Here is the geometry node method screenshot, the curve length should be at least 800mm, but the number shows as 14.66mm.
8
-
2$\begingroup$ First shot: Your object is scaled in Object Mode? The measurement will be of the geometry before any object-level transformations. (Ctrl-A to bake those transfornmations into the geometry.. 'Applying' ) $\endgroup$– Robin Betts ♦Commented May 29 at 8:35
-
1$\begingroup$ Thanks for your feedback. I have tried to apply the scale, the numbers remain the same. The scale is now 1:1 and the dimension of the curve is 150 x 309mm. The length still says 14.66mm, strangely. I have referenced in the curve object again to be safe but still no luck. $\endgroup$– NeusialCommented May 29 at 10:43
-
$\begingroup$ Hi, Neusial I think this was closed on the assumption that it was about the problem I described, and it turns out not to be. The next step is to edit your post to include a share on blend-exchange.com . When that's done, we can re-open with some evidence to go on, to help solve your problem. $\endgroup$– Robin Betts ♦Commented May 29 at 10:56
-
$\begingroup$ I have tried to re-edit and re-post but not sure if it worked. Sorry I am new to this forum! $\endgroup$– NeusialCommented May 30 at 5:35
-
$\begingroup$ If you include a share of your .blend file in your post by sharing on blend-exchange.com , that would really help us figure it out. $\endgroup$– Robin Betts ♦Commented May 30 at 6:15
|
Show 3 more comments
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
Your problem here is obviously not the scale of the curve you want to measure: when the Object Info node is set to Relative, the calculations ignore the original dimensions of the curve and use the actual dimensions but relative to their own frame of reference. Which means it does not matter if you applied the scale on your curve object or not.
But here comes the issue: as I said, Relative means relative to their own frame of reference (not to the world coordinates, otherwise it would be named "absolute").
So the length of the curve in its actual dimensions is calculated relative to the object's transforms which holds the Geometry Nodes modifier. And as it seems from your screenshot, the String to Curves node is set to a size of 1000 mm, but the text is much smaller when comparing with the curve.
So in your case, as I mention in the comments, the value is not too low, but much too high because even though you have set the display units to milimeters, Geometry Nodes do not care for that and use meters. Which means,a curve that should have a length of maybe 800 mm = 0.8 m shows a value of 14.67 m - how comes?
Using simpler values, if the length should be 1 m but it shows 10 m, the reason is that the scale of the GN object is only 0.1 in this case. When the GN nodetree measures a length of 1 m relative to it being scaled to only 1/10th, this results in a curve length of 10 × 1 m = 10 m. And your object is definitely scaled < 1.
Take a look at this practical example:
A curve circle with a radius of 1 m has a curve length (= circumference) of 2π ≈ 6.284 m. The Geometry Nodes object creating the numbers text has a scale of 1 and is showing the expected value.
But if I now scale the GN object in Object Mode to 0.5, since it is now only half of its original size, relative to itself the curve appears to be twice as large, and therefore the length shown now is 2 × 2π ≈ 12.567 m.
On the other hand, switching the Object Info node to Original, the nodetree will now ignore its own scale and only show the circumference of the original circle.
However this also means it will ignore when you scale down the circle to half its size as long as you do not apply the scale on the circle.
answered May 30 at 14:22
-
$\begingroup$ I see, so it is a scale issue of the geometry node measurement in relative mode. I checked the scale and it was "0.051" therefore causing the "0.74m" to read as "14.67m". I have corrected the scale to "0.001" and now the measurement reads "748" which is the unit and measurement that seems accurate. Thank you for the detailed explanation, it was very helpful. $\endgroup$– NeusialCommented Jun 3 at 3:24
-
$\begingroup$ @Neusial What the measurement reads is 748 meters though, not milimeters. It will only show the "correct" measurement if you set the scale to 1, which would be 0.748 m. It only happens to look correct because 0.001 = 1/1000 is the factor of milimeter to meter. The correct way would be to have the scale at 1 and multiply the result by 1000 to display meters as milimeters. Of course you can leave it like that if you want that. Just be aware that a Transfer Geometry node now might show to move something 100 mm in a direction, but it's only 100 mm / 1000 = 0.1 mm in the scene actually. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 3 at 6:14