Kevin K

Just wondering if there are any VW users in the forum that are based in French Polynesia (besides me) I live here in FP but most of my clients are in the USA and Canada. From time to time I am asked by someone living here in FP to design a residence for them. But, because I am not totally fluent in French and certainly do not know all the ins and outs necessary here to obtain a building permit, etc. it would be of value for me to work with a local architect or designer. Thanks -Kev

...and so begins 2023 issues... I have an iMac Pro, Radeon Pro Vega 64. 64 gigs of Ram, running OS Monterey. I received this error message when attempting to use Redshift to render a viewport. I downloaded the trial version, for this very reason before purchasing 2023. Always a good idea to take a little test drive, in my experience. Worked fine in VW 2022. I am totally clueless where one would find where to tweak these options?

Jesse, good call, I forgot to mention unchecking the constant reflectivity option. Very necessary, as you pointed out.

....sort of like this....lots of control by creating an image prop. just need to tweak the settings and size, but it is so smart, that when you create the image prop and choose the bitmap of the painting...the aspect ratio of the image perfectly matches the actual aspect ratio of the image. You just may need to slightly resize it in the object info palette, etc., but the aspect ration is still maintained.

Sorry, I meant I create an image prop….again, this works well and is very accurate.

I include paintings on walls in many of my renderings…some framed and some not. I generally just make an image with the correct scale/size…pretty quick and easy.

Yeah, it really would be nice to have this function embedded in the roof tool..to include hip/ridge items. Perhaps in VW 2046? 🙂 Christiaan, another approach that is a bit more realistic than having one long extrusion, etc.......is to : 1) create/extrude a single piece of whatever material/shape you want 2) Snap a 3d polygon to the angled slope of the hip portion of the roof(also one at the ridge) 3) then select the 3d poly and the item created for the individual use the "duplicate along path" tool and configure it as need be pertaining too repetitions, etc In adddition : a) you will need to, depending on the roof slope, etc, do a little quick math to slightly rotate the extruded piece representing the individual roof tile, that will run up the 3d polygon in the correct orientation b) once you have one edge, just mirror and duplicate to the other hip roofs, obviously c) in the example I provided, that extruded piece needs to be slightly rotated in an elevational view, so that the pieces overlap as they run up the slopes. This may sound like a lot of work, but honestly it all happens in seconds once you math out the items I mentioned. In my example, I didn't create a symbol for the individual piece of roof tile, but that would probably be a good idea 🙂 I attached a screenshot as well as a file so all my text above will hopefully make more sense. The file has the individual roof tile included as an example. -Kev Hip-Ridge V2022.vwx

Lipstick on a Pig...what a horrible disappointment.

Matt Yeah, those fine tuning tools….so, so helpful. I can’t even fathom what was involved in creating those little gems! Thanks for a bit of CM history!

One final thought on this topic...then I will shut up about it 🙂 Note the before and after images. I hired a drone pilot to take a few aerial shots of the site where this proposed project will be situated. My point is that without Camera Match and its great masking and shadow tools, this would have pretty difficult and time consuming to procure by 'faking' a rendered view and placing it into a photograph. Possible, but time consuming, without any real accuracy. It is one thing to take a photograph from the ground, and if you have all the right GPS settings, etc tied to the photo, which can show the longitude and latitude as well the angle of the shot pertaining to North, an aerial photo is a different animal. So....my sage advice is that Camera Match will probably serve you well. 🙂 -Kev

Hahaha….I anxiously await that number! At any rate…good detective work!

Matt I have no idea under the sun how or why you came up with the suggestion to UNCHECK the option for 'none fill uses alpha transparency'....but it totally worked!! I am calling your boss and demanding you get a raise!!! 🙂 The image below is of another view, using camera match, but you can clearly see that the situation I was having, with the halo white outlines around any 3d landscape items etc, is totally gone. You may need to click the image to see it at correct resolution. Anyway, thanks heaps.

Hey Matt Thanks a lot for you suggestions. I did not send you the file as yet because I am messing with a few items in the file. Stay tuned and I will get back to you. 🙂

Mark Wow...really? In a galaxy far far away in the past 🙂 Yeah I lived in Cambria and Cayucos for years and years before moving to French Poly. I did a little test exporting a render bitmap image after placing a blue extrusion behind there 3d model and you can see there is not issue with any white outlines as occurred with the Camera Match Object Photo. It will be interesting to have Matt weigh in.

Kev, no, those are real 3d trees, which is why I was surprised this was happening...no mask involved.

Dr. Panzer, Dr. Panzer, emergency in room 101! 🙂 Matt...I am working on this commercial project in Calif, and the local planning department is requesting some images of how the project will look within the context of the existing neighborhood. So, Camera Match is more than helpful in this situation, but I am noticing this little anomaly pertaining to my 3d model of the new building and the Camera Match Photo. There is a sort of white outline around some of the objects, especially the real 3d trees, plants, etc (not image props). You can see this in the screen shot called "Booker St. Anomaly". I also attached the before and after images as a reference. Any thoughts on what may be causing this ? Thanks -Kev

This is precisely why zoomer gets paid the big bucks….:-)

Ohhhhhhhh.....another thought. I didn't quite catch in your message where you said " If I have nothing selected, and set my Attributes to class settings"... Try NOT having attributes set to 'use class settings' as a test. Jut have everything set to the default classes..and not using ''class style"...see if that makes a difference.... Again, I would do this in a new blank file to test it....

François No it should not…..did you try opening a new blank file to test it out? you should consider that. Could be some voodoo in the file you are working on that doesn’t allow you to do what you wish, regarding the attribute settings.

Oh, as a thought, open a new blank file to test out what I mentioned….before you tweak the use at creation option in whatever file you have open….

François Check your settings, regarding "use at creation" Normally I just leave "None" as my default class when drawing anything....then, if desired I will put whatever it is into a specific class. You may have your None class (if you work as I mentioned above) set to 'use at creation'. ? check that out...if you uncheck 'use at creation' you should be able to set your attributes to whatever you wish, and it will maintain those settings. Be careful though...there are certain advantages to using the 'use at creation' option. and there are reasons NOT to do so.

Christina A few thoughts...some sage advice from an ancient VW user 🙂 First, it is always a good idea to note your version of VW when you post anything. For example I am not upgrading to VW 2020 for more reasons than I care to mention here, so I was not able to assist you with your issue because your file was a 2022 file and I could not open it 🙂 Second...do yourself a huge favor and spend a couple hundred bucks and buy a second display. Honestly, I absolutely cannot imagine working, as you do, having all the various palettes jammed around your one display window. You will find that you will probably make like 5,000 less mouse clicks during the day by having all your palettes on a second display. The time you spend scrolling to expand and contract all those crowded palettes on your one display would be insanity to me 🙂

hahahaha.....the middle of the Atlantic 🙂 Yeah, would be tough to build something on that floating site model !!! My bad... Let me know and I can reimport it and WON'T move it, and send it to you..... Or...you can asked 'Mr Bonehead-Prince to do it for ya. 🙂

Anders Not sure what you mean by 'correct coordinates'? I just imported it as 'all 3d data' and it did take about a minute or so for all those pesky 3d loci to appear. I also moved all the data to fit on the center of a 24x36 sheet...perhaps I should not have done that? Under the circumstances, you may not be able to get the data as continuous 3d polys, as I had mentioned, because of the Swedish terrain Model source, but as you noted, you can ask 🙂 Not sure what you plan to do with the site model, but with what I gave you, will it work ok??

Tom Not sure, but perhaps because I have my souped-up iMac Pro to thank 🙂 As you know, when you import dwg data you can choose to bring it in as: -all 2d -2d & 3d (which is the dumbest thing I have ever have heard of) -or all 3d data. (which is best when creating site models) Because Anders mentioned there were tons of 3d loci, so I chose all 3d....which probably wasn't really necessary, but maybe thats why it arrived a bit faster? When I import dwg/autoBad survey data I import it first as all 2d, for the basic top plan view of the site plan, then as all 3d for creation of the 3d site model.