Jump to content

P Retondo

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by P Retondo

  1. As suggested by some on this board, I upgraded my video card (from a 32MB GeForce2 to a 128MB GeForce3)in an attempt to accelerate realtime walkthroughs on a complex building using Open GL rendering. For those who are interested, this resulted in minimal, if any, improvement. Seems as though processer speed is the key. P4 2.0G785MB RAMWin2000VW 8.5.2 and 9.5.1nVIDIA G3Ti200
  2. Joe, As a long-time user of VW 3D dating back to MiniCAD 4.0, I would guess that your biggest problem is with snapping. Some really strange things can happen when you move an object in 3D space and think you are snapping to one thing, when the program is actually snapping to some object in the background. Very difficult to control. A program like ACAD or Rhino, which has multiple windows from different perspectives, is a lot easier to follow when working in 3D because it helps triangulate your position. Here's a technique I use frequently when moving objects around. I try to restrict my moves to the 2 dimensions of the working plane. When snapping, I place a 2D object, such as a 2D locus, in the foreground. When a 3D object snaps to a 2D object, it cannot change its position along the axis normal to the working plane (normally, the screen). This will give you a lot more control. It also helps to create temporary groups, and enter them so that you limit the number of objects you are dealing with. VectorWorks has its plusses and minuses, but I think its 2D-3D interface is better than most. Best of luck! [ 05-15-2002: Message edited by: P Retondo ]
  3. Thank you all for your expert advice!
  4. Does anyone have advice on how to improve my hardware to get faster, smoother realtime walkthrough capability? A moderately large GL-rendered model (e.g., an ordinary house) on my computer allows me to navigate smoothly with no jerkiness or hesitation. A large, more complex model, especially with 3D conversion resolution set to high, can be jerky and unresponsive. Would a faster video card improve performance, or is this strictly a processer speed issue? VW 8.5Win 2000P4 2G750MB RAM32MB NVIDIA GeForce2 MX
  5. quote: Originally posted by Matthew Giampapa: Right now there are really two origins. One is the immovable center of the drawing world, and the other is the user-defined origin, which you move with the move origin tool. (At least that is my understanding of it) So when you have layers that are at a different scale, you have to take into account that the user origin itself is being measured as a discrete distance from the center of the drawing. Matthew GiampapaTechnical Support So, Matthew, some questions. 1) What do you mean by "take into account that the user origin itself is being measured as a discrete distance from the center of the drawing," when the word "distance" is ambiguous in this context -- it could mean "distance" in one of several different scales, or "distance" on the page. Also, what do you mean by "center of the drawing" -- is that center of the page (in which case, I don't understand what you mean at all), "center of the drawing world," or what? 2)What system is used to define the sheet extents, and how are layers of different scales aligned to that sheet boundary? 3)When you define a new (user) origin, is that now a layer-by-layer choice, or does it apply to every layer in the file? If the latter, how are layers of different scale affected? [ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: P Retondo ]
  6. I find that print scaling does not work properly if you do what seems the natural thing: select a new page size, then change the print scaling percentage. It only works properly if, in this exact order, I 1)change the page size in Print Setup, then 2) set the Print Area (under the Page pull-down menu), then 3) go back to Print Setup to enter print scaling. This behavior may have to do with my specific settings - I usually do this in order to print an Architectural D sheet at 50% on a 13x19 sheet, or smaller on an 11x17. I don't understand why the above steps can't be done in the order 1), 3), 2), but it hasn't worked for me - if I do it that way, the print scaling setting returns to 100%. VW 9.0.1Win 2000HP 1220CP4 2G/768
  7. Dear NNA, I believe that the discussion board sites are not handling persistent cookies (at least for Explorer 5.0) correctly. My username does not appear in this window at the beginning of each session, as it used to, but it does on subsequent posts during a session. Also, the folder colors indicating new activity do not update properly. I have my persistent cookies options set to "notify," and I am not getting the notification I used to.
  8. Whenever I've had this problem, it had to do with the door and window classes not being on. Also, if you have not checked the "3D Jamb" box in the door info palette, the door opening will not show when rendered.
  9. It's particularly frustrating not to have alternate coordinate systems in 2D when VW has long been capable of changing coordinate systems in 3D using Working Planes, which allow all tools, move commands, nudge, etc.,to work in alternate, named coordinate systems rotated and translated in 3D space! NNA: How about adapting all that code to the 2D side?
  10. R Mullin and jnr, You speak of economic realities, but I think you're choosing to ignore the fact that VectorWorks is significantly less expensive than competing fully capable CAD programs. In my own experience, an architect dealing with a client who demands first-class service should respond with something like a first-class fee estimate. Should the economic logic be different for those who create software? The tone of entitlement and outrage from some of the users on this bulletin board suggests that they had paid something like $2500 per station for the software. Criticism and suggestions are useful information, as you point out. An insulting tone towards NNA engineers is, however, not useful, and my comments were directed in part to a discomfort I feel about that. I'm not claiming that all is well with version 9. In my own work, I have limited use for 9 since existing work from 8.5.2 doesn't migrate well. I could have returned my copy of version 9 for a refund, but found it worthwhile because of some of the new features. I agree also that the difficulties with the new version do not bode well for the future of the product, and understand that users who have paid thousands of dollars over the years and have a huge investment in the viability of this program might be upset at the moment. I hope that NNA can somehow pull it together. My reading is that they have big plans for VectorWorks, but tried to take too big a jump after purchasing the company. [This message has been edited by P Retondo (edited 10-20-2001).]
  11. Dear all, This bulletin board is an extremely valuable resource, which is why I have continued to follow it for several months. Not only does NNA check in now and then with important information, but the users have supplied me with invaluable and intelligent advice, warnings, and perspectives for the future of the application. I would hope that a few occasions of intemperate expression on the part of some do not spoil anyone's appreciation of the discussion, either at NNA or among VW users. Both users and NNA engineers should spend more effort expressing appreciation for the time spent by each other on this site. It would be nice if NNA could respond more frequently, but I am sure we all understand that they are spread thin. It would be equally nice if users would think twice about venting their frustration with the program and the software engineering process in a way that might create bad feelings. Software is not an easy thing to create, especially in a real world with budgets, deadlines, and marketing. That said, I think we all know how it feels to use an imperfect product day in and day out. Let me ask both "sides" the following question: how much would it be fair to pay for a program that was significantly more useful, bug-free, and responsive to user requests for modification? I'm now a grad student, but used to work in architectural offices and managed the CAD systems there. I'm positive that my former firms would have paid 2-3 times as much for a program with improved capabilities and productivity. Is there a way to increase the ability of NNA to hire more programmers without threatening the base of new users attracted to the initial buy-in price? For example, would architects and engineers be willing to pay extra for a subscription that gives professionals faster fixes and access to new features that others would have to wait for the next release to get?
  12. Open GL rendering in VW 8.5.2 gets slower as the program is used. I just timed this phenomenon: a rendering of a complex design takes 13 seconds when the program is just opened. After a couple of hours of working in VectorWorks, the same rendering takes 34 seconds. After quitting and restarting the program, it again takes 13 seconds to render. Does anyone know why this happens, and does anyone know if the problem has been fixed in 9.0? VW 8.5.2 Win 2000 P4 2G/768 MB
  13. quote: Originally posted by stella: I don't know if 9 has it, but I would love to see a 'fence' option in trimming, like in AutoCad, where you can select a cutting edge, then draw a line through a number of objects, all of which will trim back to that edge. It can be a bit of a pain having to pick each object to trim if there are a lot of them! Stella, I'm a bit confused by your mention of both "fence" and "line / edge", but the following would apply to either kind of trimming object: In VW 8.5 you can select a trimming object (line or polygon)and use <Ctrl + T> to trim all lines or arcs that intersect it. Use a group to exclude objects from being trimmed. A circle or an arc will only trim lines. In VW 9 there is no <Ctrl + T>. However, as with VW 8, the "Intersect Surface" and "Clip Surface" tools will do substantially what you are looking for. You control the objects to be modified by selecting only those objects to be trimmed, plus a polygon or circle that serves as the "fence." The fence must be the "top" object (<ctrl + F> to bring it to the top). The "Intersect Surface" cuts the selected objects at the polygon or circle that is on top - with lines, only the interior portion remains, but for other types you have to delete the original. Arcs are converted to closed polylines. Clearly this could work better, but the tool was not really intended to do a trim. The "Clip Surface" tool deletes the portions of all object inside the "fence." VW 8.5.2 and 9.0.1 Win 2000 [This message has been edited by P Retondo (edited 10-07-2001).]
  14. quote: Originally posted by Andrew Bell@NNA: Extrudes are for true 3-D objects, where they can be rotated out of the X-Y plane, and thus there is no relationship between the ground and the extrude's "local" 2-D space. Andrew, I have offered the same complaint as Archken in the past. The lack of congruence between a 3D extrude's current position and the coordinates of it's 2D ancestor is truly a huge missed opportunity. The 2D/3D interface does not work if this relationship cannot be maintained. The same problem holds with solid additions and subtractions. The way the program works now creates a huge waste of time. What's the big deal with rotation in 3D space? This is what computers are good at. When you enter an edit window for an extrude, the 2D shape has to appear in some 2D coordinate space - why not the space that aligns with the current view and current location of the extrude? What we want to do is this: when viewing an extrude normal to its extruded face, we want to be able to enter the edit window and paste in place a copied 2D object. Then we can edit the extrude's ancestor shape accurately using that pasted object. Similarly, when editing a solid addition or subtraction, we want to be able to paste in additional or substitute objects from the main coordinate space. Since currently the edit window puts these ancestor objects in the position they occupied when the boolean operation was performed, we cannot do what we need to do.
  15. Stella, Someone else told me how to do this, so now it's my turn! Create a new layer at the scale you want, and use layer linking (under the View pull-down menu) to create an image of the layer or layers you want to display. Each linked layer is a separate image, which can be unlocked and moved to any position (x,y,z) you want on the sheet/new layer. Unfortunately, the only way to show just a portion of the information on the linked layer is to create a mask (a white rectangle with a rectangle clipped out of the middle to make a "window.")
  16. Does anyone know the status of a fix for the following version 9 bug reported earlier in these forums: stretching a 3D object by its center handle gives an erroneous result? This is the most serious bug I've seen reported, and I have not seen anyone from NNA acknowledge it. By the way, this error seems to result only when stretching up or down (relative to the screen), not side to side. Further, it is inconsistent - the error is likely to be different when redoing the exact same operation. Try this test: extrude a 2" wide x 6" high rectangle. Place an 8" high rectangle beside it, and attempt to stretch the solid using the bottom or top center handle to the 8" dimension. Redo this several times. The results I get for the y dimension of the solid were as follows: 8.17", 8", 8.084", 8.348", 8", 8", 8.17", ... . Note there is some kind of quantum effect here, perhaps related to pixel size. This behavior seems to be affected also by zoom factor and whether "constraint to grid" is selected. To get the craziest results, do not constrain to grid. VW 9.0.1 Win 2000 PII 333/192 [This message has been edited by P Retondo (edited 10-04-2001).]
  17. quote: Originally posted by MikeB: Matthew Yes, I know what the screen symbols mean. If I get the diagonal arrow and the screen hint says "point" at the end of a wall the constrant will not be Vert. or Horiz. but slightly off. If I get the diagonal arrow and the screen hint says "corner" at the end of the wall the Vert. and Horiz. constrant will be correct. This might be a Mac bug. In my Windows version, it does not seem to be possible to get both the stretch cursor symbol with the "Point" screen hint. When moving from the "Corner" screen hint to either side of the wall, I get the "Point" screen hint and the stretch cursor consistently changes to the cross cursor. "Corner" does not seem to have particular geometric meaning in this context, but holding down the shift key to constrain stretching works properly. VW 9.0.1 Win 2000 PII 333/192
  18. Matthew, Donald, I believe the issue here may possibly have to do with the Mac version of 9.0. In my windows versions, 8.5.2 and 9.0 behave the same (as Matthew says), and behave exactly the way Donald wishes (per his description of 8.5.2 Mac). VW 8.5.2 and 9.0.1 PII 333/192 Win 2000
  19. quote: Originally posted by Stereo: The lines become straight when the actual viewpoint and eye are on the same height. If you want to look at an object that is high up like a roof if you stand in front of a house - you just stretch the marquee until you see that object - and do not change the viewpoint. To gather these threads together, the question becomes: How can you reset a perspective so that the viewer height and the "Look Toward Height" are the same, thus making all vertical lines vertical? You can use the Walkthrough Tool to change your view "angle" (i.e., look up or down at the scene, and move viewpoint up or down, using <ctrl + mouse> ), but I know of no process that allows us to reset the viewer height and "Look Toward" parameters. This would be very useful.
  20. quote: Originally posted by SeanFlaherty: Which do you think would aid your drafting more? 1) A single click extend tool (maybe a mode) that extends one line at a time to a selected boundary (a la 8.5). 2) A command that takes all of the selected lines/walls and extends them to a boundary that you click on after picking the command. Sean, thanks for asking a great question! 2) sounds attractive, given that you can zoom out after creating the selection set to find the object you want to extend to. The one problem to be worked out would be if the user selected an illegal object to extend. This could be handled the way some 3D boolean commands are handled, by giving a warning and automatically excluding the illegal objects. Having this tool in no way negates the important advantages of having the new Connect/Combine tool. It would be great to have both capabilities.
  21. Open GL is part of my copy of VW 8.5.2. It works better with v 9. Win 2000 PII 333
  22. The old extend tool is very much missed here. It is particularly useful when working from one side of a drawing to another when the scale of things is such that you have to zoom in to pick objects accurately.
  23. Donald, I'm confused - the Trim Tool (scissors icon) seems to behave as it always did, and requires the user to click on an object before it is trimmed. Are you referring to a different trim tool? I agree enthusiastically with the suggestion on the save prompt. It is nothing short of annoying, but I leave it on because annoyance is better than losing a bunch of time if I get lost in my work and forget to save often enough. VW 9.0.1 Win 2000 [This message has been edited by P Retondo (edited 09-01-2001).]
  24. quote: Originally posted by Robert Nichols: The strategies you suggested for positioning elements with precision disappointed me a bit ... Robert, On the other hand, AutoCAD (don't know about ArchiCAD) doesn't have the "Move" command allowing you to precisely define a relative movement. I'm surprised no one has brought up this one: using any of the handles on an object, position the cursor over the point until you see the "cross" symbol. Click to grab the object and drag (holding down the mouse button) to any location. Screen hints tell you when you have "homed in" on the location you desire. This is functionally the same as your "click - click" vector. PS, NNA: the complaint about moving walls after resizing them is one of my pet peeves, as well. Wouldn't it be easy to set up three buttons, similar to the 9-button array we see in the info palette when resizing other kinds of objects, so that we can fix the part of the wall (center or either side, at the user's option) we want to stay put when changing its thickness? [This message has been edited by P Retondo (edited 08-29-2001).]
  25. quote: Originally posted by Andrew Bell@NNA: Are you working on a Mac? I've been doing a decent-sized project with several solids on a PC, and while solid computation isn't instantaneous, the speed wasn't slow enough to be an issue Andrew: I have solid booleans that take 30 seconds or more to compute in VW 9.0.1 (timed at 8 seconds in VW 8.5.2). If we have to do this kind of thing to get lines showing the interesection of all solids, it's too slow. Consider that you will have to go in and edit all of these complex objects every time you want to change one, and wait each time for the calculation to be completed. Thanks for your participation in this forum! -Pete VW 9.0.1 Win 2000 PII 333 192 MB RAM


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...