Jump to content

J. Wallace

Member
  • Content Count

    647
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

59 Excellent

4 Followers

About J. Wallace

  • Rank
    500 Club

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Landscape/permaculture/rainwater harvesting designer
  • Homepage
    www.jaandesigns.ca
  • Location
    Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

1,184 profile views
  1. Hello everyone I started having an interesting challenge on Friday with a small site model and a curved retaining wall site modifier that was inserted. I've never experienced this issue and hope others might see an easy fix. To clarify: I have a small site model (under 1/2 acre) that was created using survey 3d polygons. All the polygons have low numbers of vertices so the model itself seems stable and easy to move around. In this design we are placing a new retaining wall that curves across the rear landscape. The file is not huge 120+ mb It appears that when one creates a retaining wall site modifier in a curved shape that the results can cause severe slow downs and crashes in this file. If you take a look at the second image I attached you'll see countless lines coming from the site model and running behind the retaining wall, this is where I think the issue is If I delete the retaining wall site modifier the file behaves itself, when it's present I have to wait several minutes for the site model to update and for the open GL to render. Even then the open GL looks poor regardless of settings. This has never happened to me on my current computer. When I change the retaining wall shape and reduce the curves, add a new retaining wall site modifier makes for a more stable file. I can conclude that these curves are causing some issues with the site model and making the file un-workable even with a robust computer. Has anyone noticed this limitation before? It's not great for us as we often work with organic shapes. I've attached the file having removed everything but the site model, the wall, retaining wall site modifier and a small pad in front. No modifier conflicts are reported. I would love to hear peoples comments on this. Thanks for any thoughts you might have. Site model.vwx
  2. @fhunt whenever I have run into similar challenges I make another plant symbol (duplicate the original in the resource browser) and give it another schedule size. Not ideal, but it works.
  3. Kelly have you tried to import in meters vs mm?
  4. Good point @Tony Kostreski it's a bit opposite in my situation. The plant cloud which is working was produced in a 1:96 scale, this distorted version is coming from a layer that is 1:2500.
  5. I seem to be having a challenge using/creating landscape areas within a specific file. If I draw a polyline or directly draw a landscape area I get a very distorted shape that is not close to what I'm after. If I create the shape/convert to a landscape area in a new blank file it works fine, as soon as I copy and paste this into my working drawing I get the same distortion. Not seen this before but hoping I can sort this out.
  6. Thanks very much @Tony Kostreski That's a huge help. I like the fact I can add a common or botanical name.
  7. I ended up sorting this out using this section from the help files. It's a bit vague but got me to where I needed to go. http://app-help.vectorworks.net/2019/eng/index.htm#t=VW2019_Guide%2FAnnotation%2FCreating_Data_Tag_Styles.htm%23XREF_33520_Creating_Tag_Styles&rhsearch=edit data tag&rhsyns=
  8. Hello everyone I'm trying to sort out how one can create a custom data tag. I'm hoping to do so for use with existing trees. I find the tags for existing tree symbols really cumbersome, for some reason they are much harder to work with when compared with plant symbols. See image below as an example of aligning tags, plant symbols align easily using the align tool, the existing tree tags never seem to align correctly which leaves one to adjust tags manually which can be a large task if your drawing contains hundreds of ex trees. I was hoping to work around this by creating a data tag for existing trees but haven't sorted out how to do this. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks
  9. We had to shift form a 2012 Mac Pro last year and opted for the Imac Pro. Happy with the performance to date, the price was a bit tough to swallow. Saying that we hope to get five years of service from this unit which makes it affordable when looking at the yearly cost. Good luck with your journey.
  10. Happy to finally see an announcement for the new Mac Pro... Pricing will be interesting, but happy to see expandability is part of Apples focus. https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/
  11. @jeff prince the property sizes I work with would be 1/2 acre up to 30...at least at this point. I think a big difference is your collecting your own drone data. I'm receiving the data from an operator. I'm going to send along a message later today and ask him some specifics. Your project is looking great, have fun.
  12. That is fantastic. Your mesh looks very good, do you find it cumbersome to navigate with? The mesh files I receive are usually huge 500gb+ so I find I set up a file for the mesh only to make it easier to reference. Exciting to read about your experience and thanks for sharing.
  13. Nice looking work...your mesh looks great overlaid onto the site model. Well done.
  14. I'm sad to hear you are leaving, but very happy to hear that family is a priority and this is were your energies will be going. Take care Jim and thank you for all your work.

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...