Tobias Kern

Hi Juan, greetings and hope you are fine? As longtime Sketchup (SKP) and VW-User i often transfer data from SKP to VW. Here my thoughts: SKP geometry can only be imported as 3D-point-object (sorry dunno the right translation from german to english) or group of 3D polygon surfaces. Imported SKP geometry with holes in surfaces (wall with door/window) can't have a filling, if used with VW-cuts because the import process is limited (3D-polygons can't have holes, and 3D-point-objects are technically a object lots of 3D-polygons). That is not very good! Often i use this way: SKP to Rhino to VW. From Rhino i can import solids. Solids can have fillings in VW cuts, but i loose all Layers (in SKP = tags) from SKP. So this is also bad for me. Better geometry but i have to manage the geometry. Sometimes at the import process, i loose the construction axe from SKP to VW. My conclusion Import SKP: - Import SKP Groups and SKP Components as VW Solids (please no 3D point-objects or group of 3D polygon surfaces) so it would be possible to use cuts in VW and other operations like additions, subtractions, ... It is possible to convert imported 3D-point-objects and groups of 3D-polygon to VW Solids, but you have to do it object by object in VW. If you have lots of imported SKP geometry this is a boring and time consuming process! There is no command in VW to convert all geometry at once to 3D.solids. Please give us such a command! - Keep all SKP Layers and import them as VW Classes, or if alternative as VW Layers - Import SKP Groups as VW solids only. Grouping in SKP means, that something (some flat surfaces) belongs together to a 3D-volume. … so more like a VW-Solid as a VW-point-object, in my understanding. - Import SKP Components (they are comparable to VW symbols) as VW-Solids inside VW-Symbols. - But what if a SKP group is not waterproof (tiny holes somewhere), then VW should give us a hint after the import process, which geometry is problematic and put the geometry on a specific layer. My conclusion Import Rhino (as side wish here): - please make it possible to keep the rhino layers! My longtime wish is, that VW would sometimes as good as SKP in 3D modeling (for my personal workflow), that i can give up SKP. At the moment it is not so, im so much faster in 3d modeling in SKP as i am in VW, because of some limitations (i write every year my wishes/ideas for a better modeling workflow to the german support) Greetings Toby

… that is why i want to control the lineweight, linestyle, opacity, ... in the material directly. i think it makes more sense. … and additionally: the visibility control (visible, non visible, grey) for materials!

Hi, i think also materials is a good start, but enhancements are more than welcome. Materials should have the same features as classes with settings for, linestyles (color, thickness, opacity, ...) and should have the same visibility setup menu like classes and layers have (visible, non visible, grey). atm you can give geometry a surface and a filling, with material, but no linestyle setting and much more important for me, you don't have a visibility control for materials. i would like to do a setup, where i can only show all geometry with some specific materials. … so please a visibility menu in the navigation palette would be handy. there you also can do the setup for the classes. i think it would be better to separate materials form classes, otherwise you can give classes the ability to save also the material setup. … or we need a "tag"-system, where we can do such visibility setups. give a object a "tag" and control the tags in a tag-menu independently from classes and materials. a tag-system would be flexible as hell. greetings tobi

… and a big yes for multiple monitors support as line-weight mentioned!

Hi Josh, greetings and thnx for your reply. Yes, i want to lock the view, or not, in every view pane i want, because i think working like this would make sense. A option for locking in this menu (see screenshot below) would be great and yes a locking-indication would help. Maybe with colorcode: green is unlocked, red is locked (the menu below is kind of blue instead), or maybe with a lock-symbol. … and a manager for saving and loading the personal settings would also be more than handy. I think the manager should also stay in the menu below. Maybe a better idea as Mark mentioned, in the "save view"-section, because it will be more comprehensible. If you implement this, the MPV is much more mature. Looking forward to VW 2022 with this implemented 😉 and 😘 Greetings and stay healthy Tobi

… does anybody know how to get the masses (length, width, height, ground area, volume,), for the wall projections into a table? Greetings Tobi

Hi Tom, a tipp for the RH example (wall with angled top and wall projection) picture above. You can model a 3D solid with the dimensions (angled top) you need and then do a wall projection. The wall will stay as a wall and will not become a solid subtraction! … so not only 2d objects can be wall projections. Greetings Tobi

Hi Mark, greetings and thnx for your answer. Maybe you misunderstood what i'm looking for. I just want to save a standard in the multiple drawing windows (MDW) for my needs and important: atm i can change the view in a MDW by using a shortcut = keypad numbers 1 – 9, or mid-mouse button + Control (Mac) to change a view (from left to front, or from left to right, or from left to perspective ...) I want, that i can't change the view, by shortcut or something else in the MDW itself. The view should stay as i set it (left remains left). The only way i want to change is over the setting menu of the MDW (top left in the MDW). … and i want to save and load my wanted standard (if i changed it by mistake). There is no menu, where i can save my standards for MDW (but maybe i overlooked it!?). Maybe we can have both ways. 1. setting for a fixed view 2. setting for a non fixed view (as it is now) … both ways are possible. In Rhino you can set the options you want in the drawing window. I like this way and i find this is much better, because it is a comprehensible behaviour. Greetings, have a nice weekend and stay healthy. Tobi

Hi Senthil, greetings and thnx for your answer. The intension, your mentioned, in VW was a good choice, but i hope this is only the beginning for a much better push/pull and overall 3D experience in VW. I never can't give up to think about VW and find ideas for improvements, because i love VW (and hate it a little, in the same time because i know so much different 3D software and their strengths. Often i think this would be cool, if we can use something similar in VW). Hope my dreams come truth and i can retire Sketchup in the future. As for now it is not possible, because im much faster (and more fun, sorry!) in 3d-modeling inside SKP. … lets bring the smart and easy way of modeling from SKP to VW for the full satisfying experience. Greetings and looking forward to the next sneakpeak session / roadmap update. Tobi

@Senthil Prabu Hi Senthil, greetings and hope your are well. I watched Youtube-Video from the german distributor (Computerworks). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00B5lhF_tL0&t=1019s&ab_channel=Vectorworksdeutsch The name of the video is: "Modeling in Vectorworks - easy as in SketchUp". I think that is not 100% correct. For me there is an important difference. VW 2021 brings us an easier workflow, e.g. now you can separate solids with lines, polygons, nurbs, ... … but you have to manipulate (push/pull) the solid directly, after you draw the line (poylgon, nurbs, ...) on the solid. I think it should be possible to separate faces of solids as it is now, but you don't have to manipulate the solid directly afterwards. The line (polygon, nurbs, ...) should separate a solidface permanent. and it should be possible to erase the separation if you want, by deleting the separationline. VW should combine the two separated faces automatically to one face (if the two faces are oriented in the same direction in 3d space to each other). If you could implement such a feature, you have much more possibilities in manipulation of the solid, e.g. you can do other manipulations with other tools (bevel-tool, deform-tool, ...). As now you only can do a push/pull manipulation of the solid. With my idea implemented, then "Modeling in Vectorworks - easy as in SketchUp" is close to 100% right! Conclusion: - lines, polygons, nurbs, ... can separate faces of solids permanently! - separations can be removed by deleting the separating geometry (lines, polygons, nurbs, ...)! - separated faces should automatically be combined, after a deletion of the separating geometry. (if the faces are oriented in the same direction (plane) in 3d space) - separated faces of solids, should be manipulated with all possible 3d-tools. … then it is easy as in SketchUp! / / / We also need more 3D-info, in the information-palette. For 2D-Object we have this: We definitely need this for all 3D objects. with the information of 9-points for top, 9-points for mid, 9-points for bottom. so we can get the information of 27 points of the bounding box (it the object is not e.g. a dice) of the object. / / / What AutoCAD makes good in the user-interface: I wish we could have something similar for VW. / / / As for the multiple drawing view: The views should not be changeable (or be logged) in the view itself. In Rhino 3D the front view always stay as a front view, the side view as side view, and so on ... The perspective view stays as a perspective. You only can change this in the settings. In VW you could change a orthogonal view to a perspective view direct in the drawing window. This is much to easy to change and not so a good solution. Rhino does it better (i think!). / / / … and the info of the actual 3d-volume (m3), complete 3d-area (m2) in the palette, from the selected 3d-object. … also it would be nice, if we can select several faces from a 3d object and we can get the the whole selected area (m2), as it is possible with 2d surfaces. … and as mentioned before wishes (read in older replies in this thread) - push/pull: point-/edge-/face-mode - push/pull of non planar faces - gumbal for 3d-object like rhino (not only in subdivision mode). Greetings and stay healty Tobi

Hi Vectorworks-Team, i personally appreciate your openness. Software is a product for the users, so it it important to listen to them and tell them the way the development goes. … so this first step goes in the right direction. Thumb up! Look at the public Twinmotion roadmap: https://portal.productboard.com/epicgames/3-twinmotion-public-roadmap/tabs/4-under-consideration I think it is always good to share some information. A weekly, monthly, or whatever timeline you prefer, would be good. What i would like to see is an option to choose a little bit (for us user), the way the roadmap goes. Maybe a public poll, or whatever. You propose some ideas from the pipeline and we can decide (a little bit) which are the most important for us and maybe this can have an impact for a future roadmap. Also a development/status quo/info-blog, would be nice, like: https://blog.sketchup.com/ Sketchup (Trimble) does it like this. They often introduce people behind the Sketchup-Team. For me also important, because you at Vectorworks are human being as we, with ideas, dreams, feelings. Why not give Vectorworks a more personal touch. Software is more than just the code and openness ist always welcome! Greetings Tobi from Germany.

Hi Matt, thnx for your reply and the investigation you do. It is important for us users (hope is speak for the most, hat we see and feel, that our problems are on a way for a fix. So big thump up to you, from me! / / / If you want one more problem, i have one? The text scale of a dimensioning (hope i translated it right with google) in a viewport on a designlayer, also make problems (since years). more then once in a year i wrote a ticket to the german service, but this problem isn't addressed. i have another VW 2021 file with the described problem. i think it is quite similar (or in a approximate direction) with the other scale problems. my description in the file is in german, but maybe you can translate it to english. in a short way: text of dimension scale not right if you have more than one usermade dimension standard in the list (see file). if you have only one usermade dimension standard in the list, then the text scale is working. make a duplicate of the working standard: the scale of the duplicate is wrong! the first in the list works. the 2nd and following don' t work, even the duplicate are made of the working (1st one). Funny is that, when you delete the 1st working standard and the 2nd standard (which don't work before) gets in the list on position 1: now the old 2nd and new 1st standard in the list works magically! Greetings and hope this long lasting bug gets fixed! Tob 20-11-07 BUG Textskalierung.vwx

… and sorry i described my problem a bit wrong. not the text get mirrored the marker gets mirrored. … had it a little bit wrong in my mind.

Mi Matt, greetings, and many thnx for your answer. Here is the demo file with my described problem and also a screenshot. The File was generated with the german version (SP1). I opened a blank "virgin" file, with nothing in it. The problem came from scale text in viewports on designlayer. Hope you can fix this soon. Greetings, have a nive week and stay healthy. Tobi 20-11-07 BUG Schnittlinie.vwx

Hi, looks great. can you please post a short screenrecorded video, how you made that (only the main steps. the solutions of your problems at the begining). that would be great. greetings and stay healthy. tobi