scottmoore

Member
  • Content count

    123
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Great

1 Follower

About scottmoore

  • Rank
    Journeyman

Personal Information

  • Homepage
    www.goliveproductions.com
  • Location
    Nashville, TN
  1. ....and, full disclosure, it was Mr Dunning who showed me how to do that in the first place. Genius.
  2. Landru is correct about this. DLVPs do not necessarily allow you to animate structures but they do give you an extremely simple way to detail the automation without any additional drawing or geometry. This works well for presentations assuming you are only using stills, and for detail elevation, section and isometric drawings.
  3. I am still on VW2017, but the DLVP is the way I handle these types of things. It’s quite beneficial for other reasons as well. Asssuming you might have truss, lighting, video, scenics etc on a truss, the DLVP allows you to move and rotate in 3D space the entire structure and contents regardless of what classes are turned on. It also allows for a simple way to detail automation. If a truss moves during a show all you need is to duplicate your viewport and move it into any position you want. Then, class your viewports by position. Simple.
  4. Sam, That is indeed true and works for a lot of parameters, but not for turning lights on and off (which, of course one can do from the visualization palette), enabling lit fog or adjusting intensity. It seems a quite tedious that these functions are only available one light at a time.
  5. Often I do have multiple design layer viewports and I am sure that this is an issue with redraw. I accept that as the nature of using DLVPs. Good call by the way. I do do a lot of extremely large scale renders for stadiums and occasionally larger venues. When doing these it requires a lot of lighting fixtures to look like anything worthwhile. In those instances I have generally not needed DLVPs as the goal was to see the entire site as opposed to some complicated stage rig. When changing views I can often watch the processor draw out each lighting fixture. My solution for these renders is to create "dumb" lighting symbols. These are simply hybrid symbols with a pre determined focus angle and color. I drop them in the drawing and rotate as required. Much faster when you are needing dozens of active lights in a rendering. Not ideal but WAY faster.
  6. Two things that need to be addressed immediately (IMO of course) is the desire to make changes to multiple fixtures as the OP is suggesting and the ability to add pan and tilt values manually without always having to use focus points. Good lord that gets so tedious. I also tend to think it slows down re-draws and may have something to do with the need to often refresh instruments. I have no way to prove this, but if I create a generic lighting symbol without turning it into a lighting device, redraws are much, much faster.
  7. This has been an ongoing request. The same applies to the "lit fog" toggle and probably every other parameter in that window. Very frustrating. My workaround is simply to get one light set up the way I want and then duplicate. Once duplicated you can add gobos, change color and focus points. There re is a thread running in the wishlist section about major improvements needed for Spotlight and it goes way beyond this. Spotlight needs a serious overhaul.
  8. I am still on 2017, but this sounds to me like it is a much better solution. I never understood why it is (or was) that you could only replace a lighting device with the active symbol. To me, that caused a stop in workflow as I had to go in and make a fixture active, then deselect the insertion tool, select the fixture in question and then select replace with active from the OIP. It sounds like you developed a workflow to address this which is good. I have always found it clunky.
  9. I may be completely missing your point, but it seems like perhaps you should simply reference the venue drawing in each of your lighting plots.
  10. I would sure like to know more about that.
  11. I'll do that Sam. You've always done great work. Thank you.
  12. Is this additional loci for setting the physical light object? For example, moving the light object further back in the instrument?
  13. Peter, I see you are an apprentenice. Would that be a sorcerer's apprentice? Nice image props!
  14. I was really keen on creating 3D truck packs but have now abandoned that approach in favor of simple plan views. I layout three iterations of a trailer and denote them as "first row", "second row" and third row. It's much quicker and I have found that crews generally understand it more quickly. When I was doing 3D views, I would render the entire truck in right isometric but then I would create three additional drawing that dealt with the truck broken up into thirds. Then each row was "exploded" so that everyone could see exactly how things packed. That turned into a ton of work on large shows so I find the plan view to be clear in a single drawing and much faster to produce. All of that said, I would like to see what Sam has developed.
  15. It's nice to learn new things.