Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Altivec

  1. zoomer I'm not sure why its doing what its doing but its definitely rendering differently. I have adjusted the rendering back to something I like. The changes I made are: - Lowered my environmental lighting brightness from 400 to 300 - Changed my shutter speed from 1/15th to 1/30th -Changed my hardwood texture from mirror (Reflection 22, Bluriness 8) to Plastic (Brightness 30, Roughness 30, Reflection 10, Bluriness 12) I did not change the wood texture of the night stand or the leather panels behind the bed because I kind of like them that way but you can see they are definitely looking more glossy then 2016 even with the lighting being adjusted. As a side note. I do not have C4D. All my textures were created in Vectorworks/Renderworks directly.
  2. I do have a blur on the floor texture which gives it that effect. Something has definitely changed with gloss levels though. I have been rendering a bunch of stuff and everything is extremely glossy. For example, look at the nightstand to the right of the bed (that texture has no blur effect on it). That's how everything with gloss is looking like on all my renderings. My stairs and hardwood below have super gloss. Man you are going to wipe out on those things. lol Yes, I do use emitters (learned the ins and outs of using borked emitters) hopefully its fixed. I am trying a bunch of stuff out so I can pin point what it is. In this case, I just increased my shutter speed but as you can see the tile floor is still getting blown out from environmental lighting but yet the staircase is starting to getting to dark so I can't increase the shutter speed any further. My textures and lighting definitely need some tweeking to get them back up to par.
  3. To give fair warning to those in the middle of projects, there is quite the difference in renderings results between 2016 and 2017. I'm guessing this has something to do with the c4d integration. Everything seems a lot more glossy and bright. Below is the same viewport rendered in both 2016 and 2017 with no alteration to the settings. So it looks like our textures need some tweeking (especially anything with gloss) and I'm not sure where the extra brightness is coming from (could be that environmental lighting is handled differently). I'm not sure if there is any info on what exactly changed to help us with the fixing of our textures or if we just have to go at it on our own. Rendered in 2016 Rendered in 2017
  4. It would really be handy to have access to the camera effects in the viewport OIP if our camera is linked to a viewport. Currently if we want to increase/or decrease shutter speed or experiment with any of the other settings we have to edit the camera, make the change and then exit. It would really improve the workflow especially when we are doing this several times in a row as we tweek the lighting and effects trying to find the settings that are just right.
  5. I Just to give you guys an update on my communications with 3DConnexion. On August 26th I added on to a post on their forum that was already made by another user asking if the Mac will eventually get "Enterprise" support. On August 26th, I also emailed their sales department informing them that I am interested in buying an "Enterprise kit" but wanted to know their plans for Mac icon support. I never received any replies to either my post or my email, so about 10 days later I politely emailed their sales department again and let them know the reason I was asking is so that I could make a decision between purchasing an Enterprise or a Space mouse. I said that icon support would be really important for me to justify Enterprise but if its not in their plans, that's fine, I'll just get the more basic one. Its been almost a couple of weeks past my second email and I have yet to receive a reply. In fact, the moderator on their board hasn't replied to any post Since Aug 25th. As much as I want one of these things, I am really turned off by their neglect. If you can't even answer a simple question to make a sale, I can't even imagine what it would be like to deal with these guys if I actually have a problem with the thing. Anyways... Since VW2017 just came out, I know some of you might want to start the update out with a 3D mouse like I wanted to so I thought I would update my progress. If I ever get a reply or more information, I will update this post again.
  6. Sorry for the confusion. Yes, for a residential application, what is noted as frame bars is what we call spindles. I whipped up a quick picture of typical residential railing. So in actuality there are two things missing to accomplish this. Custom symbol geometry for the frame bars and custom profile for the shoe(base rail)
  7. Man oh man, the improvement on this tool is phenomenal. This was one of the tools that was so outdated that I was embarrassed that it was even on my tool palette taking up space (I know I could remove it). As I was watching the video showing the new tool I was smiling ear to ear going. Yes, yes they finally get it... But then right at the end, I went nooooooooooo. Everything is absolutely perfect, custom profiles for the rail, Post Symbols.... But what happened to the spindles? only rectangle or cylinder, why no custom spindle option like the posts have? So again, I'm left with a tool that's almost good enough. I guess I can at least use it for the rail and posts and then do distribute along a path for the spindles which is way better than before but It was almost perfect. Sigh. I don't want to discredit what was done because as I said the improvement is outstanding and I know Rome wasn't built in a day. My concern is that this tool hardly seen any change since I've been using the program for over 25 years. Now that its so close to being usable and worthy, I would hate for the development team to go "its good enough" and move on to something else when all it needs is just a little more time in the oven.
  8. I haven't put 2017 through its paces yet but my first impressions are that this is the best update we got in a long time. I am a long time user that has grown very frustrated with this software and the direction of its development but I must say this update has given me hope again. For that, I thank the Vectorworks team for a job well done, and I thank Jim especially for his dedication to give us a voice to help make things better with his honest and fair moderation of these boards. Now in saying that. There is still a long way to go and as a result of my renewed hope, I'm going to be riding you guys all year long to make sure we keep going in the right direction
  9. I've used Mac's since 84 and I would be beyond furious if they discontinued it but unfortunately I wouldn't be stunned or surprised if they did. I think their decisions in the past 6 years has really caused MacPro users to leave in droves. As a result what was already a niche market to begin with is now beyond niche and in reality, not worth the development costs. Removing a processor board in 2013 cut their competitiveness in half for anyone that needed CPU so they lost a lot of those users, They cut off graphic cards and PCI boards so they lost a lot of users that require those items. They got rid of their Pro photography software losing those users. Basically they designed the MacPro for one thing (FCPX) and although I like FCPX, they lost a lot of that market with the botched up first release. Add to this that they haven't upgraded the machine or adjusted pricing in almost a thousand days shows me they have no interest in the segment. Its not like the rest of the industry has sat still in the last 3 years. Intel has upgraded the Xeon E5 two times in that time. Apple is using E5v2 that maxes out at 12 cores, while competitors such as HP and Dell are using E5v4 that maxes out at 22 cores and they have dual boards so you can get 44 core systems. Graphic cards have also had leaps and bounds in the past 3 years. Apple has neglected the MacPro so badly that even die hard fan boys like me are considering the jump. So if I am considering the jump to windows, any sane person would have done it long ago. Unless Apple puts major effort and redesigns the MacPro and makes it amazing once again (function over form), I don't think there will be a big enough market to justify it continuing.
  10. I had a 2010 MacPro with 12 cores but it recently died (loved that machine). It was the middle tier at that time and I paid around 5k for it. The current 3 year old Mac Pro costs about 10k to get 12 cores so there is no way I am going to spend that kind of money on 3 year old tech. I borrowed my wife's 2013 MacPro (6 cores at 3.5 ghz) as I wait for Apple to update the MacPro. It runs VW and renders pretty decently, but I estimate my old 12 core MacPro to be around 75% faster at rendering. But I find working in vectorworks is faster on the newer machine. I think that's due to the graphics cards being much superior. Open GL on large models is as smooth as silk. So depending what you do, graphic card and ram are important for working in vectorworks. Cores are important for rendering. As zoomed mentioned, Apple will be either upgrading the MacPro in the next month or so (which will be a huge upgrade) or they will discontinue it, in which you should start looking at window machines for pro level work. I don't really want to switch but if Apple discontinues the Pro, I have no choice.
  11. I didn't mean to put any additional stress on Jim or the staff before the release. I was just wondering if they had plans to release more info like they did in the past. It was really a simple yes/no question. It shouldn't take too much of his time to answer and it would probably ease everyones nerves if we knew the answer whether it was yes or no.
  12. Jim, Do you know if they are going to slowly release some more features or videos for us to get excited about or will it be silence until release date?
  13. I did my part by giving them a nudge but looking at their boards was not very encouraging at all. Looks like there have been a lot of people on their case for years to put the Mac on par with Windows for a lot of their products. A lot of no responding from the moderator and a lot of people that feel they've been duped. That kind of bothers me. Its one thing to tell me "No... we have no plans to put icons on the Mac" and then let me decide if I want to still purchase or not and its completely another thing to ignore the question completely. I've learned not to completely judge products by support forums because thats where people normally go to complain and sometimes the whole story is not told. I have sent an email directly to "Sales" asking the question. So I guess I'll see how I get treated first hand.
  14. But if you look even closer and play the movie below the 2 screen shots it shows the tools switching within the same program which means when fully supported by the program you have much more then the static 12 buttons. I am hoping Vectorworks will act like the program in the video at some point in time. Yes of course you can. Former Space Pilots haven't even had a display and you could use them too. It is just for the learning period to have a readable Text instead of showing all 12 Buttons Symbols just "Keystroke SHIF...." Yes... as I mentioned, if the buttons are static and never change, the text display is fine. My issue is if the buttons become dynamic where the buttons are constantly switching based on what tool you are using in the same program (hundreds of tools assigned to the same buttons). This means you will have to constantly read the display to know what tool is activated. Looking at an icon is far quicker then reading. Time and fatigue will add up pretty quickly if you are doing that a thousand times a day.
  15. That's great to hear Jim. I will fire off a quick email to 3dconnexion to see what their plans are for icons on the mac. I'll report back here when I find anything out just in case any other Mac users are interested.
  16. Thanks zoomer, Your description of how it currently works is kind of what I thought. except for "Macros are globally, so they will add 12 times for each App you assign" I am not really sure what you mean by that. When they show the demos on their site it appears the 12 icons change depending on which tool is chosen in the program they are using. So for example, if the wall tool is chosen, I would like to see the upper tool bar icons appear (the 4 line control modes, wall preferences, etc), If I then switch to the polyline tool then the icons would switch to all the vertex modes, etc. As for text labels versus icons. I understand that on the Mac its all text at this point but If icons on the Mac are not in the future, it is a deal breaker for me. Although, some might think what's the difference. I believe there is a big difference between an Icon and text in terms of reading and understanding what the button is. If the button never changes you can get by on text because eventually you memorize the command based on its position (not the text) but if these buttons are constantly changing and all the text on the buttons need to be read each time, I'd rather just use a keyboard shortcut. I know that right now, none of this works that way but I was more asking if Jim knew what the goals were for implementing enterprise in future releases. If what I mentioned above is what they are striving for, I would definitely buy enterprise and be happy to wait as it slowly evolves into what I want.
  17. Those darn targeted ads keep reminding me that I want one of these and I'm starting to break down. Jim, I am not sure if you can answer any of these questions or not. You mentioned in another thread that they are working on making Enterprise work with VW. Do you know if this includes it working on the Mac? 3dconnexion website says they have drivers that work on OSX but with limitations (such as text labels no icon). I think that defeats the purpose of getting enterprise. Do you know if the icons of tools will show up on enterprise? and more specifically on the Mac?
  18. Thanks rDesign... That's good news. If they are working on Enterprise like Jim says, I'll wait until they add that support before I buy. In Canada, Enterprise is over $500. I don't have a problem spending that if everything works as it should but if its problematic like it currently is, it will just make me even more annoyed than I already am with VW. I'll save Jim from reading one of my rants by holding off buying.
  19. I have never tried it in this type of application, and please somebody step in and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this something that would work great with reference files. In other words, have separate files for each unit type and then have a master file where you import all the units into. Again, I'm just thinking out loud so I could be way off base.
  20. I was about to buy one of these but as this thread goes on, I'm getting less and less interested. At first, I was thinking the SpaceMouse Enterprise but then Jim mentioned that the bigger models had issues with Vectorworks. When I checked their site, sure enough vectorworks is not one of the supported programs they list. So then I thought, I'll go to the opposite end of the spectrum and just get the basic space navigator but from what you are telling me, even this is just a hack in vectorworks. If I have to actually think about what I'm doing and have to switch modes just to move around, doesn't it defeat the purpose. Until these things are fully integrated and I am able to not think about navigation, I think I'm going to pass.
  21. I get the programming rational that its easier to this than that so we did it. The problem with that rational is that the user gets fooled into believing VW is something that its not, but that's a whole other discussion. I do dabble in programming so I don't necessarily agree with your view point that improving texture mapping will break current objects. Clearly VW already is storing texture mapping attributes that are stretched and UV mapped on imported objects. Its just they choose not to show or allow us to alter these attributes. Internally this done by having a unique mapping type other than planer, perimeter, etc... This same approach can be used to "not break" current textured objects. For example, instead of changing the current"plane" mapping, introduce a new one called "scalable plane" so only new objects created with this mapping type would be affected. Now. by no means am I implying this is easy or it should be done all at once but the longer they wait the harder it gets. Your suggestion of even being able to map each face independantly would be a million times better than what we have now. that is as long as they allow us to scale the texture independently on XY axis. Expecting us to go into photoshop every time we change the size of an object ever so slightly just isn't working for me anymore.
  22. Just for the record. I never implied that renderworks should do "higher end rendering" I agree that this should be passed on to C4D if like you said the transfer back and forth is rock solid. All I am saying is that the basics (what's already there) should be fixed. Caustics and VR = High end rendering Being able to properly place a texture to an object = basic functionality My point is why waste development time on advanced features such as caustics and VR if presentation or high end rendering is not the direction VW is going. Sure the glass sitting on the table will look amazing but the chair beside it with a patterned fabric looks like something that came from mars because a basic texture can't be applied to it.
  23. Thanks Jim. I know your thoughts are similar to mine in a lot of regards and I know your hands are tied and your mouth gagged (lol, sounding like the wrong kind of forum). I look forward to seeing all these 2.0 tools. In saying that, I think my rant may have been a little premature. My biggest gripe for 20 years has been mapping, so when you kinda alluded to it not only not happening in 2017 but probably not in my life time, I snapped. I also know you are very busy so I will do my best to bite my tongue until the release. Who knows, If I see that a significant portion of development went to getting the basics back up to par as you say, I will end up pleasantly surprised. Then all I have to do is hit "like" button a million times under the new texture mapping improvements Wishlist and I will be a happy camper.
  24. Sorry for the confusion J Lucas... I must have pressed the wrong reply button and the quotes did not get included. I disagreed with Jim's reply to a post I made and Jershaun 100% agreement to that reply. I agree 100% with this statement. Vw shouldn't be trying to reinvent the wheel rather use other software for features they don't have, especially (but not limited to) the software already in their stable. Thanks for your feedback Jim.
  25. Unfortunately, I 100% disagree. I don't think anybody is arguing that Vectorworks has to be able to do anything or everything. I think most are saying quite the opposite actually. Right now it looks like the philosophy is to add new features but as long as they get close to good enough, development stops and they move on to another new feature and the old one gets abandoned. Where as I believe that you make sure what you already have is maintained to be best in class before you develop new features. To be honest. I am not sure if Vectorworks is best in class of anything. If anybody knows of one, I would be really curious to hear what some are. Many of the tools haven't been maintained for over 20 years. For example, look at the handrail tool. Do you really think that anyone doing cutting edge "VR" would use that tool? If the answer is no, why then move on to something like "VR" In my case, I use renderworks because I do presentation work. Although nice, I never asked for caustics and new shaders. All I keep asking for year after year is to "fix" the basics. Although, I really want to use subdivisions, I can't because it is not possible to texture properly. The mapping tools are beyond archaic to the point where free 3D programs are far superior in this regard. This is a perfect example of the almost good enough approach. Surely, when creating the subdivision tools, somebody over there must have tried putting a texture on a model and said oh boy... Do they not know that they are selling renderworks as part of vectorworks. How do they expect us, you know the guys they suckered to pay for this add on to deal with this. I guess the decision must have been, oh well its good enough. NEXT... I just don't get how something like that can be ignored. Telling me to use C4D is a cop out and if that is truly the case, then renderworks should either be killed off or should be free. I use renderworks because my workflow requires quick turn arounds and I have changes flying around several times a day. I have no time to go back and forth between programs. That is why I chose the best workflow that works for me and I PAID for and also PAY for MAINTAINING RENDERWORKS. I understand that its not suppose to be even close to the level of C4D but not being able to independently scale (stretch) a texture on a xy axis in this day and age... Really? Not being able to texture some of the objects you create... Really? But instead of that, l am going to get cool VR. Really? I just don't get the continuous haphazzard choice of development. Again lets learn to crawl before we run. Jim... I just want to add, none of my frustration (and boy am i truly frustrated) is directed towards you. Sometimes, I think you are the only one that has a clue over there (you should get a raise). I really appreciate everything you do and your future plans sound great. I sure hope they work because the powers that be could really use yours and the communities guidance.


7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114


© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

  • Create New...