Does 3ds Max have an attribute, numerical, parameter, or size editor?

LeifDahl

Does 3ds Max have an attribute, numerical, parameter, or size editor?

I've noticed I can set the x, y, and z size in a parameters panel when creating a new box; however once I convert it to an editable poly I can't seem to find a window to edit this outside of scaling from 100%.

For example, if I have a polygon that is taller than it is wide and I want it's height and width to be the same, I'm used to being able to find the height value and copy and paste it into the area showing the width value (Coming from the perspective of Maya, Silo, and Lightwave).

I can of course measure the polygon, duplicate it then flip it 90 degrees and match the height vertices, or just not use 3ds Max . I also noticed Max displays location coordinates, so I would assume that the size data is available as well. I'm hoping i'm just looking in the wrong spots or using the wrong terminology for Max because this seems like a very straightforward feature in other modeling programs and I'm surprised I haven't been able to find an equivalent in 3ds Max. 

ActionDawg

Under the Utilities tab you can find a measurement tool but that's only for objects. There are measurement helper objects and the Measure Distance tool:
https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/3ds-max/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2016/ENU/3DSMax/files/GUID-25B16E09-84D0-4F8E-9F17-0CC52ABB450F-htm.html

You can also simply crunch the numbers from the vertex or edge coordinates you see in the Coordinate Display if you want. IE: Vertex1 x position - Vertex2 x position. If you want to make a polygon a square then figure out the difference between the target size and what it currently is and subtract or add the appropriate amount. Simple arithmetic is all you need.

Once you convert an object to editable poly it is no longer a primitive able to be edited with those initial size parameters you mention. It is instead an object containing verts/edges/polygons that can be in any arbitrary arrangement. It doesn't know what it used to be, for good reason. Editable Poly is meant to be a pure state relying on no external information determining its topology. It can even be a completely empty object.

Alternatively you can use an edit poly modifier on top of your primitive which would allow you to modify parameters after the fact, but this is generally poor practice as, if you are not extremely careful, it is highly likely to break the modifier stack (read, everything) the second you change the vertex ordering. This means no adding or removing sides or segments, only changing size parameters. But these kinds of size operations are instead better suited to the FFD modifiers.

One final note is that you really do not want to be scaling objects at the object level willy nilly, as transforms can quickly become frustrating to deal with when you have random scale and rotation values for arbitrary objects. Any time I get handed an asset like this I want to die.

LeifDahl

@somedoggy Thank you for the quick and detailed response. This definitely echos a bunch of old posts I found (Specifically the part about avoiding scaling at the object level), but it's nice to see it all laid out together in one spot and up to date. Thanks!

I am however curious why so many people warn against scaling at the object level?

I have run into small bumps with scale being an issue going between other modeling programs, importing into game engines, lightmap resolution, or even causing software to crash, but these have all been very easily avoided with proper organization. The efficiency that's added to my 3D pipeline and convenience of being able to copy and past transform data throughout my scene very much outweighs any scaling issues I've come across, so I'm curious to learn more about why this is avoided for the 3dsMax workflow.


Side note rant.....

In the end, there's now quite a large handful of 3D modeling software out there and the "best" ones are very much subjective to the users preferred workflow, how they were trained, or the type of 3D projects they're working on. For example majority of my work has been for video games and perhaps this scale issue isn't as relevant for those pipelines. For modeling/UVing I've primarily used Silo3D for almost 8 years now. Yet I keep exploring other software and current industry standards because on paper they heavily outweigh Silo3D and many of them (including 3ds Max) have amazing robust tools that are super helpful. But, I always find myself coming back to Silo for small reasons like a numerical editor, because it works well with my preferred workflow.

  

poopipe

Use an xform modifier if you're going to scale things at object level - it leaves the object transforms intact. If you want to directly enter translation values for scaling try an ffd modifier with 2points per axis instead. 

 Scaling at object level is considered bad practice because unless you understand the consequences and manage them you end up with weird shit happening.
I lost count of the number of times I've wandered over to fix a problem for someone that was down to a crappy transform about a decade ago and it hasn't stopped yet. 

Noors

It's not that it should be avoided. It's that you should know when and why reset the transormation matrix, or else you'll get shit going.
And it's not specifically a max workflow,
For instance, all  bevel/extrude/chamfer mesurements  will be wrong as they will apply to the mesh and not take the transformation in account.
You normals will be impacted so chances that projections and normal map would also be incorrect.
Skinned mesh will not react correctly.
Even worst if you have a hierarchy as the transforms are inherited.
Make a box, scale it on 1 axis. Make a teapot, parent it to the box. Rotate the teapot. Holly cow, wtf ?
Not even talking about controllers or wire parameters

So reset your object transformation before major operations/parenting/rotating.
You should keep your asset clean and scale in the engine if needed

ActionDawg

Basically what they said.

For example I received a mesh for a mechanical character (that I've had to redo basically from scratch anyway due to poor modeling) and they used random scale values all over the place, not to mention that they worked in arbitary units. This is unacceptable when I need to target cm for Unreal and have to prepare this for rigging. With all these objects at random scales I had to fix something that could have been avoided from the start, for every object across the character, and then scale it all down to the correct units.

LeifDahl

Thanks for all the feedback!

Having random scale values that aren't consistent definitely seems like a nightmare to deal with. Luckily 3ds Max has quite a robust tool set and getting around any transform modifiers shouldn't be much an issue. Plus, passing on clean assets for other users to work with is very important so I'll always side with the cleanest approach.

Thanks!