Jump to content

Kevin K

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kevin K

  1. Yep, you found it. it is a bit fettered away, I agree.
  2. Ok, now I am much clearer on the big picture of what you are doing, now that you have explained things in a bit more detail. I had thought the slight slope in your object was unintentional ! Silly me! And yes,, you are correct in that you can’t create a nurbs surface directly from 3d polys, but.....if you have a nurbs curve, there is an option to create surface from curves option. I use it quite often. You CAN convert a nurbs curve from a 3d poly, however, then convert surface from that nurbs curve. It does get a little finicky at times if your nurbs curve(s) are complex.
  3. First, the main difference between nurbs curve and nurbs surface.....nurbs curves have no solid mass. think of it as a polygon with a none fill. curbs surfaces do have mass. You can give them a solid fill as well as a few other options like extruding them by choosing the shell solids option. Secondly....I am probably still way off here, but I created a small low res movie to attempt to explain one option as to what you wanted to achieve. Again, I fully admit I could be wayyyy off. This whole process involved 3 moves. 1) creating an extrude along path from the basic solid shape 2) creating an extrude along path line-weight 480.mov for the parapet object 3) using the split tool to shorten up the parapet. Pretty fast and simple, really.
  4. I think I missed the whole gist of what you wanted to do. sorry about that. I was thinking you just wanted to separate the parapet object from the main shape.
  5. Ok, after a bit of analysis a few things come to mind. 1) I think if I were doing what you wanted to achieve, if I understand it correctly, I would have probably just made two extrude along path items.....Done....and simple. One for the basic shape and one for the parapet. Pretty simple. Keep in mind that the profile object must be planer! 2) one other thought, the faceting you are seeing with the curves has to do with two things. a) if you set your open GL settings to 'very high' you should see those facets kind of smooth out. b) also, I noticed the file is in millimeters at a 1:1 scale . since it is decimal if you increase the precision a bit, using a few more zero's after the decimal point, sometimes that helps with smoothness of curves as well. In addition, its a good idea to set you prefs to use very high for the 3d conversion resolution if you have objects in the file that have curves. 3) I also noticed that the basic shape is 'non-planer' so using the 'split tool' can get tricky. IF you put the file in an elevational view you will see that there is a slight slope to that object, so, sectioning can be a bit dodgy. Anyway....I updated your file to show your original generic solid along with my two extrude along path objects. They look a bit smoother by just setting the open gl to extra high. See what you think. vsolid KEVIN v2018.vwx
  6. I got time...its only 7:20 am in Tahiti. :-) Thanks for your comments. I am mid-flight messing with your file. Stand by.....I have some ideas
  7. Sir line-weight Geeze, what a post to wake up to! :-) Before I put in my 2 cents, 1) I noticed that the object in your file is a generic solid....was there a reason you didn't just leave it as the original objects? 2) IF I understand the basics, you just wanted to have that parapet object(above your red line) as a separate object?? 3) did you consider simply doing an extrude along path for the parapet part? As is often the case, there are several ways to accomplish things in VW, but....there is usually one best way...meaning less tweaking and mouse clicks. Not sure exactly what that would be in this case until I mess with the file. Pat S usually has a good handle on all things VW, so I see he offered up a solution.
  8. Ohhhhhhh, Mr Helm, did I detect a wee bit of biting sarcasm there related to C’s comments 🙂 Now, now, I was told we all had to play nice here.
  9. markdd Totally up to you, and perhaps you could respond to Pat's thought about submitting the files to the powers that be so they can analyze the situation. I will say that definitely having at least one backup system, like time machine if you are a Mac person, is absolutely a good idea. It has saved my bacon on several occasions over the years.
  10. markdd It has been a long time since I have used the backup file setting, but in the past, when I did enable that setting, when opening up a backup I would get an error messages stating something to the effect that "not all objects could be regenerated'. Meaning that, for example, there were tons of things in my 3d model that were missing. Hence my decision to choose the 'overwrite existing file' which was bulletproof. So, to address your question, I am not really sure what all was deleted in the backup file. It simply did not work as advertised. Now, to be fair, perhaps the whole backup scenario works better these days, but I just prefer to overwrite existing file.
  11. Personally, I am not a fan of the VW paradigm of creating a backup file. Why? Because in all my years when you resurrect a backup file it never, ever quite comes back whole. I prefer to use overwrite original. Plus, as mentioned, Time Machine takes care of faithfully creating a backup. I auto save every ten minutes. Again, just my preferred methodology.
  12. Sorry, I have no idea where that other text came from. I must have pushed the wrong button!! That said....try Andy’s suggestion too....he is wayyy smarter than me!
  13. Hey, don’t be afraid of those tools...whatever it takes to get the job done, right?? 😉 I am happy to take a look at your file, if you wish to resolve your issue. You could just copy and paste that solid subtraction into a blank file. I don’t need the entire file, and post it here. Be mindfu
  14. Hey, don’t be afraid of those tools...whatever it takes to get the job done, right?? 😉 I am happy to take a look at your file, if you wish to resolve your issue. You could just copy and paste that solid subtraction into a blank file. I don’t need the entire file, and post it here. Be mindful I am using VW 2020.
  15. In my haste, I forgot to mention...my bad. Perhaps call that design layer 'Lighting Exterior' and do be sure to class each light, so that you can selectively use the lights you need for any particular rendering.
  16. Gabriel Interior renderings in VW are tricky, mainly because of configuring the lighting correctly. What Grant and markdd pointed out are good thoughts on the subject, to be sure. Cutting to the chase without getting overly complicated , for interior renderings here are a few suggestions: 1) Pretty much always use 16 bounces. You can use 4, but if you zoom in close you will notice the difference. 2) You will note the screenshot below, pertaining to the basic settings that usually produce good results. May increase render time, but that is just the way the cookie crumbles :-) You will never get acceptable results using 'all low' quality. It is faster and will give you and idea how your scene is lit, etc, but rarely acceptable for the end quality of the rendering. I believe that is contributing to all that blotchiness you alluded to. 3) Be mindful of the dimension used for ambient occlusion. You set it too high and you get very large shadows where the planes intersect. 4) * something that will also really help is to set up, on a design layer, 6 directional lights, with no shadows. One that points at the ceiling, one directly to the floor and one light each (4 total) with an elevation of 0, coming from each basic north, south east, west direction. Because they are directional lights, even within an interior scene, those lights will affect each wall face. Do be careful not to make them 100% bright. That will produce too much light. Usually making them all slightly different between 30-40% brightness. This way you can easily customize how much light hits an interior surface (walls in your example rendering) You may need to play with the brightness levels a bit. Then you can obviously add other directional lights at a slight angle that would use shadows to stream light through windows, etc. those lights would want to be using brightness of between 80-100%, depending. Hopefully all this makes sense. IF not I can send you a small file with the light setup I mentioned. This suggestion is of course for daytime interior renderings, Night renderings are a whole different kettle of fish. Anyway, experiment with these suggestions and see if you issues are somewhat mitigated. So...as I prattle on. :-). This is what you get using the lighting suggestions mentioned above. I did reduce the resolution a bit to reduce file size. I did use an HDRI hemispheric background in this rendering which you can see a bit of thru the windows, fyi.
  17. sorry, Typo, I meant 'test this'.
  18. I did not rest this, but have you tried simply using the round wall tool then using the cased opening options for any doors or windows. I am fairly sure that would solve your texture issues.
  19. Stephan Well....thanks for the explanation....although I am personally not letting VW off the hook. I have the feeling that they are very aware of the issue. They just don't like talking about it. That said, as promised, here is your 3d greek salad. Not sure if you use c4d, but I included that file as well. Still another mystery to me why the VW file is 5 times larger that the c4d version.....another mystery for another day. Enjoy your salad! :-) GREEK SALAD V2020.vwx GREEK SALAD.c4d
  20. Stephan This is slightly off topic, but still relevant. You seem to be the go to person for anything InteriorCad, so I have a burning question, and have had this question for about 18 years now. How is it InteriorCad can control the direction of wood grain around door and drawer profiles/frames and VW can't? I will say this is soooo irritating and disappointing to me, and quite frankly, the main reason I did not upgrade to VW 2021. I do a lot of rendering and it is beyond the pale that when dealing with door and window casing/trim that has a wood grained texture, you can choose either a horizontal or vertical direction for the direction of the texture.....which is untenable. Wood grain on a horizontal piece of trim does NOT run vertically. Maybe on Earth 2, but not in our world. There are painful workarounds to resolve this, but I refuse to take all the time necessary to procure that. I have brought this up for years to the VW powers that be and I still have not received a coherent response as to why this situation has not been addressed. Honestly, it cheapens exponentially the software, which basically is a very good product, in my view. I thought you may have some sage advice regarding this situation, since I can't get diddly-squat from the folks at VW. If you can possibly shed some light on this, I will gladly reward you by sending you that 3d greek salad you had commented on. :-)
  21. You may want to tone down your ambient occlusion settings a bit. Those intersecting corners look a bit dark and heavy. That said, perhaps you prefer that look. just a thought.
  22. Tom First, the weather here is beyond amazing ! It is coming into our more rainy, humid season, but there are still many beautiful tropical days. A bit off topic, but if you click the link below, and click on the “Stingrays of Moorea” , then click on one of the short videos on that page, you will get a sense of what it is like to hang out in the lagoon with some of my Stingray pals !I am the guy with the mask and snorkel on his balding head! https://www.kskeys.com/copy-of-vargueno I hope all the math involved in sorting out the tile layout is not keeping you up at night! As you mentioned, there is some necessary fiddling and trial and error to get the results you want. Again, for the vertical batts and standing seams it is pretty straight forward, but that roof tile symbol does present a bit of a challenge. I have used the other, quicker option that you mentioned, as well, and although the tiles are not quite as realistic, it does look fine if you viewing the tiles from about 20 feet away. I just got crazy one day and wanted to raise the bar a bit, which is why I created the single barrel tile symbol. I guess the main reason I even started the topic was because there are a lot of cool possibilities when using the surface array tool.
  23. Tom Bedtime here in Tahiti, but I will check the forum mañana to see if you have any questions, etc. Hopefully what I sent helps you out.
  24. Well, I thought I attached the file....maybe not.... Hopefully it is in this post. BARREL TILE EXAMPLE 2020.vwx.zip
  25. Tom Ok, I attached a 2020 file. Let me know if you need an earlier version. The file will open in an iso view with two screenshot images showing the setting for each tile layout. I didn't take the time to do the upside down tiles under the regular ones. The file is compressed so u will need to uncompress it. Do be mindful that the tile array items are based upon one tile 3d symbol. This keeps the file size somewhat smaller, but that said all those tiles do contribute to file size. The tile symbol is based upon a shell object, so you may want to convert it to something else which could reduce the the file size of the 3d symbol. I just have not taken any time to mess with that. Let me know if you have additional questions. I will say that the settings and math in the OIP involved with these roof tiles is way more complicated than just doing standing seams or batts..
  • Create New...