Jump to content

line-weight

Member
  • Content Count

    931
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by line-weight

  1. VW doesn't really provide us with a built-in reference grid system that's useful when working in 3D. I'm interested to hear of any strategies people use to create a reference grid system. Firstly a grid that is useful whilst drawing and editing in 3D. Something like a series of vertical planes that I could use as guides when placing or moving an object - when I want something to be offset from grid line A by x mm and so on. Possibly horizontal planes as well. Some might say this is covered by layer or storey levels, but at the moment, say I want to create an extrude that sits 1m above 2nd floor FFL: the way I do it now tends to rely on finding a floor surface and setting the working plane to it, which doesn't seem ideal. Secondly, and ideally, this grid would work in such a way that it could be turned on and off in viewports to automatically show in the right locations. This may be too much to ask though. Anyway. I'm interested to hear how others deal with this. Or, when drawing in 3d, do you only ever place objects relative to other objects?
  2. line-weight

    The Vectorworks Twitch

    I think there'll be a fair few people reading this who feel that losing hours or days of productive working time sorting out the mess that unstable software can produce isn't something they'd describe as a "wrinkle". If it's 'to be expected' that early SPs won't work properly, then they should be released as public betas or 'release candidates'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle It's fairly standard stuff. Some people like to get in early and take the risk of encountering bugs. Some people can't afford the risk and prefer to wait until they know things are stable. How are people supposed to know that it's not safe until SP2 or SP3? Is this stated in VW marketing material?
  3. line-weight

    The Vectorworks Twitch

    I completely sympathise with the comments about feeling like unpaid beta-testers. I'm a sole practitioner too - it's me who has to sort out anything that goes wrong and spend time working out how to get around it (thank goodness for this forum by the way). I am glad that I decided to stop my VSS subscription and not pay for 2019. It sounds like 2019 is a lot worse than 2018, but using what I assume will be the final SP for 2018 the software still fails to deliver on multiple counts of things that have been claimed in marketing stuff over several releases. In most software packages it would be normal to assume that everything in the tool palettes actually works. I think that those of you who are having major issues with 2019 and reverting to 2018 should make a serious requests to your distributors for your money back. Maybe this is the only way to get a message to the people higher up at VW?
  4. Thanks. Not quite enough to persuade me to go for 2019. Automatic labelling would be nice but it sounds from your comments like it's not 100% reliable. I'll look forward to upgrading to 2020, the version of VW where everything is going to work flawlessly.
  5. Might also be useful where you have an elevation/section view that's not parallel with your vertical gridtangle planes, so switching them on doesn't make sense but would still be useful to see the horizontal ones.
  6. Any chance you could back-save a copy of this file to a VW2018 version for those of us who've not moved to 2019?
  7. Thanks @cberg and @Hans-Olav Looks like you have a similar set up to digitalcarbon above, with the grid planes being simple rectangles with no fill. Before figuring out how the data tag thing works... I'm trying to work out how to get the grid lines to show as dotted in my section viewports. It seems to draw the 'cut' through the rectangle (even though it has no fill) in the linetype set in the gridline's attributes - which is fine; however it is also I think drawing the far edge of it, in the solid linetype I have set for 'objects beyond section plane', which makes the line appear solid. How are you getting around this? ***edit - have solved this I think by converting the rectangle to a polygon and then 'hide edges' for the two vertical edges. Now it seems to work fine in section viewport.
  8. Is this just something I find? Or am I doing something wrong? For some years I've treated design layer viewports with caution because they just seem to cause trouble. I thought I'd have a go with one today to see if such fears were still justified. It's a section viewport, sitting on its own design layer. See the screen recording. All I want to do is draw some lines, snapping to the geometry in the DLVP. You can see the purple lines I'm trying to draw. Apart from the fact that the selection box for the DLVP is flickering on and off which is pretty distracting - drawing and resizing those lines is so glitchy it's unusable. You can see they disappear, or re-appear in previous locations, or show up as ghost lines. In addition the hidden line geometry in the DLVP is a mess, with certain lines flicking in and out of view when I zoom in and out. What's going on? dlvp.mov
  9. line-weight

    Design Layer Viewports causing numerous graphics issues

    @David S - there is no annotations space because it's a design layer viewport, not a sheet layer viewport. I'm drawing the lines in the same design layer that the DLVP is sitting in.
  10. line-weight

    Design Layer Viewports causing numerous graphics issues

    No, they are being drawn in the same design layer as the DLVP. As a bit of an update to my problems: I have realised that ticking 'display flattened' in the viewport OIP makes the viewport viewable in top plan view, and if I view it in top-plan view, I can then add lines as I'm trying to do above, but without having any issues. So that solves it for my immediate use case - but it seems like something is not right, if viewing the DLVP in the way I am in my screen recording.
  11. line-weight

    Hide Classes Within Layers

    I have to say that currently I find setting up display properties pretty overwhelming in VW. Right at the moment I'm trying to rationalise how I use 'material' classes so that things work in both a 3d (openGL) view, in sections including non-merged sections, and in elevation or 'beyond the cutting plane view' and its close to driving me insane. I've had to basically draw up a table to try and work out which settings where have what effects in which display modes. Settings are scattered in different locations, many have misleading names, and certain combinations work in one display mode but not another. It's a mess, really a mess.
  12. line-weight

    Hide Classes Within Layers

    Actually that's an interesting point that the 2D symbol view thing introduced with 2019 might be seen as going in this direction. I'm still on 2018 so haven't messed around with that yet - does it allow you to set up symbol objects such that they would show as a 2d over-ride in a horizontal section as well as a vertical section? I've struggled a bit to see the point of that new feature but maybe it could be quite useful if it works in horizontal sections.
  13. line-weight

    Hide Classes Within Layers

    Yes I think that a lot of problems arise from dealing with the merging of display paradigms. My feeling is that design layers are still useful as an organisational device (it might be that stories can take their place, I don't know because I gave up on stories a while back). I think that it's top-plan that may be the redundant part. I'd be happy to see the back of top/plan, alongside section viewports (including horizontal sections) being improved and made a bit more clever/customisable. I did a thread on this subject a while back:
  14. Thanks to Jim for converting so I could open. Ok, so I can see you have your grid 'planes' set up as rectangles, no fill, and linetype is your special labelled linetypes. (When I look at your sheet layer 'BOM 413 (Elevation)' though, the grid lines don't show up in any of the viewports for me...not sure why?) - I can see that you can set up each of those rectangles such that it is outside of the bounds of any of the model geometry. Then if you take an elevation, top or bottom view, one of the sides of the rectangle will be in the foreground and will show on top of the model when in a viewport. - How does that work in a sectional viewport though? Because you will see the 'far' side of that rectangle but it will beyond and obscured by any model geometry that's in front of it. - Presumably you've not found any way for your grid lines to remain accessible to snap to or measure from whilst editing inside a container object such as a group? - In practice how do you make use of the grid lines? For example, say you wanted to draw, from scratch, a cube that in plan was centred on 'Grid-07' and with its bottom surface 20ft above 'Grid-100.00ft'? Would you, for example, start by aligning the working plane with one of those grid rectangles? Or do you use multi pane and make use of side/top views along with looking at things in a 3d view?
  15. Hi - thanks - would be interested to look at that however I'm not able to open it in 2018...is that a 2019 file?
  16. ^ what @digitalcarbon shows in that thread is kind of what I'm thinking of. Rather than the basic grid that is discussed in the first few posts. I'm talking about the kind of grid you set up for architectural drawings where you place the grid lines where they are useful, rather than as a regular spacing. It's also common to want to have some of the grid lines at different angles, for example if the building has a secondary wing which is at an angle to the main building. My questions about @digitalcarbon's grid lines there would be what do they look like in a 3d opengl view (are they planes or lines?) and also do they remain visible within container objects. I can't think of how I could set something up so that it would still remain accessible whilst editing within, say, grouped objects.
  17. line-weight

    Hide Classes Within Layers

    I used to use them a fair bit when I was still working entirely in 2d so also in top-plan. Sounds like you manage to use them in 3d. I presume that wouldn't be a sectional viewport though. I think it might be sectional DLVPs that tend to send everything haywire (I just tried again this evening and still find them to cause problems, started another thread about it).
  18. line-weight

    Hide Classes Within Layers

    Do you find this reliable? In the past I've had problems with odd things happening to DLVPs viewed in SLVPs, so have been a bit nervous about using this kind of setup. It's with 3d views that I've experienced that though.
  19. ***edit: Originally this thread was titled 'My wish: VW2018 to have no new features. Please.' Shortly after the release of VW2018 it was changed to: 'My wish: VW2019 to have no new features. Please.' It is now changed to: 'My wish: VW2020 to have no new features. Please.' *** Instead, all resources should be put into making already-existing features work properly. Doors, windows, stairs, structural members. I'm sure everyone can add their own things to this list. Anything else in the "known issues" list. Wishlist items that relate to existing features and which obviously are important to many users. I don't actually care what new features are offered in VW2018. I won't really be interested in paying for them because I won't really trust that they'll work in practice, even in the SP2 and beyond versions. Much more valuable to me would be the ability to reliably use the tools that are supposedly there already, but which I don't use because either a bug or a crucial dysfunctionality means they aren't useful in real practice. One of the best "features" of 2017 was the revamped resource browser. Something everyone has to use all the time but which was horrible to use. I actively avoided going near it and it discouraged me from trying all sorts of things. It's not now completely perfect but it's loads better and it changes the way I use VW. It wasn't a flashy new toy but its real world benefit is much higher than, say, the Structural Member tool which still doesn't seem to be usable. I think this is a serious issue with VW. Please vote this up if you agree. I am worried that we'll get left behind as the rest of the world transitions into proper BIM, not because they've got fancier features but because they have software that works properly and reliably in its core functions - something VW does in 2D but not in the context of BIM/3D.
  20. line-weight

    Exporting to pdf - vs. image file - file size

    Have just realised there's an option to change default from PNG to JPG in VW preferences by the way. I might try changing this.
  21. line-weight

    Hide Classes Within Layers

    One way I have tried doing this is to have the main floorplan in top/plan view as you have, and then level(s) below that viewed in hidden line as a top (not top/plan) view. This done with two viewports, cropped around each other. A bit of a fiddly workaround though. At present I am experimenting with abandoning top/plan altogether and doing the whole thing as a horizontal section...that is kind of another story though.
  22. I'm spending today sorting out my title block borders, rebuilding them so they work properly with the 2018 onwards system. So far in VW I've done drawing issue sheets manually. But am wondering if I should start using the 'issue manager' provided (perhaps with a little customisation). However, I don't want to invest loads of time in understanding how it works, just in order to find out that there's some crucial problem with it that makes it useless in practice (which sadly is what I've come to expect of so many VW functions). And if a drawing issue sheet gets messed up, that can be a complete nightmare to sort out. So my question is, does anyone out there currently use it in real world practice for architectural drawing issue and does it work properly?
  23. line-weight

    Do you use the 'issue manager' and does it work?

    @Hans-Olav I would still be interested to know what you use for your drawing register - is it the VW automatically generated one that is discussed in that other thread? Or is it one you built yourself?
  24. line-weight

    Drawing registers

    I think I ran the script and then I recalculated the worksheet, rather than updating it from the Manager.
  25. line-weight

    Drawing registers

    Unfortunately it's not of much use if the sequence of issues gets mixed up, like you can see in my example where it puts issue no. 3 after issue no. 8. I think it would be better just to live with some empty columns in the worksheet.

 

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.

×