JMR

Links are buggy in PC environment, too...the link is suddenly lost, materials replaced in the middle of everything and whatnot. Sometimes it works fine.

Bummer....I can replicate the above both in 2023 and 2025 Design Suite: It appears that the first time the symbol and the symbol within symbol are created and placed, the Space is detected correctly, but if one moves things around, the worksheet will get stuck in the first calculation...very strange. Trying for a 2nd time...now I get SOME of the objects to the worksheet, but not all: moving symbols makes the worksheet to lose track of the objects: We've used this function extensively for scheduling, and so far haven't noticed anything strange...but we have been scheduling symbols and not geometry inside them. Looks like a bug...?

Here you go, it's a VW 2023 file. E SPACE NAME TEST.vwx

The file is VW 2023.

I am...in this case there are symbols within symbols that are listed.

It doesn't, it's just that I've had so many issues with exporting and syncing to different rendering programs, over the years...if I was to find a rock-solid solution via another application, that would be great. Speaking of which, has someone found a particular external renderer that works great with VW? I've used mostly Twinmotion with VW but find the export somewhat buggy, also the user interface is very peculiar IMHO.

Hi, The function does work, check that you have this ticked in the worksheet criteria: Also, the elevation of the object must be exactly at the same elevation as the space object: if your space object Z is 3500, then the symbol has to be at that height as well. If I remember correctly, the function is also aware of the 3D dimensions of the space object (if you have it set), sometimes one can get double spaces and in that case they usually are overlapping in 3D. Or, you might have two flat space objects at the same elevation. Hope this helps.

At least in Finland, but I think the requirement is based on some EU directive -> probably will propagate more widely.

It's going to be some kind of database of the objects and data, I assume something like a .CSV file generated from the model. The exact requirements have not yet been published, AFAIK.

Yes, a quickish rendering in Rhino / Maxwell. Thanks.

Well, photorealistic? I'm especially interested in representation of natural light. better examples: https://www.chaos.com/architectural-visualization#showcase https://maxwellrender.com/gallery/ https://bellarender.com/gallery/

Discussion is resulting, great! Please note that I did not indicate that VW should NOT excel as a CAD program. If I had to choose between the two, I would (have to) choose CAD. Almost anything can be done with time, commitment and processing power. There were a lot of things that were unrealistic ten years ago, that are everyday stuff today. To me, it is clear as day that (real-time) photorealistic presentation will be the expected standard in the very near future, also during the design process. That is, the clients' expectations increase all the time, as they are very much aware what is possible. There is nothing that prevents evolution of software in this regard. Geometry can be exported within the software to another software module for rendering, much like Maxwell for Rhino does and many others, I assume. That is not real-time of course, but proves that there is a pathway already existing for still images at least. I respectfully disagree. Blender can do it...also some other packages do a lot better job with stock renderers. Exactly, this is the point of my post. I've found the Twinmotion live link to be too unreliable, and rendering quality is just not good enough (for me at least). Therefore it would be nice to be able to do rendering in the same program. I guess I'm a bit tired of all kinds of import/export glitches and issues that always seem to exist. In some parts of Europe, in 2026 it will be mandatory to provide building permit documents in 3D (IFC), and in a machine readable format. It will be mandatory to provide an as-built 3D model to the council after the completion of the project. EVERYTHING will be parametric and 3D in the long run. If one doesn't embrace 3D, it's good bye and change of profession. Or the service has to be bought from a third party. This assumes all available funds are 100% committed to improving the existing tools and developing new tools. I doubt the real situation is so rosy. This also assumes the new subscription system was set up only to improve the quality of the product...just have a look at the stair tool, window sills and the structural member tool... Another angle at this might be that VW needs to remain competitive compared to other software solutions. For still images it doesn't matter after the triangulation is done. Maxwell for Rhino plugin does just that. It's one way of doing it. This thread indicates that there are rather different expectations of quality; for me, life-like lighting such as Blender, Maxwell and Corona can do is what I need for my clients.

Hi all, A few Sunday morning musings regarding rendering. Currently there are Renderworks, Redshift, Twinmotion (live link), Lumion, Enscape and a plethora of geometry export options to other programs. All fine and it's good there are options for different workflows. However. I believe it's time for a high-end integrated rendering solution WITHIN Vectorworks, such that is EASY to use and preferably FAST, and works with ALL Vectorworks features (=no functional exceptions like bump maps etc.) There are so many glitches, surprises and and limitations with the current options, that we cannot remain competitive without investing into 3rd party visualization services. Today clients expect life-like photorealistic renderings even in simple projects. I also believe that the new (rather pricey) subscription system should include a rendering solution that is good enough that 3rd party services are not needed for still images. To sum it up, we need to be able to produce high quality renders within Vectorworks, easily. The quality level needs to be something like this (just an example, not endorsing any particular solution): https://www.chaos.com/gallery/product/chaos-corona Hopefully this sparks up some discussion on the matter?

A few thoughts. Last spring I paid for two annual VW subscriptions, 1700e or so each, for two new employees. After three months the building industry ground to an almost complete halt and many ongoing design jobs were put to ice. Suddenly there was no work for all of us. Annual subscriptions cannot be suspended or "parked", stated my vendor. I thought I had already paid for a year of use (beforehand, full amount) and not for a particular product. So, factually, I ended up paying about 570e per month per seat for these licenses, since the work situation hasn't improved and very likely will not this winter. I cannot help feeling that I was stolen money from. From now on it's only monthly licenses for new employees, no matter how solid the job situation looks. Or another software product from the same parent company.

So far, no.