"Position" values of X and Y

[stealingfeathers]

Hello all:

I never gave this much thought until someone asked me and then I went looking in the User Manual for the answer. Couldn't find it.

What unit of measurement is being used for the X, Y values in the workspace? The center of the visible region is 0,0. Okay, that makes perfect sense. The lower half for Y axis will result in a negative number. The left half of the X axis will display a negative number. Of course, of course -- no problem. But if I make a small vector square and put it at a corner just outside of the image area (visible region), then I get a number such as X = 1.9000 and Y = 1.1200. What units are we measuring with? The numbers don't match up with the project settings ppi, so that's not it.

Thanks,
RR

[obtusity]

"Cliftons", a unit based on higher creative thought rather than real-world measurements.

More seriously, here's an answer from respected forum elder heyvern, originally posted here:

Positions of layers, points and bones is not in pixels but application "units" that equal 1 at the top of the output area and -1 at the bottom. The top and bottom values never change no matter what the pixel dimensions are.

The left and right values of the output area is based on the width divided by the height of the pixel dimensions. For example a pixel dimension of 1280px x 720px is 1.777. The left side of the output area in the preview would be -1.777 and the right side 1.777. The left and right side values change based on the ratio of the width and height of the pixel dimensions.

This helps maintain the relative size of all the layers and animation if you change the resolution of a project. If you had set a project to be a very small resolution and then changed it later it would keep the size of everything relative to the top and bottom of the output area. Everything would... sort of... scale up but you don't notice it. It basically keeps everything the same size relative to the top and bottom of the output area.

[funksmaname]

"Cliftons", a unit based on higher creative thought rather than real-world measurements.

[stealingfeathers]

Awesome. Thanks for responding. I suspected it was something along those lines, but I wouldn't have been able to articulate it without seeing it in writing.

"Cliftons", a unit based on higher creative thought rather than real-world measurements.

More seriously, here's an answer from respected forum elder heyvern, originally posted here:

Positions of layers, points and bones is not in pixels but application "units" that equal 1 at the top of the output area and -1 at the bottom. The top and bottom values never change no matter what the pixel dimensions are.

The left and right values of the output area is based on the width divided by the height of the pixel dimensions. For example a pixel dimension of 1280px x 720px is 1.777. The left side of the output area in the preview would be -1.777 and the right side 1.777. The left and right side values change based on the ratio of the width and height of the pixel dimensions.

This helps maintain the relative size of all the layers and animation if you change the resolution of a project. If you had set a project to be a very small resolution and then changed it later it would keep the size of everything relative to the top and bottom of the output area. Everything would... sort of... scale up but you don't notice it. It basically keeps everything the same size relative to the top and bottom of the output area.

[hayasidist]

"Cliftons", a unit based on higher creative thought rather than real-world measurements

love that unit name!!


just an addition to what's been said...

the +1/-1 top bottom are as with default camera z position /zoom... change the zoom and/or camera z then the top of the screen changes from 1


If you want to set a scale for the "Clifton"- IOW to set a real world distance for 1 Clifton - you can IF you're strictly 3d. If not (i.e you're doing your own perspective on a layer) then the correlation is not linear... IOW 1 Clifton wide at the "near point" is maybe a metre or so; but 1 Clifton at the far point might be a few kilometres; and if you draw the sun, 1 Clifton might be 10 Million Km (10 Tm)

[stealingfeathers]

Yeah, I get it...basically... I have to admit, scale and distance are trickier in Moho than in 3D programs I've used.
Thank you!

just an addition to what's been said...

the +1/-1 top bottom are as with default camera z position /zoom... change the zoom and/or camera z then the top of the screen changes from 1

If you want to set a scale for the "Clifton"- IOW to set a real world distance for 1 Clifton - you can IF you're strictly 3d. If not (i.e you're doing your own perspective on a layer) then the correlation is not linear... IOW 1 Clifton wide at the "near point" is maybe a metre or so; but 1 Clifton at the far point might be a few kilometres; and if you draw the sun, 1 Clifton might be 10 Million Km (10 Tm)

[hayasidist]

Yeah, I get it...basically... I have to admit, scale and distance are trickier in Moho than in 3D programs I've used.

well .... Moho isn't a 3d package -- it gives you what the "old world" 2d animators had in terms of cels and multiplane plus a load more. So if you can draw a landscape on a piece of paper and it looks right then who cares about the fact that 1cm on the paper is the equivalent of anything from (say) 1m to 10Km in the real world. And if you can draw the same landscape split into what is "close", "middle" and "far" on 3 different pieces of celluloid and then move those cels "a lot", "a bit" and "hardly at all" and make it look right for the motion you intended then you'll have succeeded.

[stealingfeathers]

I didn't mean that I expect it to act like a 3D application. It's just that I used 3D software exclusively for several years before I tried out 2D software. It was tough to get used to at first, but I love what Moho has to offer. It is a pleasure to work with.

Yeah, I get it...basically... I have to admit, scale and distance are trickier in Moho than in 3D programs I've used.

well .... Moho isn't a 3d package -- it gives you what the "old world" 2d animators had in terms of cels and multiplane plus a load more. So if you can draw a landscape on a piece of paper and it looks right then who cares about the fact that 1cm on the paper is the equivalent of anything from (say) 1m to 10Km in the real world. And if you can draw the same landscape split into what is "close", "middle" and "far" on 3 different pieces of celluloid and then move those cels "a lot", "a bit" and "hardly at all" and make it look right for the motion you intended then you'll have succeeded.

[hayasidist]

I love what Moho has to offer. It is a pleasure to work with.

+1 to that