Jump to content

Simon Allan

Member
  • Posts

    100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Simon Allan

  1. @Dave Donley

    Off the top of my head I would like to be able to select, by the following list, in DataPrep so I can make the changes I need when bringing the VW file into UE.

     

    Classes/Layers

    These two allow me to grab big chunks of objects.

     

    Truss Type/Name/Position

    Lighting Instrument Type

     

    You mention plugin objects which is great but with something like the Stage Decks I need to be able to select the exact type of deck I need as the plugin has lots of details that can be changed and I often have several decks in the drawing that contain slightly different settings.

     

    As mentioned in my initial post, I need to get direct access to the objects without them being under several parent objects as I need the actual co-ordinates of the object and not the parents that sit at 0,0,0. 

     

    I am not sure if it is possible for the addition of a tag function that I can easily/quickly add to any object or symbol but that would allow me to get hold of anything I need during the DP import. The examples above are very much from a lighting side of things but I also know that I will need to select many other objects such as windows, walls, etc, etc. and the tag feature might help with that.

     

    Let me know if you need more info.

    • Like 2
  2. I have been doing some testing with the dataprep feature in UE4.27 and I am running into issues when trying to work with a VW file.

    Hoping I can get some guidance as maybe I am missing something. I have also been doing lots of testing with C4D into UE via Dataprep and I can get this to work just as I want.

     

    I export the VW file as an Unreal Datasmith file and I can bring it into UE via dataprep all ok but the issue is the way VW exports the data that makes it very difficult to work with in dataprep.

    I have attached a test file I am using that just contains some truss and some extrudes.

    In this example, my workflow would be to select the truss and exchange it for my own blueprint truss where I have much better control.

     

    The biggest issue is all truss seems to get assigned a generic name so that makes it difficult to filter it in dataprep. I realise I can use a selection via a selected objects filter but this defeats the point of using dataprep as the VW file will be getting updated through the project and I dont want to keep adding new items to the filter as the drawing grows.

    VW also seems to add 3 parent objects to the truss which are all located at 0,0,0 which also means I cant make any use of them either...unless I want my UE objects to all sit at 0,0,0...which I would not want. What are these 3 parent objects in relation to VW and can I get any control over them in VW?

     

    I know Revit allows tags to be added to items and those tags can be used in dataprep but I dont know if VW has something similar as that would potentially solve the issue.

     

    The dataprep feature is a very powerful tool inside UE and it will certainly be a great help when working on bigger projects that evolve over time...so hopefully there is an answer out there to my problems.

     

    Many thanks.

     

     

     

    DataPrep.png

    VW_Truss_DPtest_v01.vwx

  3. Hi All,

     

    Does anyone else get a hard crash when telling a fixture to use GDTF geometry and then trying to move a fixture?

    I tried a couple of different GDTF files and VW symbols but I get the same results. I also used the Robe T1 which I would assume to be a good example.

     

    I am using VW2021 SP3.1 on windows 10.

     

    Any help appreciated.

    Thanks

  4. @AlHanson Thanks for the info. I had not thought of that.

    Sadly that is too much of a workaround as the symbols I am doing are meant for lots of people so whilst it would be OK if it was just me using them I can see it leading to issues asking users of the symbols to do so.

     

    @Jesse Cogswell That wold work if users of the symbols were on VW2021...and many of them wont be.

     

    I feel my best solution is just make the symbols black and hope the user knows the steps to change the colour of the texture.

    I will keep my fingers crossed for a more elegant built in solution in the near future.

     

    Thanks for the suggestions though 🙂 

  5. The goal is to be able to change between one of two "default instrument textures" at the click of a "Black/White button" in the OIP for the fixture.

    One texture is white and the other is black as the fixture is available in these two colours. These textures are simple default instrument textures that are applied to various parts (but not all) of the fixture.

     

    This reason for looking at marionette to solve this is because I dont want to create two variants of the fixture and I dont want to use the class system as I dont feel that is an elegant or intuitive way to get the best results for user experience.

     

    Ive seen some wonderful things that marionette can do and kind of thought this would be a relatively easy job for it. Maybe I am wrong...but I hope not.

     

    Thanks

  6. Hi All,

    I have not used Marionette before but was hoping it could help me solve a problem.

     

    I have a lighting symbol that contains several parts that each have a texture applied. 

    I want to be able to select, via the OIP for the symbol, a choice of 3 textures that are all in my resource browser. This could either be via a drop down or selection button.

    For example...

    I want to be able to chose the color of my light symbol (the color of the model not the light emitting from it) from a choice of Red, Green, Blue.

    The parts that have the texture applied are always the same color as the other parts so the light would always be one color and not a mixture of colors.

     

    Is this possible?

    I did take a look online for something that might fit already but the more I looked the more confused I got 🙂

     

    Any helps appreciated.

    Many thanks

     

  7. Interesting to read you got better results with HLR in VW2020.

    I was curious so did a test on a simple drawing (5 viewports on one sheet, all HLR) that I am currently working on in VW2019.

     

    Here are the results.

    VW2019 (SP5.3)=345 seconds

    VW2020 (SP1)=373 seconds

     

    Like usual...disappointing.

     

  8. ok...All understood now, I think.

     

    So just to confirm, doing hidden line renders on curves may not be able to show a perfectly smooth curve?

     

    If so, is this a bug that can be sorted or "just the way it is"?

     

    Thanks

  9. 1 hour ago, Matt Panzer said:

    Right. There will always be faceting because the hidden line renderer ultimately results in line segments.

     

    OK, so why does the other object (the one using the non curved profile) render without issues?

     

     

    1 hour ago, Matt Panzer said:

    I believe the unpredictable behavior your getting with a sweep is due to how the hidden line render interprets the huge number of facets your sweeps already have into its own rendered facets.

     

    I have tried various segment amounts and it still seems unpredictable. 

     

    1 hour ago, Matt Panzer said:

    We can do this within symbols (in VW 2019) when using the "Generate 2D from 3D Component" command.

     

    Are you saying this is how I fix it? If so, can you please give more details as I could not find that command. Thanks

  10. Using an extrude along path (my path was a circle cut in half) and the same profile (with rounded corners) I get the same "faceted edge" result.

    The only difference was the 3D conversion setting behaved as expected in that it got worse the lower the setting was. It was still faceted when set to "Very High" though.

     

     

  11. @Charlie Winter My main focus is to get VW exchanging data with C4D via MVR. I am also interested in the potential with media servers especially relating to pixel mapping.

     

    I personally believe MVR will only grow and get widely adopted when it is working to a point that other 3rd party applications can utilise it.

     

     

    • Like 1
  12. Thanks. Hopefully someone can clarify if this is a bug or user error.

     

    I would have hoped that this particular issue (lack of rotation) did get looked into during SP3 testing as this was first brought up back in November.

  13. Thanks for looking at this Kevin.

     

    I changed the setting to low on the file I uploaded and it behaved as your pictures show. 

    I also tried on another drawing (sadly I can't share that one) that has the same issue and lowering the 3D conversion setting had no effect. Neither did adjusting the segment angle of the sweep.

     

    I think it has something to do with the profile shape and that curves are present. It also might be a hidden line thing too.

     

    Either way, the behaviour, as you pointed out, does not make sense.

  14. Hi,

     

    Been having some issues trying to get a smooth sweep when using a profile that has curves in it.

    I have attached a simple sample that shows the error. You will need to zoom in on the edge to see it but it is not  a smooth curve.

     

    I dont know if this is a graphics setting or something else.

     

    Any help appreciated.

     

    thanks.

     

    Sweep Issue_VW Forum.vwx

  15. Now on SP3 and still getting issues.

     

    I drew a new version (attached) of the test plot in SP3 just to be sure and when importing back into VW, all the fixtures disappear.

    The fixtures are in the drawing because I can select them...but that is because I know where they are. I also see the don't have the rotation info with them which was the main issue in the original post.

     

    From what I can tell, the difference between SP2 and SP3 was SP2 showed a place holder for the fixture.

    I know there have MVR updates in SP3 so I am not sure what is going wrong.

     

    Please advise as I am trying to get some progress on this much hyped feature.

    Thanks

     

    MVR Test Export_Rev03.vwx

  16. Hi Henry,

     

    I use VW, C4D, Stage, Corona and PS. I am still waiting for a 'one solution fits all' but in all honesty, I have given up as I don't think it will happen anytime soon 🙂

     

    I change my workflow depending on the client and what they want but currently I am moving more to this:

    Starting in VW or C4D using stage plugin.

    Get everything built and then render with Corona but don't use any beams.

    Take various passes into PS and finish.

     

    Below is an image that is about 20% Cinema/Stage and the rest is PS. This was before I started using Corona. Whilst there is no VW in this, there is nothing to say that I could not have started the build using VW. I have in fact taken the C4D and imported in VW for CAD drawings.Concert_Concept_01_FOH_2K.thumb.png.92181df1834370611fab3897396a2e33.png

     

     

    This is now the same Cinema file with loads more work put into it, mainly from Stage.It is about 80% C4d/Stage and the rest is PS. Again, this was before I started using Corona.

    1669499315_ConcertRender_FOH.thumb.png.aa56696579e5461564746a7b27a02ecb.png

     

    Some more images from the above way of working.

    90269408_ConcertRender_LookUp.thumb.png.105cbc7ca9e01a160e6d908809363e75.png

     

    407993008_ConcertRender_Drums.thumb.png.cd84df49432828d478bf52c7929d43bd.png

     

    As you can see, there is a bit of a difference but the first method was way faster that the second. The second also allows for me to start animating but that is a fair bit more work to say the least.

    I would say the first method gives a more "conceptual" look whereas the second method gives a more polished look. I tend to prefer something that sits between the two though!

     

    If I did these again, I would have a slightly different approach in that I would use Corona and would end up photoshopping more beams, lens flares and atmospherics in.

     

    Another big factor is what render power you have and the timeline you are up against and that will often dictate which route I take.

    Stage is great to get set built and nice looking renders in a very fast way.  Of course C4D can run a bit slow when you start trying to render hundreds of beams though 🙂

    I did try rendering in VW but had the same frustrations other people mention.

     

    The stuff Evan and Wesley show are great examples of what can be achieved with different workflows and I recommend you take a look at the images on Evans website as there are many stunning examples. Seeing these is what got me looking at Corona (Thanks Evan!) and I have really enjoyed using it....but ask me again in 6 months and it maybe that I am using Octane or Redshift etc etc! In fact, a lot of the decision to go with Corona was because of my hardware...but if Apple produce another Pro let down then I am heading to Windows...but that is another story.

     

     

    I would say, looking at your renders that it is definitely worth trying to take them through PS before you make any decisions about other purchases though. I think if you held back on adding in all the beams and atmosphere in Capture and tried to add them in PS you may be pleasantly surprised with what you can achieve.

     

    I hope this info helps in some way but as long as you are prepared to pick the workflow that best suits the job and be open to learn new workflows, then you are off to a good start.

     

    Cheers 

    Simon

     

    • Like 2
    • Love 1
  17. Hi Dave,

     

    I was curious so went back and checked my file as I am now on SP2. Here is what I found...

     

    I took the VWX file Mark supplied and added a straight piece of Tyler truss to it and updated the VPs on the SL.

     

    Below is a screen shot of the PDF produced using my Mac Pro. Specs in signature. As you can see, all is OK.

    1709037201_HLIssueMP.thumb.png.782c3d38d4f908dce05d4fd28f1dad65.png

     

     

    I then went onto my MacBook Pro. Specs in signature. As you can see, things are still wrong.

    1790281485_HLIssue_MBP.thumb.png.e5e8e2362b9f649a45480d6a2d5d5b56.png

     

    On the MBP I then rendered HL in the DL the corner block showed the simple class (blue box) but the straight piece did not and displayed correctly. See below...

    829471473_HLIssue_MBP_DL.thumb.png.e90674053e32c1438670d04c96d8a927.png

     

     

    Both machines on SP2 running VW2019. The only difference is the OS version and graphics card.

    I then exported the file to VW2018 and all worked as it should on the MBP.

    All I can conclude is VW2019 is still not working as it should.

     

    I have included the VW file in case you want to try.

    @dbrumbach

    Hidden Line Truss_Visibility issue.vwx

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...