Jump to content

line-weight

Member
  • Posts

    2,565
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1,472 Spectacular

2 Followers

Personal Information

  • Location
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

6,159 profile views
  1. Is Blender in any way a useful application for making things like walkthroughs? As in, animate the viewpoint instead of the geometry. The walkthrough tools in VW are virtually useless. I know Twinmotion is the obvious option, but (a) it's not free and (b) I'm not really convinced that the VW <> TM direct link stuff is ever going to be properly maintained so if Blender is an alternative route maybe it would be worth me looking at it.
  2. Looks like a problem that was raised >13 years ago. No doubt a fix is just around the corner.
  3. Some of my drawing labels have a 2d locus object included in them. I use these as reference points to hook them onto certain positions relative to sheet borders. Not perfect but saves a bit of tedious positioning. The 2d loci objects aren't visible in the drawing sheets once they are printed/exported as PDF.
  4. Any news on this issue, or is this thread just going to go silent like the previous one? Can you help in giving us some clue about whether a fix is being worked on, @Dave Donley?
  5. I've tried opening the file in VW2022 on a mac and can confirm I see the same. I see something that I also observe with some of my own files when I have problems which is something like a memory leak - memory usage in Activity Monitor just starts going up and up. Your file managed to prompt a "system has run out of application memory" warning and a crash of Vectorworks. I had a look at one of the symbols in the file, this one and noticed that trying to edit it prompted a long period of beach ball before it let me in to edit the 3d mesh. But the mesh is not obviously a very complex one. Tried deleting that symbol, but then retrying a section vport update still showed major lag. Tried selecting all symbols in the model (to try deleting them all) but this action (using custom selection) caused a crash of VW. It would be interesting to see if opening it in VW2023 is any better (I don't have 2023 at the moment) because it's supposed to have addressed some problems with slow update of sections. *edit* on another attempt I managed to select & delete all symbols. After doing this, the sections updated fine. So I think it's one of the symbols that's causing the problems.
  6. Same here. Sills in the native VW window tool are a disaster and seem to bear little resemblance to what sills are in real life (a bit like the window tool itself). Every time I try and include a sill, elaborate workarounds are needed to get it anywhere close to what I want, and I nearly always just end up unticking the box and drawing a sill manually. In that case, you need to persuade VW to leave some space under the window and sometimes that in itself becomes a pain, so I end up making the window opening an "uncased opening" and then manually positioning a detached window object in it. And then there are lintels.
  7. Tried feeding the same set of photos into the demo version of Metashape. This was just following the default workflow and accepting all the default settings (of which, there are many more to fiddle with than in Photocatch). The demo version doesn't allow export of models so wasn't able to bring it into VW for direct capture, however this is what it gave me. Interestingly, like the first attempt with Photocatch it seems to have made a decision to focus only on one portion of the site. I did get some kind of error message at some point in the process asking me to do something about unmatched photos, but I dismissed it and carried on. Probably with greater understanding of the software, much better results could be obtained. But at first sight, the "default" output it's given me is not obviously better than what I got out of photocatch. It seems to have more gaps and contains one very obviously completely wrong section, where a wall has become entirely detached from the building and is floating in fresh air.
  8. This is how I see the "real" pricing difference between the current/old model and the new subscription one. It's based on stated UK prices for an architect licence. The £550 is about what a VSS renewal normally costs in my experience. I think the resale value of an owned licence needs to be taken into account in the comparison because it is relevant if at any point you want to exit. That might be an exit for good, to another software, or it might be an exit for a year or two, or it might be an exit from a self-owned licence when someone takes a job where a licence is paid for by an employer. What I'd point out is that while it takes until year 4 for the subscription model to start becoming more expensive than the perpetual one in terms of cash paid out, when you take into account the resale value of an owned licence, the subscription model is already more expensive in year 2. (And if you want to, you can consider the value of that owned licence to be the fact you can continue to use it usefully for 2 or 3 years, instead of its resale value) This is why saying that the subscription model offers a reduction in "upfront costs" is a bit of a nonsense. If you put yourself in the position of someone considering going freelance for a bit, seeing how it goes for 2-3 years before making a decision about what you want to do long term, the subscription model simply is not really more attractive than the old one.
  9. line-weight

    Parapet

    In my experience it is sometimes worth it. It depends very much on the building, things like how many repeated details there are.
  10. line-weight

    Parapet

    Ah yes I remember that. It's a good way of creating the multiple components relatively quickly. However it is still the case that later editing the path is tedious as you have to do it for each component individually.
  11. line-weight

    Parapet

    In a regular extrude, you can have multiple "profile" objects with different attributes and these will be preserved in the 3d object that is produced. However in a typical Vectorworks consistency the same is not true of an extrude-along-path (I think - someone might correct me). So you have to extrude each component individually. And of course this is a pain if you want to retrospectively edit the "path" because you have to do so for each component. As far as 3d modelling is concerned this is where you have a choice - yes in theory you can achieve that level of detail all in 3d (so you can cut your detail section through the model and not need to add anything), or you can model (for example) only the outermost layers in 3d (so it all looks right in elevation) but then add the internal sectional detail as 2d annotations, on the sectional details. I would say it's a bit of an art, striking the right balance between stuff modelled in 3d and stuff added as 2d annotation. Note that another option is to fully 3d-model the outermost components, then only 3d-model a strategic portion(s) of the internal components - basically, only where you are going to cut your section. In that case you could model the internal components as "regular" extrudes not EAPs.
  12. Not sure if this is of much interest to anyone other than me, but this is what happened - the screen recording shows the first-attempt model, then superimposed on it, the model that was generated when I removed all the photos that only dealt with the smaller building. It has chosen to model much more of the site. This is using info all of which was available in the photoset used for the first attempt: so clearly it has made some kind of decision behind the scenes about what to include. Screen Recording 2022-09-22 at 12.32.35.mov
  13. Is there an equivalent for the menu that lets you choose the view (top/plan, front, left iso etc)?
  14. I made a similar transition to you about ten years ago - having used vectorworks under my employers' licence for many years I then became self employed and had to pay for it myself. My route was to buy a second hand license that was a few years out of date - that's how i kept my entry costs low. It was all I needed for the first couple of years when I was just doing a scattering of basic architectural jobs alongside other work. And since then I've continued to use VW, gradually using it more full time, paying to upgrade, not necessarily every year but when it worked for me. That route I think is now shut out. What's also ignored in the "up front costs" discussion is that (under the old model) even if you paid full whack for the latest version, with a perpetual licence you knew you always had the option of selling it on. So some of that cash you put down, you knew you could reclaim if you needed to, in exchange for giving up your right to use the software. That's very different from the subscription model - the money you pay is gone for ever. It's not an investment, you don't actually own anything at all. Just renting.
×
×
  • Create New...