• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

58 Excellent

About line-weight

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Location
    London, UK
  1. Yes, that's what I would be aiming for. Thanks for comments. Will follow up those links.
  2. I find the shelf unit tool quite handy for working out initial arrangements /visualisations because it can automatically generate the shelves and so on, meaning it's very quick and easy to adjust sizes. Those workarounds unfortunately largely remove those benefits! Things being a couple of mm off tends to make things start to go wrong with snaps and getting stuff aligned and so on. Agreed, there are problems with the other cabinetwork objects too.
  3. If I create a closed shelving unit with the shelving unit tool, and tick the "back" box, a back panel is created but it has no thickness. This not only means that it is not correct in section but in openGL, because the "back" of the unit is against the wall it's on, the two planes are on top of each other and you get that highly distracting flicker/interference pattern when moving around the model. So I have to go around and add back panels manually. The back panel needs to have a thickness which can be adjusted. Really it ought to be possible to adjust the thickness of the main cabinet and the shelves separately too.
  4. For sure the result will depend on screen or print method ... but any colour cast in these situations will apply to the whole image, not just the material I've made. I'm thinking more in terms of relative to other materials in the model. I guess the way to think about it would be: if I put it next to a pure "white" material in a rendering, I want to make sure it doesn't have an apparent colour cast, whatever the colour of light lighting it in the model might be.
  5. If I want to use a photograph of a "real world" texture to create one in VW - any tips on how to get the best colour match? For example, should I photograph it under a light with a "daylight" colour temperature? Do some kind of white balance process on the photograph once I've taken it? I know colour matching is massively complex, just wondering if there are any methods others use to get something that looks "about right" in renders.
  6. This continues to be a problem for me. The more complex the model, the more of a problem it is. Some recent fiddling around / observation suggests it may be linked to the presence of symbol objects. From a given viewpoint, I can highlight faces on various objects fine until I move the cursor onto part of the screen where a symbol object is in the background. Then everything slows down, and often I get the spinning beachball (I'm on Mac) and everything freezes for a few seconds. If I then move back to other parts of the screen, things seem to recover. If I temporarily delete the symbol objects, then there are no problems at all. In this particular case, one of the symbols is a "bimobject" one, one is one I've built myself, partly using geometry imported from a manufacturer's DXF model, and one contains geometry imported from a sketchup model. What they may all have in common is a large number of faces on curved surfaces due to the import process. So it makes me wonder if the push-pull tool is trying to choose between thousands of faces as my cursor passes over those areas, and that's what's freaking it out. If I'm correct then I think it needs to be set to ignore faces within complex symbols...or something. I have to say that this problem is becoming more and more disruptive to my work, as my models increase in complexity. @JimWare you still monitoring this thread? If not I will post this as a new troubleshooting thread.
  7. Ah thanks, now I get you. Wasn't sure what you meant by baseboard, I see it's the american term for what we call the skirting or stringer in the UK.
  8. I'm not quite sure what you mean by an "extract of the solid intersection"?
  9. Yes, and in an ideal world it would be nice to have the whole of the stringer (straight and curved sections) drawn in such a way that a 2d elevation of its profile can be easily edited (including those transitions between pitches) and remapped onto the model.
  10. Possibly bendy ply or MDF onto a formwork, but it's just a design option at this stage. As it happens I will probably go with an alternative. It's still very useful to have the discussion about how to create something like this though.
  11. Yes it is true that there would need to be a transition between different pitches in elevation.
  12. Does this give me a curve that is part of a true circle in plan though? Trying it with 4 loci produces something that looks like it might be nearly right (viewing it in plan, against a "genuine" circle it doesn't follow exactly the same line but that might just be down to screen rendering). Trying it with 3 loci gives something less convincing. May seem pedantic but this could be significant in some scenarios, for example if I later added it to another solid generated from a "genuine" circle they would nearly-but-not-quite-match. And I'd like to know that the end points of that nurbs curve, viewed in plan, are at a tangent to the proper circle so that there is a smooth transition if placed adjacent to a straight section.
  13. Thanks. Sounds like a good solution although it relies on calculating the pitch manually. Ideally I like solutions that generate directly from existing geometry, as this seems less prone to small errors.
  14. Thanks. Not sure I fully follow the steps but if I understand correctly you've effectively cut through it with a flat plane - the result of which is that it is not rising on an even gradient along with the pitch of the stairs at the points where they meet the stringer (neither does RussU's - however I can see how to use his method to achieve this).
  15. Interesting - thanks. I have not used the deform tool previously; you have prompted me to have a bit of a play with it.