Axonometric view. Why this octant of the space?

[jruiz]

Just wondering...
In FreeCAD, when setting axonometric view, one "sees" the fourth octant of the space (+X, -Y, +Z axes). Wouldn't it be more comfortable to see the first octant (+X, +Y, +Z axes) instead of that?
Regards

[DeepSOIC]

Click a corner of navigation cube to get into any axo view you want.


If memory serves me correct, it's some standard. And it's not a universal standard.

[jruiz]

Click a corner of navigation cube to get into any axo view you want.


If memory serves me correct, it's some standard. And it's not a universal standard.

I am sorry, but what is it called "navigation cube"?

[Jee-Bee]

this one

[jruiz]

Ok. Thank you.
Please, correct me:
The mavicube is not part of official FreeCAD version yet...
If so, is there any link for downloading a binary of that FreeCAD version, or it has to be compiled?

[DeepSOIC]

https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases

The mavicube is not part of official FreeCAD version yet...
If so, is there any link for downloading a binary of that FreeCAD version, or it has to be compiled?

It's not in 0.17, it's in development version 0.18.
Binaries here: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases

[jruiz]

https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases

The mavicube is not part of official FreeCAD version yet...
If so, is there any link for downloading a binary of that FreeCAD version, or it has to be compiled?

It's not in 0.17, it's in development version 0.18.
Binaries here: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/releases

Thanks a lot. going to download it now.

[NormandC]

Wouldn't it be more comfortable to see the first octant (+X, +Y, +Z axes) instead of that?

Define "more comfortable". How could it possibly be "more comfortable"? Quite bluntly, this is meaningless.

If memory serves me correct, it's some standard. And it's not a universal standard.

It's not a standard, but it's a convention, and a pretty universal convention at that. I would surmise that it comes from technical drawing conventions, and specifically American ones, since many of the leading CAD programs on the market (at least in the Western countries) come from the USA.

In USA and Canada (and Japan I believe), technical drawings use third angle projection, in which you'll commonly have a front view as base view, a top view and a right view (placed at the right of the front view), along with an isometric view above the right view. This isometric projection is oriented like the axonometric view in FreeCAD, as well as the CAD programs I mentioned above.

[jruiz]

Wouldn't it be more comfortable to see the first octant (+X, +Y, +Z axes) instead of that?

Define "more comfortable". How could it possibly be "more comfortable"? Quite bluntly, this is meaningless.

If memory serves me correct, it's some standard. And it's not a universal standard.

It's not a standard, but it's a convention, and a pretty universal convention at that. I would surmise that it comes from technical drawing conventions, and specifically American ones, since many of the leading CAD programs on the market (at least in the Western countries) come from the USA.

In USA and Canada (and Japan I believe), technical drawings use third angle projection, in which you'll commonly have a front view as base view, a top view and a right view (placed at the right of the front view), along with an isometric view above the right view. This isometric projection is oriented like the axonometric view in FreeCAD, as well as the CAD programs I mentioned above.

Hi NormandC.
Comfortable: the same meaning as read in a dictionary. I was wondering what Freecad users thought...
Thank you very much for your answer.
I suppose you realized the close relation of this topic with this one:
https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=30813
As I wrote in this post modifications could be done via options the user could chose..
I agree that standards are useful, but IMHO sometimes they could be "expanded" for exploring if things could be improved...

[NormandC]

Hi,

Comfortable: the same meaning as read in a dictionary.

You still have not given a real answer on how you think viewing the object from another octant could be considered "more comfortable". And you won't be able to, because it is not based on any provable fact.

I could even retort that it would be "less comfortable" because you'd be viewing your model from the rear rather than from the front (the front being the XZ plane - that's right, the XZ rather than ZX plane, because you usually want to look at your model in upright position, from the front, and not sideways and from the rear).

What I can tell from experience, is that it will always depend on the shape of the model, and how it is oriented. As well as what the end user is accustomed. That's actually why, in addition to a few standard view orientations available from a toolbar and keyboard shortcuts, we can rotate the 3D view with the mouse to any orientation we wish...

I agree that standards are useful, but IMHO sometimes they could be "expanded" for exploring if things could be improved...

I have no issue with wanting to propose more orientation choices for standard views, my issue was only with the use of "more comfortable" to define a (+X, +Y, +Z) orientation.

Incidentally, AutoCAD had a view toolbar with 4 different isometric orientation. They were labelled SW (South-West) isometric, SE isometric, NE and NW isometric. I believe they were all above the XY plane, but it's been a long time since I used that program.