View RSS Feed

Baile nam Fonn

Learning an Isometric Trick (easier than expected!)

Rating: 2 votes, 4.50 average.
6 Comments
by
Baile nam Fonn
, 04-13-2015 at 10:14 PM (31213 Views)
I had previously thought that there was no hope of sussing out the operations nescessary to wrangle a square grid down onto an axonometric plane.
As it turns out, with help from a very straightforward little tutorial I found (http://ahninniah.blogspot.ca/2013/04...-inkscape.html), the solution was in fact very simple to deduce.
The secret ingredient was the very precise scale transform step - profuse thanks to Olga Bikmullina for simply giving the answer.
Edit: I should note at this point that Bikmullina's instructions were for preparing vertical faces for use in isometric drawings: tremendously useful information which, funny enough, I don't plan to use for this mapping project.
However, I agree with Meshon that it is well worth bookmarking.

Click image for larger version.  Name: isometricDemo.png  Views: 651  Size: 58.9 KB  ID: 72702

The steps to achieve the above transformation are almost exclusively performed in the Object > Transform dialogue, in the following order:
  1. Duplicate the object (Ctrl+D)
  2. Move the object duplicate. (in this case, -300 px in the vertical).\
  3. Rotate 90 degrees clockwise. (this step is nescessary to achieve my desired relative rotation)
  4. Scale the Width to precisely 86.603%. (leaving the Length at 100%)
  5. Skew the Vertical by 30 degrees.
  6. And, finally, Rotate counter-clockwise 120 degrees.


To be sure of the success I used the measure tool (with cusp node snapping) to confirm that tile edges were indeed still exactly 5 pixels in length.

Woot!

It may be a good time to admit that it didn't occur to me to search out a tutorial for doing this here in the forum.
If you know of one (or authored one), please do link it in the comments!

Updated 04-14-2015 at 09:29 AM by Baile nam Fonn (Meshon's comment prompted better description of link)

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags
Categories
WIP - Ernie'sTome

Comments

  1. Corilliant's Avatar
    Heh, neat!
  2. Meshon's Avatar
    I'm not sure if this is the same thing but to get my top downs into an isometric shape I rotate 45º and then scale the vertical to 57.7% of original.

    Aha! I went and read the page you linked. The more complex transform lets you do vertical faces! I am so bookmarking that. I think I haven't quite yet even realized how awesome this will be.

    However, in case all you're doing is taking a standard top-down grided map and turning it into the base layer for an isometric map, the two-part transform I mentioned will do the trick.

    cheers,
    Meshon
  3. Baile nam Fonn's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Meshon
    I'm not sure if this is the same thing but to get my top downs into an isometric shape I rotate 45º and then scale the vertical to 57.7% of original.

    Aha! I went and read the page you linked. The more complex transform lets you do vertical faces! I am so bookmarking that. I think I haven't quite yet even realized how awesome this will be.

    However, in case all you're doing is taking a standard top-down grided map and turning it into the base layer for an isometric map, the two-part transform I mentioned will do the trick.

    cheers,
    Meshon
    Thanks for the tip, Meshon!

    I had a strong suspicion that my quickly hacked together hop, skip and jump wasn't the pinnacle of elegance.

    [testing it now...]

    ..Unfortunately, the 45, 57.7 transform fell short of passing my measure tool test. I tried toying around and got pretty close to 30°, but it stubbornly kept closer to 4 pixels tile length than 5.
    I want a transform that's perfectly compatible with the axonometric grid's angles & measures-- grid snapping is my friend.

    {Minor aside: I've made the arbitrary decision to up my primitive tile to 6 pixels, 3 to a meter. My Z axis will likewise be upped to 9 pixels between planes. I like the number three. Nine is fun too.}
  4. Meshon's Avatar
    Oooh, that's subtle! I had to run through the process myself to understand (the math gears in my brain are missing a couple teeth) but I see now that you end up with isometric grid "squares" with exactly the same side length as the original.

    Now, I know I can make isometricky looking maps with the 45º 57.7% method, but what will I gain by using this transform? If it sounds like I'm being doubtful, I'm totally not. I'm interested, I just can't think of anything that this would help me to do better, so I'm hoping you can do the thinking for me

    Also learning that InkScape has a snappable axonometric grid is a pretty big deal for me in itself. You know, since I pay for Illustrator I'm not allowed to have nice things... Adobe! *shakes fist

    cheers,
    Meshon
  5. Baile nam Fonn's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Meshon
    [...] what will I gain by using this transform?
    I haven't a clue, to be honest.

    For me, personally, the answer is 'peace of mind'.
    Workmates accuse me of being obsessive compulsive, but I reckon that I just have some slightly over-developed perfectionism.

    Oh, and I probably have less idea than you how the math works.
    Wikipedia told me that 'true' isometric has to have 120° angles, for some reason or other. So I s'pose that's where the 30 and 120 degree bits came from?
    The equations were completely opaque to my mind.
    All I know is that I wanted Inkscape's grid to agree with the transform, so they could be happy together and harmonious and stuff.
    Updated 04-15-2015 at 08:30 AM by Baile nam Fonn
  6. Meshon's Avatar
    I'll probably keep using 45º 57.7% but I have to admit, the idea that the sides would be the same length also appeals to me on some deep, fundamental level Thank you for this post though, reading the links and my follow-up work has taught me a few new things, so that's ++good!

    cheers,
    Meshon