P Retondo

Convert polylines to arcs and lines, etc., using the "Decompose" command. Polygons, by contrast, are by definition composed only of line segments and will only yield line segments, unless you redraft in the manner you describe. If you convert a polyline to a polygon, you've lost all the curvature information. I think your suggestion about making the selection handles for objects fit the "smallest rectangle," which in many cases would be rotated, is a very interesting one.

Islandmon, thanks for the insight. I stepped through my movie, and I could clearly identify the key frames. Unfortunately, the frame shown above is one of them! Maybe size is one of the factors affecting my situation. I zoomed out to reduce the overall size of the view, because I find that it creates the animations faster with smaller file size. I would have been willing to accept the on-screen resolution I was seeing from the rendered view, but it seems my expectations were a little high. I'll try to keep the factors you point out in mind as I do some more experimentation.

Don, not quite sure what you are saying. The correct way to construct a model is to establish a model layer, then in that layer create Layer Links of all the appropriate design layers containing 3d objects. The layers linked can be native to the file, or can be WGR layers. Once you have assembled the model in this way, including any lighting desired, position a view that is to your liking and create a Viewport on a sheet layer. The viewport is then looking at your single model layer containing all the Layer Links. From the viewport you can adjust the exact perspective, but I find it easier to adjust the perspective in the model layer itself, using the various viewing tools.

Nicholas and Jonathan, thanks, I'll try all those suggestions!

Don, what he means is that Layer Links are not supported by a WGR, so any layer referenced into the "master" file will not contain any layer links. Since "model" layers in the referenced file are constructed using Layer Links, those layers will basically be empty in the master file. You have to go back to basics by referencing your actual Design Layers, or the layers that the objects were constructed in, and then gathering them into a new Model Layer in your "master" document by creating Layer Links. PS: I'm not sure, but I think that Islandmon is using "master" and "subordinate" in the reverse sense of your original post; I'm using the terms as I think you are - i.e., the file that contains the references is the "master" and the files in which the "pieces" are created are the "referenced" files. I actually think something like "container file" and "contributor files" might be more intuitive.

You can see textures in Section Viewports, but they are applied in orientations that can be bizarrely different from what you see in an elevation.

My Renderworks QT animations are not giving me the image quality I had hoped for. I'm using the "Video" compression type at "best" quality. The range of colors, pixel size, and aliasing don't come close to what I see on screen (72 dpi, presumably) with a static Renderworks display. Does anyone know whether any of the other QT options can offer better quality? The following image shows a frame captured from the video (which is considerably sharper than what the QT player is showing on screen at the same size!!), compared to a jpeg created directly from the VW rendering. The comparison does show the color banding and lack of shadow gradation in the video as opposed to the jpeg image. BTW, the file size of the VW jpeg times the number of movie frames is approximately equal to the video file size. The fact that the video player displays much greater aliasing and lack of edge resolution than it's own still frame capture suggests that the quality of the video display itself is a factor. Does anyone have any advice about that issue?

Christiaan, I'd agree that this is a bug. Any such string that starts with the zero digit should be handled as a text string instead of as a number.

AutoCAD content can definitely mess with things. I have a symbol that won't display its handles, which came from an AutoCAD drawing made for a plumbing manufacturer (why are all these AutoCAD drawings so poorly constructed?).

I think I put this on the wishlist in the past, but I'd like to renew the desire to have the animation path captured from a realtime walkthrough. Then we could do a quick tour of a project in OpenGL, and have a RenderWorks animation created from the saved "movements."

When you start the animation, your initial view should be rendered in the background behind the animation dialog box. I'm not 100% clear that you are telling us this is so. If it isn't, and the view is a wireframe instead, you will get wireframe results. BTW, it would be better if the animation module were able to deliver the rendering type as specified, regardless of how the model is rendered in the current view.

Robert, thanks!

JHE, a couple of things. Do you know about copying/retrieving a file using the Workgroup Reference method? Second, you never said whether the layer you are working in is a Design layer or a Sheet layer.

Mike, love your suggestion about doing away with dragging symbols out of walls. If we want to get rid of one, just select and delete. I believe, if memory serves, that back in the very old days it was not possible to delete a symbol from a wall in that way. With respect to entering position when dragging, it is possible to do so now using the X, Y and L parameters in the geometry bar at the top of the screen. I think what you mean, along the lines of Christiaan's suggestion, is to have some readout of the position with respect to the wall end points. I wonder if that is ultimately so useful - often we want to locate with respect to a T-joined wall, etc., and the program just couldn't deal with all the variables there. I place and move a locus or line as a snapping point myself. I have used the "position" OIP dialog to move a window, say, 2" to the right by using the mathematical expression method for changing the numbers. Recently, I use the "L" parameter in the aforementioned geometry bar while dragging the symbol.

Blink, your components tab is grey because your wall has been assigned a style. Using the OIP, select "Convert to unstyled wall." You can then edit the components. It sounds like your door or window has gotten disengaged from the wall. With an engaged door, don't try to put your cursor on the outlying handles (they aren't control points). Put the cursor directly on a corner of your jamb, then drag when you see the double arrow. To prevent your door from disengaging from the wall, click on the "wall insertion mode" in the mode bar at the top of the screen so that it is not highlighted. Then, you will be unable to drag the door out of the wall. PS: it is customary to give the version of VW and the OS you are working with.

JHE, sorry, my oversight. Based on Steve's observations about his files working fine on other machines, you might be able to shed some light by checking things out in similar fashion. Does his step-by-step problem description match what you are observing? The reason I added a caution about using the menu to reset Layer and Class View options (for the test) is that it is remotely possible a keyboard shortcut has been assigned to one of those options, and that you are inadvertantly switching the Class View to Active only.

Steve, I can confirm that I don't experience the problem you describe. You've already verified that the problem is isolated to your computer, so I would have to suspect that your VW installation has gone faulty. I note that you haven't done the free upgrade to 12.5.1, which is in itself worthwhile. The best I can come up with is to suggest that you uninstall VW and do a fresh installation of 12.5.1 - it might solve your problem. After doing your fresh install, hold off if you've been using a customized workspace, and run a quick test or two using one of the standard workspaces. I'd also take care to do all re-setting of the Layer and Class View settings using the menu instead of keyboard shortcuts, just for the test.

Christiaan, thanks for the update - it prompted me to try out the locus suggestion, and I withdraw my wishlist request, it seems as though the program actually already behaves as I thought I wished it did! Thanks, Antone and Mike, for incredibly helpful advice. I also note that if I convert a PIO to a symbol, it no longer carries with it the wall infill that it used to, so my understanding of the way things work seems to be a bit outdated.

Christiaan, has your question been answered? I am assuming that the image you posted shows the behavior you DO NOT want. If you still have the problem, I'm guessing that the door handle in the 2d view is creating the outer boundary limit of the symbol, and that the wall is being cut to that position. I've experienced this kind of problem in the past, and I've suggested on the wish list that a specific object type (say a locus with a particular class name) be created that would force the wall cut to occur at a desired location instead at the extreme limits of the symbol object. Note that in a door PIO with trim, there is a "wall simulation" that actually fills the area between the actual cut and the jamb. That suggests a possible workaround you could play with. Create a door with trim on one side of 0 thickness. Note in the attached image that the selection handles show the actual extents of the symbol with 0-thickness trim, and that the PIO has filled in the wall up to the jambs:

Katie, I wonder why we have to keep going over the same ground? I think it's because those who are contributing complaints here 1) do not make it clear that they understand all of the variables involved in snapping/selection behavior (not saying that you don't understand, just that you are not writing it down with thoroughness) and 2) are not giving enough precise information about what is being experienced. Everyone, could we give Katie a hand? Steve, appreciate that you have given us your system specs, JHE could you also do that? This might be a Mac-only problem. I have never experienced the problems being discussed except for the following: - When I have inadvertantly changed my Class Options - When the object is in another layer and not in Top/Plan view - When I have pasted an object and its class is set to "invisible" the object can remain visible but not selectable. - Under certain circumstances, after doing some quick zooming and /or panning, selection handles will not appear. The object is actually selected (confirmed by the OIP), but I have to close the file and re-open it in order to restore handle visibility. This last situation is a bug, and I have attempted to report it but can't reproduce the sequence of events that leads to the problem.

Robert, right, that's the system I use. The original question had to do with a slab that is the thickness of the entire floor/ceiling assembly. Joists in that situation are not rendered visible in a Section Viewport unless the user has checked "separate cross sections." The request was to make them visible with "merged cross sections/create structural and nonstructural groups" when the slab encompasses the joist objects.

My joists all show up in section because I have a floor that is 1.5" thick (for example) and a separate object, usually an extrude, to model the ceiling. That way, the space between elements isn't (usually!) joined into a single white space. Structural elements in a floor should be visible when the proper options in a Section Viewport are select, and I hope that this is fixed - particularly as I hope that some time in the future we will have an integrated floor/ceiling assembly object that could have components, similar to a wall.

Just checked it out - it doesn't work in floor slabs for either wood or steel framing members. There are some situations where this option does help, but apparently not in yours. I always make my floor slab the actual thickness of the floor sheathing and finish, so I don't run into this problem. I think the section viewport object has a ways to go before it's firing on all cylinders. You can convert a steel beam (joist) to a 3d object, then rotate it and play with it. The conversion is to 3d polys, so boolean operations can be a bit cumbersome. I've always taken the cross section and extruded it in order to model things. Like with a lot of other PIO's, I wish that they would become more useful objects when converted.

Will, you are probably using the "merged cross sections" option. Try also checking the "create structural and non-structural groups" option in the Advanced Properties -> Attributes dialog box. For framing members that works, but not sure about steel beams.

JHE, is this behavior noted in a viewport annotation space or sheet layer, or is it in a design layer? Or does it occur irrespective of the above? I think you ought to try to get someone at NNA to have a look at one of your files and try to duplicate the problem.