line-weight

To give credit where credit is due, these forums in my experience are on the whole uncensored and we do seem quite free to moan, criticise the product and company, and talk about alternative products, without interference.

Ok, now some complaints about the Help System's feedback form. - I click on "was this page helpful" on the relevant help page. It takes me to the feedback form but without remembering where I've come from. I have to manually copy&paste the URL of the help page. Why isn't this automatically registered? Surely this doesn't require genius level web coding. - Again I have to fill in my name and email address and everything, even if I'm already signed in to the forums, or already have vectorworks open and attached to my specific licence number and so on - And then I have to do a Captcha, selecting boxes with motorbikes or traffic lights or whatever. These maybe are small things individually but it's all friction against swiftly submitting feedback, making the user do work to help VW fix something that is wrong.

I've got questions too. Have I understood it right, that if I want an image of something in my Graphic Legend Cells, that something can't just be anything, it has to be something that fits one of these "display modes": And "Hybrid Object Display" means, presumably, a display mode that can display "hybrid objects". "Hybrid objects" seems to include symbols. So, I can have an image of a symbol at least. But does this mean that I can't have an image of, say, an extrude, or a generic solid? Note to VW Help section writers - I can't see anywhere that explains what exactly these "Display Modes" are. I can't see anywhere that clearly defines what a "hybrid object" is. How are we supposed to know what "Component Display" is? Component of what? What's a "Vertical Wall" - is it different from a wall? Aren't all walls vertical? Etc Etc

"the names of each cell are not very intuitive" is a great bit of understatement here! Agreed on all the requests, and a bit disappointing there's no response to this from anyone at VW - given that this is one of the headline new features of VW2023. On request 4, not sure how this would work for symbols which have several instances, the context of each of which might be different. Presumably there would have to be the ability to specify a particular instance, and then further controls about the extent of the context, what is included in it and so on. It could get complicated.

As I am currently in the process of getting my head around Graphic Legends and what they can/can't do, I'd be interested to see this.

My impression is that some memory related things have been improved between 2022 and 2023, but not necessarily such that they are any better than they were in 2021. And some have got slightly worse between 2022 and 2023.

I'm not disputing that more memory is better - and sure, given the option buying a new mac today I'd take 32 over 16. However - I believe there is a problem with the way VW deals with memory, that has not been entirely fixed in 2023, which means that it just keeps wanting more and more, until everything stops working. Perhaps only in certain situations, which not all users will experience. That's based on my own experience, and what I've seen other users noting. In addition to @zeno describing it happening on a 64GB machine, for example here is @Tom W. describing having to restart VW2023 due to running out of memory on an intel machine with 48GB (if his signature is correct). Again, I'm not disputing that 32 will generally be better than 16 - but I'm not sure it would solve this particular problem, other than that it would perhaps not occur until a little further into a session.

My (limited) understanding is that once the xGB of RAM is used up, stuff that would otherwise be put into RAM is put on the hard disk instead, of course slowing everything down. On my 16GB machine Activity Monitor has registered up to 80GB before things seize up. This is why I wonder how much difference having 32GB rather than 16GB would make - because if VW is happy to shovel in 80GB of stuff on a 16GB machine then surely it would do the same on a 32GB one. (And ultimately - why does it do this anyway - surely it shouldn't have to. It does this when I batch-render a bunch of RW VPs, as if it can't do one, release memory, do the next one, etc. Maybe this behaviour has been fixed for section VPs but not RW VPs?)

I reported on some of my memory-hogging experiments here. My impression is that having more RAM might not really help (it simply would take a bit longer for it to fill up and everything collapse). I think that was based on some comments from other users, for example this one here by @zeno describing memory on a (I think) 64GB machine getting eaten up, and going off up to 140 or 190GB.

Interested to know where you see this producing real-world use benefits. For example my comparison between 2021 and 2023 so far has shown: - Updating section viewports in 2023 takes about 60-70% of the time it does in 2021. That's a significant difference, although still a long way from the "real-time update" that everyone would really like. - Renderworks renders I see a marginal but measureable improvement - Viewing heavy (ie a lot of complex viewports) sheet layers no improvement - Memory-hogging (ie filling up RAM and then not releasing it after completing processes) no improvement. Unfortunately for me it's the last two things that would make most difference to my day-to-day use. What I can't test myself is whether things would be different if I had more RAM available.

Hm, I'm not sure I agree, unless it's the case that, for example, 90% of users don't really attempt to use VW in a 3d-based workflow. Although, it wouldn't entirely surprise me if that was the case.

Have to say, I don't think of myself as a "power user" (always find that term a bit cringe). I get by fine with an M1 mac mini with 16GB RAM for now. Almost everything that slows me down or annoys me is stuff to do with VW rather than the mac mini. I'm not in a hurry to think about moving to an M2 anything at this point.

Sure. But they don't necessarily "do the math" for what's best for VW-focussed use. For example VW seems quite memory hungry but often wastes processing power. One of the issues with the first M1 mac minis was the maximum of 16gb RAM.

So... how about these new M2 mac minis? Any substantial benefits for Vectoroworks users compared to the M1 mac minis? And do they make the Mac Studio less attractive in relative terms, taking cost into account? https://www.apple.com/uk/mac/compare/?modelList=Mac-mini-M2,Mac-studio-2022,Mac-mini-M1

As I understand it, "emitter brightness" is a kind of brightness factor that you can apply to all (or some) light objects in your file. So if you have a bunch of light sources and you want to dim them all a bit, if they are each selected to "use emitter" then you can do this in one operation by decreasing the "emitter brightness" percentage. Instead of having to go around each light object and adjusting all individually. It is (sort of) explained here https://app-help.vectorworks.net/2023/eng/VW2023_Guide/Rendering2/Setting Spotlight_rendering_options.htm On your other points, nearly all are familiar to me as points of frustration/confusion. Lighting in Renderworks is one of the bits of VW that it feels has had little attention paid to it in years. It often feels that Renderworks is being quietly run down in the hope that everyone just uses (at extra cost) third party rendering software, a shame because as you say there are a lot of benefits to keeping everything in one file. And with sufficient time & effort you can get pretty good results from RW.

It's definitely still a problem in VW2023, if you use "export as PDF". If you go to "print" and then in the print dialogue select "save as PDF" as the destination, instead of a printer, the PDF produced that way seems to have undistorted colour, so this is a workaround of sorts, but it doesn't help if you are batch-exporting drawing sheets via the "publish" command.

Thanks. This I think is a result of me submitting it as a bug a week or two ago; I had email confirmation that it's being looked at.

Am I right in thinking the various image based solutions aren't going to work if the target is to produce hidden-line vector drawings?

yeah. It's still a drag to have to fill out all the compulsory bits of the form though. I'm already signed in under a forum username. I can already be contacted here. But I have to go and type out my name and email address and look up my VW serial number and choose an operating system from the dropdown that doesn't include my operating system because it hasn't been updated since macos 11. And then if I want to upload anything I have to go to a whole different form which gives no indication of being linked to what I submit in the main one. The whole tone of the process is not "sorry the software you have paid us quite a lot of money for is not working. Let us try and sort it out for you", it's "follow the correct procedures and we might consider being so generous as to cast a glance over your issue. Don't push your luck. Please do not send emails asking if your bug is fixed"

Yes, adding a proper ticketing system for support would definitely be welcome. And, for bug submits, not just a confirmation that your submission has been received but a follow-up that tells you whether it's been acknowledged as a bug, and if so, gives you a reference number that you can use to complain about it still not being fixed 6 months/years later. And in the ideal world, periodic updates that might give you an estimate for which release it will be fixed in, that sort of thing. However - while all that would be good, I quite firmly believe that the forum being the first stop (for those who want to use it) is something to be encouraged, because firstly it's a quick way of identifying via other users when it's not a bug, just something you're doing wrong (which must save some admin time for VW) but secondly because it's all on public record - everyone can see when something is first noted, everyone can benefit from any discussion around it which might include temporary workarounds, and anyone can chase it up when no updates on progress are forthcoming. And, a quick idea can be formed about whether it's something that everyone can replicate and if not, it can often be pinned down to a certain set of conditions. Again, doesn't this actually save VW people some work behind the scenes?

Careful though that this does not give you a hugely over-detailed 3d mesh object that then bogs your file down massively.

I've decided to make a specific thread for this, rather than sending other threads off course by going on about it each time it happens. Bugs or problems are raised here in the forums all the time. I know that the forums are not necessarily supposed to be a formal route for reporting issues (although, in 2023, I think they should be, really). And sometimes but not always, a VW employee will respond. Whenever a VW employee does respond, it's greatly appreciated, because often they can give advice, or just reassurance that something is being looked at. But quite often, we are then asked to re-report the problem elsewhere, for example using the "bug submit" form. More recently, I've been asked to report issues with online help via the "feedback" button in the online help. This can be intensely irritating. Why? Because I've already explained the problem, in the forum thread. I've already used a fair bit of my own time doing so. I've put it somewhere publicly visible, so that other people can contribute, confirm whether they can replicate, or benefit from any helpful replies or solutions. Jointly, the users on that thread have used their own time to provide information about something that doesn't work in software that they've paid for. This information is all sitting there in a thread, often including multiple screenshots, video recordings etc. I don't want to spend more of my own time typing the same information into a webform. And re-uploading images and videos that are already there on the forum. And once I've done that, it just disappears into the ether. If a VW employee has responded to a thread, looked at the issue and agreed it's a bug or a problem, is it unreasonable to expect that they take action to get the information into whichever part of the system it needs to get into? This does happen sometimes. I want to be a bit cautious with this request because I realise that maybe some employees look at forum threads and offer help even if it's not technically part of their job to do so. And I wouldn't want to disincentivise them from offering help by creating a fear that they will get caught up in onerous paperwork as a result. So it's not about anyone individual but about VW's policy. It's been suggested many times before that the forums need someone who is dedicated to picking up this kind of stuff. The situation where you spend time reporting a problem (a problem which itself has already cost you time and effort), then get asked to spend even more of your own time reporting it all over again, and then zero feedback on whether anything's being done about it, this is a terrible "customer experience" and it's way out of step with how good software companies deal with things these days.

I've repeated these tests in VW2023 SP3 In summary - VW2023 more memory hungry in general than 2021 and 2022 - there is maybe marginal improvement in navigating around a complex sheet layer, compared to 2022 but not better than 2021 - step 14 shows an improvement on 2022 but again not an improvement on 2021 - step 15 demonstrates that VW will in certain situations still just keep eating more and more memory until it runs out and crashes. Sure, 44 viewports is a lot to do in one go but I don't see why it can't just deal with a batch of manageable size, release memory, do the next batch, etc. NB that when it eats up 80GB of memory this is on a mac mini with 16GB RAM! @Stéphane if you are having memory problems in VW2021 I would suggest that you avoid VW2022 but maybe VW2023 would be OK, that is, not necessarily worse than 2021.

Discussed in this thread: I didn't know this was such an old problem - been going on at least 10 years going by when this thread was started. I've not yet tested whether there's an improvement in VW2023.

They show that they are asking, and maybe that they are listening. But the next stage on from listening is acting. This thread was started in October last year, and has made it clear - I think - that the online help doesn't explain everything about this new tool. It's now January and as far as I can see, the online help has not been added to. It's great that there's going to be a Coffee Break session but the online documentation is much more important. There are other sections of the online help that don't fully explain certain tools, which I've pointed out many times, and it's the same story - nothing happens. Years go by and nothing happens.