Jump to content

scottmoore

Member
  • Posts

    642
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

394 Spectacular

4 Followers

Personal Information

  • Homepage
    www.goliveproductions.com
  • Location
    Nashville, TN

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. One other note on file size and speed: While it is fairly common knowledge that replacing as many arcs and curves with straight lines in 3D is a massive time saver for rendering, I did not realize that also applies to 2D objects. When creating symbols, the 2D portion will often have arcs involved. If an item is going to be used a lot (for instance, thousands of chairs) reducing unnecessary radiuses will improve performance; often significantly.
  2. Good information here. Just to clarify (and assuming one is using symbols when one would expect) grouping does or does not impact files size? Following the seating examples sites, I typically do not use the seating tool, so instead I manually create my seating layouts. When I create a section of seats (using chair symbols) I’ll go ahead and group it. I’ve never considered the implications on file size. Now, determining a proper file size for images for texturing, that is an issue.
  3. A few years later, the solution for exporting to visualizers is simply to export the design layers from which the DLVPs are generated independently. To the question of naming conventions, I have some prefix information that is unique to my workflow but now call both the layers and classes DLVP 01 thru DLVP 10. I add a bit of specific detailed naming after once I’ve determined what one might be used for on a specific project. Works pretty well and I still find it quite intuitive vs schematic views.
  4. My opinion is that VWX developers have decided it is easier to move users to external render programs than to rebuild VWX to the point that it provides GPU rendering. I would imagine that would be a massive undertaking. Your points are all valid. My suggestion is to spend some time in a blank file just adding lights and adjusting them. Personally I’ve never had issues selecting and moving the sources. The biggest frustration for me is the confusion in calculations in a light beam where lit fog is in use. The beam of light, regardless of settings, appears brighter, the wider the beam gets. Somewhat backwards of how light really works.
  5. Truly, the best thing you can do is experiment. Lighting a rendering is not all that different, in most ways, than lighting a theater scene or, perhaps more to the point, a video or movie shoot. In those scenarios you hire professional lighting designers, so plan on having to do some homework. Play around with light sources to begin with. Setting the light type, beam and field, various fall off options, intensities. Note that <100% is an option and sometimes necessary. Look at angles, and direction. Then it becomes a relationship between lighting, textures, reflections, backgrounds, etc. Also note, that utilizing IES files, especially when the light is grazing a surface, can add a ton of realism. The point above made by Luis is a good one. If you watch the credits on an animated movie, you will see a lot of people involved with “lighting”. There is a reason for that.
  6. It is extremely frustrating to me that arc lengths are only measured from the counter-clockwise direction. I do a TON of work where I have to create arcs along existing arcs and mine have to be specific lengths and run specific directions. Currently I have to draw the arcs counter clockwise, set the appropriate lengths and then, if the arc actually has to run clockwise (which is often) I then have to rotate the arc into position. That is simply archaic. What would be ideal is either include a graphic in the OIP that is like the 9 radio buttons for a rectangle or 3 for a line as mentioned in this thread: or, a simple radio button that states “flip direction”. The former would allow arcs to work like other geometry which is smart. The latter would be less intuitive but quite simple to use. The current solution is just far too cumbersome.
  7. We still yoke fixtures out on HUD truss (both top and bottom chords) as well as connect to the onstage and off stage chords, sometimes to the verticals and often to the legs in either the leg or catwalk position. Not to mention that VWX does not know to snap the fixtures on the center chord to the TOP of the truss, unless, of course, you’ve inverted the truss into a basket…… ….but yes, we all need to switch to HUD truss. (Or Tyler GT, Christie F-type, PRG BAT, or the SGPS version whose name escapes me.) 😉
  8. That is awesome Jesse. I’ve got a project coming up quickly that needs this feature for certain. Much appreciated.
  9. Late to the conversation here. Realistic rendering is an art form unto itself. There are no magic tool sets. It’s all about attention to detail (what to include, what to leave out, how to “cheat”), lighting, textures and rendering styles. You can produce really beautiful renderings in VWX, but it’s all in the details. As to including venues, you can see what is already available. For me it depends on the level of client and the potential that I will be in the facility more than once. That determines the amount of time I’ll spend on a model. If you can get decent 2D plans you can go along way in modeling. Grab all the photos you can from the web and/or in person. The architect tools available in Spotlight are plenty to get you going. I find I only use the wall and door tools at most and sometimes not even that. I say that because a lot of times it’s far simpler to generate simple geometry with an image texture than actually creating something like, for instance, a door. It will typically look better as well so long as it’s not a focal point of your design. Your renders will be much faster as well.
  10. Copy that and thanks Jesse. That makes perfect sense. No need for the additional script as it would take the same amount of time to just rename the sheet layers. It is interesting to see how all this works. I've noticed that there must be something to changing the name of a symbol as the name in the resource manager comes up with the newly assigned name. The symbol's name in the object info seems to remain the original. Regardless, this is a serious game changer and time saver. I love it!!
  11. OK, this is really quite amazing and I really appreciate it. I do have one question; the script does not seem to locate sheet layers. Any suggestions? Otherwise, this is exactly what I needed and a massive time saver. It finds layers, classes, saved views, and symbols in one operation. So great!!
  12. That is also fascinating @Jesse Cogswell I will try both of these approaches when I get through these next few projects. Currently my calendar is extremely full. Thank you for taking time to pursue this!
  13. Actually, I use blank layers to break up my list of layers. This allows you to organize anyway you would like, and if instituted in your template, will make locating layers (and saved views by the way) much simpler.
  14. I just create them. @jeff prince idea above is a good one.
  15. @Pat Stanford Wow! Yes, that is exactly what I need. I will give that a shot. ps: that excessive hair loss ship has sailed a very long time ago…..
×
×
  • Create New...