zoomer

Member
  • Content count

    3,951
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

243 Spectacular

7 Followers

About zoomer

  • Rank
    Vectorworks Addict

Personal Information

  • Location
    🇪🇺 Europe
  1. Not to get misunderstood, I also like the new features very much. But I see no chance keeping existing source contour data and recreate a new Site Model each time I have to re-edit source data - if all my contour work is gone then too. Hard enough that re-editing existing contours may destroy your proposed contour work. So kind of a one-way street. May be fine for simpler terrains though with contour editing only though. I need to export my site models to a 3D App and maybe do some edits there, so I need a proper mesh without unnecessary extra vertices that make work harder. (BTW the Face Normals are flipped) Currently I have to rework my DTM's existing source data, because there are some kind of "proposed" existing changes, like a street that outside of the property that is in planning and now changed. So not something you want in your cut and fill calculations by proposed changes. And these changes caused problems in existing so I need full control over source data.
  2. I am not 100% sure if deactivation will always prevent Cameras from destroying their coordinate values when being edited. But there aren't many situations where can keep Cameras deactivated for editing. Even when not using Cameras in Design Layers but linked into viewports, for example to edit my exposure settings I have to activate the Camera View. I lost Cameras this way too. Although it seems that Cameras survive a bit longer when used linked into Viewports only.
  3. I found a workaround. You shall not lower the Layer You have to keep the Layer on 0,00 m but move Source Contours up and afterwards your Site Model's Z value down again. So Site Model Surface has correct height and 3D Poly Editing has correct Height. But generated Contours Height Labels are off now in 2D. I can have an additional Start Contour Offset = + Sea Level or not, but I can't see that it does what you expect or even anything.
  4. YES, there were changes. According toh help : "The Triangular Irregular Network algorithm has been improved, generating site models much faster while avoiding generation errors."
  5. Looks like the Lines were misinterpreted as Dimensions (?)
  6. That for me is an absolute no-go ... That is why I'm back to VW 2017 and will ignore VW 2018 until I can edit, or at least extract, source data again. I do edit and optimize my SM Source Data all the time over the whole project duration. It was stated, you asked we listened, People asked why we can't just edit the contour lines ? Fine. But this new edit mode is no replacement for taking away Existing Source Data Editing ! (I can elaborate on this) First I wondered why I was confronted with just another new arbitrary UI Element again, the "Edit Contour Tools Palette" with grayed out and deactivated standard Palettes Icons. Why not just use the Tools from Standard Palettes ??? Until I realized, the new form of UI will just tell you that you "shall not" use other Tools beside the ones shown when editing Contours. Unfortunately you CAN use other Tools as well, like the Tools you added to your Custom Workspace's RMB Option Menu or all Tools from the Menu Bar. And they work fine like "Simplify Polys" and such things - as long as you stay in your "Edit Mode" Session. But as soon as you left the Edit Mode and come back later, all these Tool Actions will be reverted again ! VW "Contours" are no Source Data at all. They will be generated from the Site Model, which was once created on Source Data. You will see this when Contour Height Settings differ from Source Data Heights. Then Contours will be offset in XY direction from the Meshes Vertices. So there is no more later Source Data Optimization by further Simplify Polygons anymore. You can delete Contours Vertices as you like, that will not Simplify the Mesh. And you can't optimize your Mesh by moving some 3D Poly vertices to the corners of your Texture Beds, if they were positioned curtly beside those and create unnecessary Mesh Salad. Creating proper Meshes is Art and I hand craft my Site Model Meshes by Source Data and need 100% access to that Data.
  7. ++++++++++++ ! That is annoying. Why at every start while searching for SP updates only happens once a week. I'm also still on VW 2017. (Will that message happen even for people from the Netherlands who still have to wait for their 2018 license keys generated for the international VW ?)
  8. Oh no, Layer shifting does not work here. VW 2017 but I had the same havoc in VW 2018. Site Model was at 0,00 like Architectura Data. 1. I lowered the Site Models Layer by -Sea Level 2. Contrary I moved my Source 3D polygons up by +Sea Level Everything looked good. Site Model is at correct 3D height from Building Level, Top Plan Contours and its Height Labels are fine. But as soon as I enter the Edit Source Data Mode (btw Site Model Plane as the only choice) my 3D Polys show a wrong Z-Height ! (Maybe double height ?) This way I can't really edit them nor add any stakes with my given height information. Additional to this height issue, I want to mention that when in any VW orthogonal Side View (which VW calls a "3D" View), snap to an Objects Point to read out its Height, the Coordinate Fields at the right bottom of the View Pane show arbitrary offsets in Z : for the right column = relative height from current active Layer height. (Overall VW height in left column is ok) There is always an arbitrary Offset in Side Views. While it works correct in a "real 3D" View like Isometric.
  9. Yes, the Cameras unfortunately have some problems over the last years now and still behave unreliably with arbitrary behaviors like loosing their positions and other things. I see no workaround so far.
  10. Exactly. Render Instances are the best way in most cases and I would keep this as a main default settings. But there are not so few people out there that work in a way that they ran into problems with the majority of their data. Either by already misusing Symbols in VW in a completely different creative way than they are thought, to workaround other problems, or just working mainly with objects that do not work in C4D Render Instances like Lights or Grass Shaders. From their point of view standard Instance Export may be better. So I see 2 ways for VW to allow flexibility, either a setting option to deactivate Render Instances completely, or better, automatically disabling Render Instances for Symbols that contain incompatible Objects. For now, or in the future if there are any reasons to never change the current export, beside exporting from VW in separate parts, In C4D you can Filter for Instances (+Locators) and switch Render/Standard mode of instances at a time.
  11. Yes, I heard that it is not a localized version so I wondered what they do. Ok, their licensing system still localized.
  12. Ufff I think offsetting user origin + rotating may be a way that I can remember a bit longer
  13. You are the second from the netherlands ... what does that distributor do ?
  14. Yes, that’s what I meant. Beautifully illustrated !
  15. 3 new Wall Styles for the corner ? - outside red - outside gray - inside yellow/gray/white/white So to get 2 Walls, inside and outside. And finally bump those 2 Wall Heads again non capped against the 6 Componant Package Wall ?