search terms to refine the search and get fewer, hopefully more relevant, results.
          With the 2011 Help, fewer terms often means nothing is returned at all, and until you guess at the right extra terms to add, you have nothing. TOTALLY backwards, as often I need the initial results to help me define the added terms and refine the search.

          And yeah, the example of what Camera Height means is lovely. So glad money and time went into helping retarded baboons learn the tools. Answers like that make me absolutely sure that 1: someone was writing help file content who doesn't actually know much about Revit. And 2: was being paid by the page. Sorry to be so blunt, but really, the 2011 help may actually be the worst thing I have ever seen. Just so totally useless as to be ridiculous.

          Gordon
          Last edited by Gordon Price; February 17, 2011, 10:11 PM.
          Pragmatic Praxis

          Comment

            #6
            Originally posted by cliff collins View Post
            ....So--there's something in our project that's causing it--just not sure what?
            Cliff, I´ve been trying to reproduce this behavior, but no matter what i do, and how many Ninja tricks i try, new cameras defaults to 1750 mm (5'-6") :banghead:
            Klaus Munkholm
            "Do. Or do not. There is no try."

            Comment

              #7
              I tried Relocate Project and moved everything down. Both cameras still say 5'6", but that is 5'6" relative to nothing meaningful now. I would have expected if anything for them to move with level 1.

              Not sure how to recreate the OP, but one more bug in the camera functionality to be aware of. You relocate project and ALL your perspectives are junk with regards to anything meaningful about their height.

              EDIT: Interesting. Before Relocate Project camera position is Relative. After Relocate project it is Explicit. The height is still the same, but what is Relative or Explicit referencing here? Origin origin? And how does anyone coming onto the project later, who doesn't know how MUCH the project was relocated, have any hope of understanding the cameras, as their heights are all "wrong" by the relocate value.

              G
              Last edited by Gordon Price; February 17, 2011, 10:39 PM.
              Pragmatic Praxis

              Comment

                #8
                It happens when Levels have been moved...

                If i have a level at 100' (level 1) and i place another one at 102', and go in to floor plan 1 (based on level 1) and make a camera, it is then based on 5'-6" off level 1. if i go to elevation and drag that level down 2 feet, however... Then when i make a camera, it will say 3'-6". Its placing it at 5'-6" off of where the level is, but its reporting its height off the difference the level was when at when it created the floor plan.

                Our training model does that, since weve binded it in to revised templates a few times to make sure its current. Ours actually all report absolute elevations now, LOL.
                Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
                @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

                Comment

                  #9
                  Interesting..........

                  We are getting somewhere now. The Project Lead DID in fact use Relocate Project some time back when coordinating locations with our consultants.
                  Now, in addition to the "incorrect" camera eye height, our Target Height Annotations are reading incorrectly--probably "off" by the same amount as the camera eye height. Dimensions appear to be reporting correctly, but not Spot Elevations. Ouch. This should be an enjoyable ride.......... Will keep you posted.
                  Cliff B. Collins
                  Registered Architect
                  The Lamar Johnson Collaborative Architects, St. Louis, MO
                  Autodesk Expert Elite

                  Comment

                    #10
                    Spot elevations are tricky. When placed on ceilings they report the height off the level that the VIEW was created from, not the height off the level the OBJECT was created from. Thats why we use ceiling tags instead of Spots. Im sure they behave similarly to datums getting moved...
                    Aaron "selfish AND petulant" Maller |P A R A L L A X T E A M | Practice Technology Implementation
                    @Web | @Twitter | @LinkedIn | @Email

                    Comment

                    Previous 1 2 template Next

                    Related Topics

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X