• Welcome to SC4 Devotion Forum Archives.

RTMT Prop Sizes and Proportionality

Started by z, December 20, 2008, 08:11:05 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Should existing props be modified when necessary to be properly proportionate?

Yes
10 (100%)
No
0 (0%)
Doesn't matter to me
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 10

z

First of all, as an introduction, I am happy to announce that jestarr has volunteered to work on the RTMT diagonal stations project.  Jestarr is probably familiar to most of you, at least through his creations, so I think you know we're going to get some really high quality work here.

As he was looking at the existing station props in preparation for his work, he noticed that some of them were not sized in proportion to the game standard, or for that matter, to other RTMT props.  Here's the example he showed me:



You'll undoubtedly recognize two of the bus shelters in the picture as the default RTMT bus stop, formally known as the London Bus Stop, or the TfL shelter.  The stairs are the standard RTMT subway stairs, and the other bus shelter is something jestarr created just for comparison, with Sims sitting and standing for reference.  Notice that the Sims look just the right size to walk down the subway stairs.  As jestarr points out, his shelter is 5 m high (15 ft), while the standard RTMT shelter is almost 10 m high (30 ft), with seats about 3 times what they should be.  Also, notice how the London shelter towers over the phone booth.  Since jestarr has to redo many of the props from scratch in order to get diagonal versions (including this one), he is proposing to shrink this shelter down to the proper size.  Nothing else would be changed.  This would be done in such a way so that all props that were already existing in your cities that were resized by jestarr would also show up properly resized as well, with no bulldozing required.  This way, you wouldn't have to worry about having two sizes of the same prop.  And of course, most of the props wouldn't have to be changed at all.

This proposal makes eminent sense to me, and I favor it strongly.  However, before authorizing a change this comprehensive, I thought it would be best to check with you, the players, to see how you felt.  If the vast majority of people like the sizes the way they are, we'll leave them.  So please vote, and feel free to post your views on this subject.

dedgren

QuoteShould existing props be modified when necessary to be properly proportionate?

Heh, Steve- is that even open to question?  If I were the creator of a nice, but objectively oversized or otherwise out of scale prop, I would take it as a huge compliment that someone would think enough of my work to take the time to resize/rescale it.


David
D. Edgren

Please call me David...

Three Rivers Region- A collaborative development of the SC4 community
The 3RR Quick Finder [linkie]


I aten't dead.  —  R.I.P. Granny Weatherwax

Skype: davidredgren

nerdly_dood

I also favor this proposition - big bus shelters just don't seem right, especially when they're as big as many smaller houses in-game...  :thumbsup:
My days here are numbered. It's been great and I've had a lot of fun, but I've moved on to bigger and better things.
—   EGO  VOBIS  VADELICO   —
Glory be unto the modder and unto the fun and unto the city game!

z

#3
Quote from: dedgren on December 20, 2008, 08:32:11 PM
Heh, Steve- is that even open to question?

Not any more!  If this were something that applied only to new situations, I wouldn't have asked.  But as it means that props are going to change in existing cities for anyone who upgrades, I thought it would be worth asking, just to make sure that I wasn't going to get a lot of comments alon the lines of, "Why did you shrink my bus stops?  I LIKED them big!"  Fortunately, it appears that that's not going to happen on any large scale.  So I've given the go-ahead to jestarr to do as he sees fit here.

cogeo

#4
It's definitely good that RTMT will finally have purpose-built models. When I started making V3 I wasn't BATting, so I had to use what was available by the time. That's why V3 required a bunch of (mostly ill-fitted) dependencies. The LU subway station (and its derivatives Additional Subway Entrance Props) was actually the only model specifically made for RTMT (thanks mcdrye)! Now this is changing. And I was really glad to hear that jestarr has offered to make some new props. I'm sure he's going to deliver top-quality products as always!

Now that there are many expereienced people around, I think it's bloody time for making props up to specs, or more precisely make specs for the props. The only "specs" required in V3 were:
- Busstop shelters must face South (negative-Y).
- Busstop shelters must be centered in the X-direction (left-right).
- Subway entrances must face South (negative-Y).
- Subway entrances must be centered in the X-direction (left-right).
- Subway entrances may span up to about 4 meters in the Y direction (max Y<=+4.00), there are those newspaper props there. They can be longer in the negative Y direction (there's nothing there).

And of course, no prop-specific lots were to be made (eg roadtop bustop with busstop prop A or B) - this would make the number of lots unmanageable - instead RTMT consists of generic lots, capable of accomodating all props that comply to the specs. That was the idea, and I think it would be best to keep it in V4 too.

As said above, I had to use ill-suited models in V3. For example there is no spec about the position of props centre in the Y-direction (ie how much to the front or back it should be moved). One of the biggest problems in RTMT is the limeted space on the sidewalks. So this has to be done very carefully. Move it a bit forwards, and it will enter the road; move it a bit backwards and it will touch (or enter) the buildings. I have used successfullly (or almost successfully) models that weren't designed for this purpose, eg the Big Blue BusStop (offset in the Y-direction quite a lot) or DPMO Busstop (too deep). For anyone interested, this was done by utilising the Resource Key Type 4 property (can among others offset a model). Then SimGoober released his rural busstops, and those were the only ones that worked without such problems.

Now we don't need to go through all this again. First of all there are needed some specs about the maximum sizes of props.
- For V3 the max width for subways (used in mcdrye's models) was 2.310m. It barely fits in Avenue and GLR-in-Avenue stations (the have the narrowest sidewalks). RalphaelNinja's subway model is 2.305m wide (according to the XML). I think the above requirement must be kept. Making them wider is impossible, as there is no space, while making them narrower would make them look unrealistic.
- For Busstop shelters someone should examine the max allowed width and depth of the models. Also examine if the prop should be centered in the Y-direction as well (I think they should, as the V3 lots were designed basically to make best use of SG's models, which are more or less centered). And the model for the tests doesn't need to be a perfect busstop, it could be a simple box, it's just for making measurements.
- The same procedure should be carried out for subway entrances as well, esp verify the max positive Y requirement, and make a spec about the max negative Y.
- As V4 may also have diagonal props as well, additional specs are required for diagonal stations. And while this is quite easy for centered busstop shelters (you just need to rotate the straight model by 45°, together with the LODs), for subways that aren't necessarily centered this can prove a headache. The solution here could be a paradigm (simple) BAT. The important thing here is the back side of the model, if the current layout is going to be kept. Someone will have to desing a diagonal prop of newspaper stands too, lol - and maybe incorporate the prop in the paradigm BAT (then BATters can easily compare their BATs against this prop, and delete it before exporting). Remember, you may not alter the lots for fitting props as neeeded, instead prop must be made in a way that would allow them to be used in the (one and only) lot without changes.
- There is also another problem concerning models rotated by 45°, one side of the model may look too dark. This is due to the ligting rig. Is this gmax-only? I had met this problem in the past, and had to make a modified lighting rig to overcome it, but lost it due to a HD crash. Does BSC have a solution for this?

Now about the model in the pic, i have some comments to make:
- Steve, the busstops shown here look like pushed backwards, and quite a lot, I would add. Is this some new version of the lots? I'm afraid they will look stuck to (if not entering) the zoned buildings. Many ingame midrise and highrise buildings have little or no space left for this. While having some space in front of the busstop looks more realistic, problems like the above aren't unlikely at all. Some testing will tell what's needed here.
- The new busstop shelters, though 5m tall look considerably low, to my option. And I don't compare them only to the original model (which is indeed huge), it looks low even compared to the phonebooth and the subway. And as a consequence, it looks low-and-wide too. It migth be interesting to see how it fares against the ingame model too. SC4 isn't exactly a scale-accurate game. Small props are oversized (often too much), to emphasize details. People aren't 3.5m tall, neither fences 4m tall in reality. SimGoober's busstops are at least 6.5m tall, as far as I can tell, and they don't really look big. I think the height for these should be set to some 6m. It's far from perfect, but taking into account the whole context (other busstops, other "small" props, as well as the game's squashing effect), it would be a good compromise, I think. It would even ease the "low-and-wide" look too.
- I don't know what the others think about this, but the textures look too dark and "dull" to me. While such textures are fine for big buildings (jestarr's industrials first come to mind), I think they aren't the best choice for (relatively) small props, as they cause the props to somehow "disappear" or to become "deemphasized". Small props should rather used lighter, more saturated textures in order to improve distinctiveness, and emphasize them further. Such props that first come to mind are (again) jestarr's BagsOnPallet props; though using quite light and saturated textures they look fine, because of their small size. Also SimGoober's busstops use textures (esp check those reds, orange, white and blue) use textures/colours that would be an eyesore if used on large buildings. But in SG's busstops they are just fine, because of their relatively small size. It may be just my preference, but I can definitely say that I like them more than their dark counterparts. And I may run the risk of being branded as extremely snobbish, for criticising jestarr's work (one of the best BATTers around), but that's my opinion. I hope he is convinced!  ;)

Looking forward to seeing some more pics!

z

#5
Quote from: cogeo on December 30, 2008, 05:06:14 PM
- Steve, the busstops shown here look like pushed backwards, and quite a lot, I would add. Is this some new version of the lots? I'm afraid they will look stuck to (if not entering) the zoned buildings. Many ingame midrise and highrise buildings have little or no space left for this. While having some space in front of the busstop looks more realistic, problems like the above aren't unlikely at all. Some testing will tell what's needed here.

I haven't touched the position of the shelters in the lots.  I noticed this too; it seems to be some sort of Lot Editor artifact, although it doesn't seem to affect all the props.  (That's the unchanged London Bus Stop in the picture, also.)  When you actually plop these lots, the shelter is properly positioned so that it doesn't overhang the edge of the sidewalk, and the shelter is almost right up to the road.  I've noticed this anomaly with all the lots containing the London Bus Stop.

EDIT: The picture at the top of this thread was actually taken by jestarr, who was using the stock version of everything, taken straight out of the online RTMT V3.50 distribution.  So it's not something that got accidentally introduced, either, since he and I see the same thing in the Lot Editor.  SimGoober's bus stops, on the other hand, appear in the Lot Editor just as they do in the game.  From what I've seen so far, it appears that only the London Bus Stop acts like this.

Quote- The new busstop shelters, though 5m tall look considerably low, to my option. And I don't compare them only to the original model (which is indeed huge), it looks low even compared to the phonebooth and the subway. And as a consequence, it looks low-and-wide too. It migth be interesting to see how it fares against the ingame model too. SC4 isn't exactly a scale-accurate game. Small props are oversized (often too much), to emphasize details. People aren't 3.5m tall, neither fences 4m tall in reality. SimGoober's busstops are at least 6.5m tall, as far as I can tell, and they don't really look big. I think the height for these should be set to some 6m. It's far from perfect, but taking into account the whole context (other busstops, other "small" props, as well as the game's squashing effect), it would be a good compromise, I think. It would even ease the "low-and-wide" look too.

I've noticed this too.  "Properly proportioned" actually seems a bit small, even though 5m would be very high for a bus stop in the real world.  But 10m was definitely too much.  This is actually part of the reason I asked the original question in this thread.  Your suggestion of 6m sounds like it might be just right.  I think it would be good to try this out before we make too many more props; I like your idea of setting specs, and now is the time to do it.

cogeo

Aaah, I see what's going on here. This model isn't centered along the Y-axis, and as I explained above I would in no case make an additional lot for it. Instead I used the RKT4 property to position it properly. It is offset by 2.0 meters along the Y axis. This property does not work well in LE (ingame it has minor problems, eg with shadows).

The point is that this also seems to be the case with the new model too. Jes, if your model is centered, then there is no need to use RKT4, you can use RKT1 instead (the default for most models). I had to use RKT4 because some of the models wern't correctly position (as a fix). But as your models are new and purpose-made, this shouldn't be needed.


May you all have a Happy New Year!!!

jestarr

I can make them any size you want, actually. ;)  It would be best, however, if standard  sizes were decided on from the start.  Simgoober's bus stops ranged from 7-8 m in length, 5.5-7 m high, and 3.5-4 m deep.  Length and depth included attached signs and bases.  This brings up another point.  Should the bus stops all have bases?  Having them has advantages and disadvantages.  The main advantage is that any lighting would show correctly in the game.  A disadvantage is that, if using timed people props inside the shelters, the LODs may be excessively complicated for such small models.  Also, unless there's a distinct need for a prop to be offset, I always center my models; this creates less problems, generally. :)  Cheers!

z

I just went through all seven of SimGoober's bus stop designs, and it was very informative.  Most of them looked just a bit on the small side to me, though not enough to really change.  And this exercise did give me a good feeling of what looked right.  I think that the 6m figure is a good one, measured from the lowest point of the roof.  That way, you don't get thrown off by curved roofs, steepled roofs, etc.  Tram stops would be expected to be at least as high and likely higher; I think using the existing scale for each of the current tram stops would be fine.

As for the bases, I would not add them to bus stops that don't already have them, both for the LOD reason, and also because real bus stops typically don't have bases; they're just placed directly on whatever pavement happens to be there.  For me, these two reasons override the lighting advantage; using a base, you may have a smaller lighting issue at the edge of the base anyway, depending on where the station is.  For SimGoober's stations, we might want to keep the bases that are already there, especially if we can use his models and thereby avoid the LOD problem (which I assume we can, since he has timed people props for these models).  Otherwise, if it gets too complicated, we can do without them here too.

Comments on these proposals are welcome; I'd like to wrap up these two issues in the next couple of days, if possible. ;)

b22rian

I would vote for the simpler setup without the bases for the bus stops...

Thanks, Brian

BarbyW

SG's bus stops don't use timed people props but a timed bus stop prop - one with people and one without.
Inside every old person is a young person wondering what happened. TP



Barbypedia: More alive than the original

z

Since there have been no objections to the proposals in my last message, they now will become firm specs.  Specifically, the height of all new or redone bus shelters shall be 6m to the lowest part of the roof.  Also, bases will not be added to new or existing props; I'll leave it to jestarr's discretion what to do about the existing bases in SimGoober's bus shelters.

cogeo

#12
Just some notes here:
- There are some people props (effects) in the pic. These weren't there in V3. In the pic there appears to be ample space in front of the busstop shelter, however this is because the shelter prop is pushed backwards, I think. As far as I can remember, there is little or no space in front of the busstop shelters. Maybe a small test with properly sized and positioned props can tell if this is really the case.
- As a result, I'm afraid these people props will need to be removed. Otherwise this would require an additional "spec": busstop shelter models that are either thin enough, or have properly shaped LODs, to allow for the people props. But I'm afraid this would be too restrictive and demanding, possibly deterring BATters (and I'm not talking about jestarr, of course) from making RTMT props. Maybe making two models (one with people sitting and one without) and displaying them in sequence, just like in SG's busstops (as Barby described) is the "most" that can be done if someone wants people displayed. But putting them in the lots, poses additional requirements, as I explained just above. A decision is needed here.
- As the "spec" about the lowest part of the roof, sorry Steve, but i would object here. Such specs would rather be restricitve and may have unwanted effects. Busstops differ largely in style and dimensions, and therefore proportions may be too different, eg the canopy can be curved, flat or inclined. So I'm not sure if such specs can (should) be enforced here. As an example, SG's Style-4 models (design #11 & #12) are 6.24m tall at their highest, and this includes a part of the support clearly protruding off above the canopy. This means that the "lowest part of the roof" is much lower than 6m, as you can roughly guess from the pics; it rather looks some 4.0-4.5m to me, and the busstop doesn't really look low (those pleading for "realism", would rather prefer it lower, I think).
- Also about the base thing, why should this become a spec? Some BATters (incl SG) would rather prefer them, for the lighting effects (they provide a convenient surface to reflect the light on, otherwise you have just the shelter). I would leave this to the BATters' own taste. It doesn't really affect the lot(s) in any way. Even if you finally decide to put those people props in the lot(s), LODs wouldn't really be much more complicated, they would just need an additional box (encompassing the base). I have made such LODs for my Rural Rail Stations, and I must say this was quite easy (and I'm in no way the most prominent BATter around).
- "...what to do about the existing bases in SimGoober's bus shelters". Jes, does this mean that you have got SG's gmax files? This would be wonderful news, as these were arguably the best and most popular busstop models in V3. It would be very good to make diagonal versions too, for V4, and in order to keep compatibility with V3.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, for GLR shelters you should probably ask vester. He has made a bunch of tram automata, so he can advise you about tram's heights (with or without the pantograph)

z

#13
Quote from: cogeo on January 06, 2009, 11:04:49 AM
- There are some people props (effects) in the pic. These weren't there in V3. In the pic there appears to be ample space in front of the busstop shelter, however this is because the shelter prop is pushed backwards, I think. As far as I can remember, there is little or no space in front of the busstop shelters. Maybe a small test with properly sized and positioned props can tell if this is really the case.
- As a result, I'm afraid these people props will need to be removed. Otherwise this would require an additional "spec": busstop shelter models that are either thin enough, or have properly shaped LODs, to allow for the people props. But I'm afraid this would be too restrictive and demanding, possibly deterring BATters (and I'm not talking about jestarr, of course) from making RTMT props. Maybe making two models (one with people sitting and one without) and displaying them in sequence, just like in SG's busstops (as Barby described) is the "most" that can be done if someone wants people displayed. But putting them in the lots, poses additional requirements, as I explained just above. A decision is needed here.

Your memory is quite correct about the lack of space in front of the shelters.  Because of this, and the other reasons you described, I think the only reasonable thing to do here is the timed dual model approach, as you and Barby described.

Quote- As the "spec" about the lowest part of the roof, sorry Steve, but i would object here. Such specs would rather be restricitve and may have unwanted effects. Busstops differ largely in style and dimensions, and therefore proportions may be too different, eg the canopy can be curved, flat or inclined. So I'm not sure if such specs can (should) be enforced here. As an example, SG's Style-4 models (design #11 & #12) are 6.24m tall at their highest, and this includes a part of the support clearly protruding off above the canopy. This means that the "lowest part of the roof" is much lower than 6m, as you can roughly guess from the pics; it rather looks some 4.0-4.5m to me, and the busstop doesn't really look low (those pleading for "realism", would rather prefer it lower, I think).

Here's where it gets interesting.  We found from the original poll that everybody would like to see these shelters properly proportioned, but what that means seems to be a little bit elusive.  Here are four pictures various different shelters; to keep the pictures together for ease of comparison, I'll leave all commentary to the end.






The first picture is simply the first picture in this thread, repeated here for comparison.  At the time, you said:

QuoteThe new busstop shelters, though 5m tall look considerably low, to my option. And I don't compare them only to the original model (which is indeed huge), it looks low even compared to the phonebooth and the subway.

I agreed with you, and still do.  But look at the next picture, which is SG's Style 4 model, and the one after that, which is SG's Style 5 model.  If you compare them to the standard Maxis phone shelter next to them, you'll see that they're both slightly shorter than jestarr's model, which you felt was too short.  Yet you said of the first model, "the busstop doesn't really look low."  I think they may simply look better because they're not as long as jestarr's model; they're more familiarly proportioned.  But if jestarr's model looks low even compared to the phonebooth and the subway, then that applies even more so to these two models.  Specifically, I don't think the ceiling of a bus shelter (meaning the lowest part, so that Sims don't have to duck when they step into it) should ever be lower than the height of the standard Maxis phone shelter.  That's why I thought your original 6m proposal was a good one; it would make the bus shelter slightly taller than the phone shelter, while still far smaller than the hulking TfL shelters.

The last picture is SG's Style 6 model.  I've included it for a few reasons.  First, I think it shows why you don't want to have a height spec based on the tallest part of the shelter.  But even the lowest part of the ceiling is noticeably higher than the phone shelter, and by extension, SG's other two bus shelters as well.  Yet the shelter as a whole looks well proportioned.

So I think you definitely have a point that no single number should be used to enforce a height limit for the bus shelters.  The last picture seems to be a good demonstration of that.  But I think it would be good to specify a recommended range; otherwise, we can end up with more bus shelters like the TfL.  So I would modify my proposal to be a recommended range of 5m to 6m for the height to the bottom of the ceiling.  These would only be recommendations, though.  I would really appreciate getting feedback on this soon from whoever is interested, as jestarr needs to know what, if any, height limit there is before he can build his shelters.

Quote- Also about the base thing, why should this become a spec? Some BATters (incl SG) would rather prefer them, for the lighting effects (they provide a convenient surface to reflect the light on, otherwise you have just the shelter). I would leave this to the BATters' own taste. It doesn't really affect the lot(s) in any way. Even if you finally decide to put those people props in the lot(s), LODs wouldn't really be much more complicated, they would just need an additional box (encompassing the base). I have made such LODs for my Rural Rail Stations, and I must say this was quite easy (and I'm in no way the most prominent BATter around).

You're right; this doesn't really need to be a spec.  It was really in answer to a question of jestarr's about what to do when constructing new models.  So my answer was really directed to him, and it really applied simply to the models being redone, which don't have bases anyway.  But if someone else wants to build a shelter with a base, that's fine.

Quote- "...what to do about the existing bases in SimGoober's bus shelters". Jes, does this mean that you have got SG's gmax files? This would be wonderful news, as these were arguably the best and most popular busstop models in V3. It would be very good to make diagonal versions too, for V4, and in order to keep compatibility with V3.

At the time I wrote that, we hadn't heard back from SimGoober, and were hopeful that we could get the models.  However, we have since learned from SG that the models have been lost. ()sad()  So that eliminates that question.

So I think that leaves the height issue as the only one left to be resolved.  I've tried to elaborate on what the implications of some of the different heights are, but in the end, I'm pretty flexible.  So please, everyone, get your comments in on this, and then we can wrap it up. :)

b22rian

hello, great work you guys are putting into this  &apls

On the height issue the recommended ceiling range looks like a very good idea to me..
With 5.0 to 6.0 looking like a fine range for the ceiling heights as you showed in the pics..

But the realism and proportions i think look quite good to me.. No there prolly not exact but
more than satisfactory for me at least..,

Thanks Brian

cogeo

Checked SG's models a bit further, and the heights (LODshell/max) are:
- Style 4 (design #11 - #12): 6.24m
- Style 5 (design #13 - #15): 4.45m
- Style 6 (design #16 - #18): 6.70m
- The Maxis red phonebooth is 6.00m tall.

To me Style 4 looks just right, Style 5 really short, and Style 6 rather tall. What is really interesting is that the height difference between Styles 4 and 6 isn't really that important (7%). Obviously this has to do with the design characteristics: Style 4 models have those protruding poles above the canopy (which is placed quite lower than the max height implies), while for Style 6 the canopy spans to the very top. This gives the impression fo being "narrow and tall" (which in turn makes the model look just "tall"), though it's not essentially narrower (6.8m vs 7.0m for Style 4). So the conclusion here is that's not just the size that's important, but the "proportionality" as well! I think that's the "problem" with Jes'  model, it looks "wide and low", giving the impression of being "just low". Jes, could you please tell us the max height of that model (and the ceiling height too)? It would be useful for comparisons.

Another point, something that makes the models harder to compare is that in these LE pics, the jes' model is pushed to the back. This makes it look "taller" (of compared against the phonebooth) than if it was properly placed. Pls use RKT1 (instead of RKT4), as the model is centered and therefore there's no need to move it (this was needed for off-centric models). Then the comparison will make much more sense. It might even be meaningful to make a custom lot and place the models next to each other for a more direct comparison.

z

#16
Quote from: cogeo on January 07, 2009, 03:33:43 PM
Checked SG's models a bit further, and the heights (LODshell/max) are:
- Style 4 (design #11 - #12): 6.24m
- Style 5 (design #13 - #15): 4.45m
- Style 6 (design #16 - #18): 6.70m
- The Maxis red phonebooth is 6.00m tall.

These are the same numbers I found; jestarr's shelter is 5m.  But the proportion of these numbers didn't look right.  For example, the phone booth didn't look 20% higher than jestarr's shelter to me.  Yet it is.  I blew up these pictures and then measured everything on my screen.  The numbers are all correct.  Also, for Style 4, the low point of the ceiling is about 4.5m, essentially the same as Style 5.

Quote
To me Style 4 looks just right, Style 5 really short, and Style 6 rather tall.

And to me, 4 and 5 both look short, and 6 looks a bit tall.  A lot of this appears to be very subjective.  The one thing that strikes me, though, is the first picture, which is the only one that has Sims in it.  They look like they have barely enough room to stand up under the shelter, which is 5m.  Of course, they're way out of proportion, too.  The best estimate I've seen is that they're 3.5m to 4m tall, which makes sense for this picture.

QuoteWhat is really interesting is that the height difference between Styles 4 and 6 isn't really that important (7%). Obviously this has to do with the design characteristics: Style 4 models have those protruding poles above the canopy (which is placed quite lower than the max height implies), while for Style 6 the canopy spans to the very top. This gives the impression fo being "narrow and tall" (which in turn makes the model look just "tall"), though it's not essentially narrower (6.8m vs 7.0m for Style 4). So the conclusion here is that's not just the size that's important, but the "proportionality" as well! I think that's the "problem" with Jes'  model, it looks "wide and low", giving the impression of being "just low".

I agree completely.  It's very easy to fool one's sense of size by using different shapes; many classic optical illusions are based on this fact.  In the same way, I would have guessed very different proportions for the buildings compared to the measurements that you supplied and I verified.

So where does this leave us?  For a lower limit, let's look at the Maxis phone booth, which is 6m tall.  If shelter ceilings are much less than 5m tall at their lowest point, than any Sims who can fit into the shelters are going to have a hard time reaching the phone!  (SG's shortest shelters seem to be right at the lowest limit of what works here, especially when you take into account the height of the Sims in the first picture.)  At the upper end, 6m seems plenty high for a ceiling height; in the last picture, which was chosen because it's SG's tallest shelter, the effective ceiling height is right about 6m.  Also, raising the height of long shelters such as jestarr's may make them look better proportioned, as you indicated.  Very unusual shelters may have reason to go outside this range, but these latest findings confirm my belief that 5m to 6m is a good "recommended" range.

Again, other opinions are welcome...