Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by line-weight

  1. 25 minutes ago, Tom W. said:


    I use Smart Options Display too all the time. Triggered by hitting Space. I love it but hate the animation (slight delay) on activation + general timidity (prone to disappearing at slightest thing). There are other threads complaining about this...




    I'm too lazy to use the space bar - I'd have to move my left hand several centimeters. Moving my right thumb a few millimeters is just about an acceptable amount of effort.


    Also - space bar is so commonly used for panning, in all sorts of applications, I'd be worried I'd confuse my brain/muscle memory if I started using it for something else in VW.

  2. I mean this thing, (smart options display?)




    It works for me because I just press one button and all the options are there visually for me with icons my brain has already learnt to recognise.

    • Like 1
  3. I just use one of these




    I like the weighted scroll wheel, the scrolling is smooth and you can scroll rapidly by sending it spinning.


    Only thing I don't like so much is the two buttons in the thumb position, they are a bit awkward because where my thumb naturally sits, it presses both of them at the same time. But I have the VW "quick actions" menu mapped to come up when I press those.


    I find there are only so many macros and mapped buttons that I can keep in my head at once so a mouse with a zillion buttons isn't that attractive to me.

  4. 4 hours ago, Pat Stanford said:

    I agree that the Value calculation does not work well. Can you suggest a different option? I have tried $/Render, and Renders/$ both give misleading information.


    Here is a version of the table that just shows the number of renders per day for each system instead of the Value.




    here I have made the "value rating" (renders per day) / (price) x 100


    Higher "value rating" means better value



  5. 3 hours ago, Pat Stanford said:

    If it is repeatable, please send it in as a bug. That is the biggest holdup in getting this fixed is that the engineers have not been able to come up with a replicable case to troubleshoot.

    because it looks like it's fixed by "repairs" to the VW application itself, I'd assumed that sending a file is not necessarily going to produce something replicable, because it somehow depends on the state of the application as well as the state of the file itself.

    • Like 1
  6. Just happened again - when I tried to resize a window opening. Resize the window opening (either using the handles on the object, or by typing a new value in the OIP) and the holes fill in, throughout the model. Undo reverses it, trying the same again, the problem is replicated. It seems to happen if I resize either of the openings on that particular wall - but not if I try resizing openings in other walls in the model.


    Fairly sure I've re-sized those openings a few times since I previously did the "repair" on VW, without issue.

  7. 7 hours ago, line-weight said:

    I don't understand the "value" figure.


    For example M2 Max macbook pro gets 0.0016 and i9 iMac gets 0.0028. They both cost about the same but M2 Max is loads faster. This suggests lower number = better.


    But ...


    M1 Macbook Pro (0.0051) and M1 Mac Mini (0.0110) take roughly the same time for the render, with M1 Mac Mini being half the price. This suggests higher number = better.


    Above^^^ in bold is what doesn't make sense. Those two conflicting observations.


    If numerator = speed and denominator = price, then a high "value rating" number = better.


    If a high number = better, then the M2 Max MBP should be getting a higher value rating than the i9 iMac. But it doesn't in the table. I think a calculation is going wrong somewhere.

  8. 1 hour ago, Don Seidel said:

    The “value” factor, the start of this topic, was to show how much processing power you can get vs the money spent. Any laptop costs a premium for the feature of portability. You also have monitor, keyboard and mouse all in one. So it’s less relative value for the cost…. Generally you can buy a more powerful desktop for less money than the laptop. But people are willing to accept the laptop premium because they must have or really want a portable system.


    Headless Macs, on the other end, don’t come with monitor, keyboard or mouse. ( It’s funny Apple describes “accessory kit” as included with the Mini and Studio Macs… the only accessory is a power chord). So while there are needed peripherals to operate the machine, the collateral cost can be mitigated by using 3rd party products, or extra used products one may have around.


    so the Mini, as intended, is a budget solution. One can always spend more, and have a more powerful, faster system.  But can one get a budget Mac that will work well with VW ? Clearly the answer is yes for many users, now that the M2 Mini has arrived.





    I get the basic idea of value - just meant that the numbers in the table don't seem to make sense.

    • Like 1
  9. I don't understand the "value" figure.


    For example M2 Max macbook pro gets 0.0016 and i9 iMac gets 0.0028. They both cost about the same but M2 Max is loads faster. This suggests lower number = better.


    But ...


    M1 Macbook Pro (0.0051) and M1 Mac Mini (0.0110) take roughly the same time for the render, with M1 Mac Mini being half the price. This suggests higher number = better.

  10. Yes - although I lost all of my door and window openings in that model, when the problem suddenly happened. Not just in that wall.


    The only unusual thing I did to that wall, that I can think of, was to use the "resize" handles to change the shape and size of the window openings, something I'd not tried before because it wasn't possible in earlier versions of VW.

    • Like 2
  11. 1 hour ago, Don Seidel said:

    There is a BUG on the time clock at the bottom of the screen. Sometimes (not always) if you click away to another program or desktop, the stopwatch on screen reports a much longer time than reality...you have o render again to see correct time.


    Even if you don't click away, it still gives wrong results (often shorter than the reality). Plus, I find it takes a while to start counting after I press the "update" button.

  12. 1 hour ago, zoomer said:


    But why is that wall looking like to separate Walls, between Door and Windows,

    although being a single Wall ?

    (Somehow the Wall seem to be broken for me and I can't "SIMPLIFY" it in DWG too !?)


    I don't know!



    1 hour ago, zoomer said:


    So I tried the "Remove Wall Breaks Tool",

    beside that it will also delete Doors and Windows !!!!!???

    The Wall is healthy again.

    Also the openings came back that way.


    Same result here (but this is after doing a "repair" on my VW2023 install).

    Also, moving it by 0,0 will solve it



    1 hour ago, zoomer said:


    Beside the Fillets at Wall Ends, which come from Connections with other Walls

    in your complete File, does that strange Wall separation Lines come also from

    Wall Connections ?


    yes, it does somehow come from a messy wall connection. It is inherited from a "as existing" model which has been changed to the "as proposed" but I have not got around to cleaning up that old connection. Below is what it looks like in the "as existing" model, both in "problem" and "healed" states.


    1 hour ago, zoomer said:


    And there are traces of another Wall Connection directly above the Door on

    the Wall's back side. Is this a valid/needed Connection ?


    As above, no it's not needed in the "as proposed" version. The door opening is enlarged compared to the original.








    Screenshot 2023-01-31 at 11.47.37.jpg

    Screenshot 2023-01-31 at 11.47.51.jpg

    • Like 1
  13. Are you all reporting the time Vectorworks gives you at the bottom of the screen when it finishes the render?


    Reason I ask is that I realised the other day that this number usually does not correspond with reality - if I measure with a stopwatch I get a different time from the one VW claims.

    • Like 1
    • Confused 1
  14. 35 minutes ago, TSG-Sim said:



    It looks like you can use your way and get rid of the margin which is a way of creating the titleblocks side by side and it creates one PDF with all the pages in which does work and if I wanted individual images I can create individual images like that but the only downside to this method is that there is no automatic method of naming the pages like sheets and no way of exporting as individual PDF pages so only one per PDF.


    You can make a title block style which is set to "auto generate page number". I'm never 100% confident I know what's going on with that, but if you make a first instance of the title block and duplicate it, you get a second instance which gets numbered two. I just tried doing a duplicate array of such titleblocks and managed to create 300 of them numbered sequentially from 1 to 300. So if you got the dims right you could overlay these onto your page grid as well as the GL cells.


    All starting to deviate a bit from what all these things were really designed for though!


    As for producing individual PDFs ... there must be some kind of PDF editing app that can split a multi-page PDF into individual pages. But of course maybe you would not end up with sensible file names.



    • Like 1
  15. This has just happened to me in 2023 SP3 too. Door in wall, all fine. Changed the door size and suddenly it's not cutting a hole through the wall. It looks OK in top/plan view but not when I look at it in 3d. Moving it in and out of the wall doesn't solve it. VW thinks it's inserted because it shows as "door in wall" in the OIP.


    Starting to regret moving to 2023 now...






  16. 32 minutes ago, Christiaan said:

    If you get hold of VW UK I'm sure they'll sort that out.


    Yes I might try that.


    I shouldn't really have to though - it feels that zero quality control has been applied to stuff released into a public library.


    Just to illustrate....here are some options if i just want a basic corner unit.




    I can choose between 3 models, "800", "900", "1000". What do those model nos refer to? Something in the Howdens naming system? Don't think so. The basic width? Well, an increase in 100 in the model number seems to be reflected in an increase in 50mm in the actual dimensions. So, doesn't look like it.


    Anyway if I choose model "800" I get this, 1031mm long.




    Of course this isn't going to work. Neither of those numbers, 612 or 631 can be right. The standard Howdens cabinet depth (minus doors) is 575mm.


    This is obvious as soon as you try and place this "corner unit" in a corner between two standard units.


    Where do those 1031 and 631 numbers come from? I reckon they come from the overall dimensions of the actual Howdens corner units, which look like this:



    And it seems available as 931x931 or 631x631.


    What VW is offering me, the "model 800" is some kind of fictional hybrid between that and a 1000mm long standard unit which you can also use in a corner situation:





  17. 28 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

    I read the first half of your post + began thinking damn why did I spend all that time creating all my own custom Howdens symbols, then read the rest of it + thought I'm glad I did...






    Have you built them using the VW cabinet tool, or from scratch?


    I've considered building my own cabinets from scratch because then I can build them fully correctly with things the VW tool doesn't let me have (for example the rear service void) but of course then I lose all the parametric stuff like changing a 600mm wide cabinet to a 500mm wide one at the flick of a switch.

  18. It's a little while since I last fought with the kitchen cabinet tools.


    This time round, I was pleased to notice that the VW library seems to offer "Howdens Universal base cabinet style" as an option.


    Howdens is a popular kitchen supplier in the UK. Their cabinets mostly follow standard sizes that most UK suppliers follow. So in initial planning stages, it makes sense to use their cabinets at least as "placeholders" in setting out a basic layout.


    Well, I thought, great, I don't have to go through the usual process of tweaking the VW cabinet settings to get to something close to a standard UK cabinet. All the Howdens ones are there ready for me.


    But it didn't take long to discover that they have incorrect dimensions. For example there seems to be a confusion between cabinet depth including or not including the door thickness. And the corner cabinets seem simply not to make any sense. I can make a guess at what's happened with those - someone has input some overall dimensions correct for an L shaped unit but not correct for the straight type unit offered. In other words, these items have been prepared without care and proper understanding. So it turns out to be just another method of wasting my time.

    • Sad 1
  • Create New...