Scale limitation?

thomthom

Try this:

Take a group or component, activate the scale tool and type in 1000 to scale it up.
Then, try to scale it down, by typing in 0,001.

I get an error saying "Invalid Scale" when I try to scale it down. But scaling down 0,01 then once more 0,1 - that works!

Anyone else seeing this behaviour?

Gaieus

Confirmed
Moved to bug reports (if you don't mind).

Edit; you don't even need to scale it up first; just take an object and try to scale it down by 0.001 (0,001 on my system)

BTW can it be NOT buggy on an English system (with the dot as decimal separator)?

pilou

It's the same for a simple selection! (not only for a group)
But maybe it's a secure for not see something disapear in a winck

thomthom

@gaieus said:

Edit; you don't even need to scale it up first; just take an object and try to scale it down by 0.001 (0,001 on my system)

Scaling up was main to prove that you can scale up by 1000, but not down. An asymmetric bug.

Gaieus

@unknownuser said:

It's the same for a simple selection! (not only for a group)

True, I did it with a non grouped suare, too.

@thomthom said:

Scaling up was main to prove that you can scale up by 1000, but not down. An asymmetric bug.

I see, thanks for explaining. Smart thinking.

Now please, someone with an English system (and dot as decimal separator) could confirm, too? (Although it shouldn't be dependant on the system IMO - just in case).

mitcorb

Same with my system here in U.S.
I noticed after getting the error message it appeared that it tried to default to 50%. I allowed that. Then I undid back to the 1000x and used the .01x and .1x and got the group back to its original size. This was a simple cube, if that matters.

Gaieus

Thanks a lot.

Now I also wonder if it is Windows only or a Mac would show this bug, too.
Could anyone confirm, please?

Jean Lemire

Hi folks.

I made this constatation when I discovered SU at version 3. It has always been working like that, I think.

Try scaling by 10000. You will need two scaling operations by 0.01 each to get back to original size.

I dont think that this is a bug but rather a limit for the allowed number used as a scale factor.

To my knowledge, the lower limit is very close to 0,001. If you type 0,001 you get an error message.

However, if you type 0,00100000001 it will work. MAybe this is a bug after all and 0,001 should be allowed. Then, why not 0,0001 ?

Just ideas.