zoomer

Usually when nothing is there it is geometry sub Z 0,00, which will just be occluded by TM's default ground plane at Z 0,00. You can delete that default ground plane and check if your geometry was below or is really not there.

I also think it should be that way. I just have seen it also different.

I did that all the time with VW to C4D Exchange. I pulled out all versions related objects on extra temporary Version Layers in VW. What you do with SLVPs and Publish, you can do very comfortable in C4D and "Render Takes" system. Exchange was usually a sub 10 second "send to C4D" and sub 5 second load in C4D and pretty reliable. And you have the comfort of automatic custom output naming à la Prefix ProjectName $CameraName $YYYYMMDD $hhmmss Suffix ... to your liking (Usually most done via RenderTakeName ...) You can start such batch rendering process when you leave the office and could be sure it's there next morning.

Opposed to Walls, for Slabs it is pretty easy. Myself and many others use Slab sandwiches .... The Structural Slab and a separate Floor Packe Slab on top. If needed also an Insulation package (or Ceiling stuff) below. Does currently not work for Walls because of the inserted PIOs. Does work for Slabs mainly because Slab openings usually do not change that often. But a change in thickness would be no fun for Slab packages either.

A "Component Container" ?

Just that Revit App and Revit users aren't always very ambitious in producing proper IFC exports. My experience is that IFC is only a giva-away for the few non Revit participants and BIM master model coordination isn't done in an IFC App but in Navisworks. Closed BIM.

😃 I think we agree. (But you were faster)

I ran into this too. Meanwhile we have building materials which helps to creates new Styles from scratch. But changes in thickness can get very tedious. So we also need "Component Styles" E.g. Concrete-Style A : concrete X, 20 cm, structural, .... And when you have to change thickness to 25 cm in Style, all Wall Styles will follow (?)

First, I always postulate that BIM CADs need to separate Structure from Finish. You may likely have 10-20 Finishes and 10-15 Structure Styles. But in all needed combinations that does no more make sense. OK that needs also intelligent PIO Insertions like Windows and Doors that are able to cut into more than a single Wall. If the Finishes are defined by Space settings and or outer/inner building element state - don't know. My other CAD at least allows to manually assign cutting elements to also cut other objects. And for Styles, it has an option for a variable thickness for one of the components. (Like the same concrete Slab package that uses multiple thicknesses for the structural Slab, according to bearing needs) This saves a lot of Styles or their similar duplicates. As we are in VW .... As long as it makes sense I do have Style Duplicates. Exceeding that, I may start searching for some workarounds.

So a similar issue like with Visualization Palette (?)

OK, if you had given a more useful number, I would have said that it is maybe because ACAD Paper Spaces/Sheet Layers have their own Scale option. So things that VW does not have may get lost in translation. But scale by 0.9628 !? Seems more like USD to EUR conversion ..... It feels like everything in ACAD has its own Scale. PaperSpace, Viewports Annotation Layer, Annotations, Texts, .... So much that I was not able to manually create a useful Sheet with a few Viewports with everything in a same give Scale from scratch.

I also had to drag in the Site Module Processor into my menu to make Validate appear. Then I had "Site Model From Source Data Site Model From Boundary Simplify 3D Polygons" 2 times in my menu. If you select one from the processor group, it will select all of them. So I could delete my old "Processor" group without the Validate ..... All fine now. But who invents such command "Blocks" - and why ? Whatever. So I will file a wish request to rename the Worskspace Editor/Menu/"All Menus" to "nearly All menus"

I am just coming from the 3DSMax past where you had to delete all occluded Faces and such tricks to get realistic render times ... Totally OK if it works for you. And of course mandatory if you need a certain quality for detail shots, correct shadows or light power ..... And no experience yet how these workflows need to change/adapt to real time GPU renderers like Twinmotion.

I always thought Guides (or Guide Lines) were a special feature of the german VW localization only. But AFAIK it is and they have some special features.

I think all above makes much sense ....

For my purposes they need too much render time. (This where VRAY started to finally get faster than standard C4D renderer) I always fake them by glow textures ..... (Global Illumination activated and higher settings mandatory) But to avoid splotch explosions, you need to have enough glow face area and enough of them to not need to go much over 200% intensity. (Usually only 120-160%) I do not try to mimic the light source body and avoid extreme face aspect ratios. So I usually fill the whole inner lamp area .... Works great for larger office spaces with typical square ceiling tile lighting but usually also ok for typical indirect lighting behind gaps like shown by the VW 2024 start up image ....

That was my first VW 2024 experience too when I accidentally looked at visualization palette by accident (just to help another user with lighting issues). Total havoc. I just thought that it was his file that was simply complete corrupt or broken. I also read about SP2 announcements (SPs are now called Updates ....) about Viz Palette issues and so expected (that someone extensively tests through the whole Viz Palette Features and fixes it) the Viz Palette to work now perfectly again with SP2.

Found it ..... Interesting, I have never noticed this before. But for me it just "locks" my rectangle. (OIP does not show a "Guide" type either) And can't delete it manually, before un-locking it. Together with "delete all Guides" it gets quite handy again. (I hope it will only delete Guides and not all locked Items !?) But nearly a bit to complicated for my stupid brain again ..... OK, maybe I should not use Rectangles as guides, just Lines. As I do 3D only, Lines (or basically all 2D) can appear only as guides, so deleting all Lines (*) from time to time should work for me without risks. (*) setting all visible, all editable - draw a new Line - Magic Wand Selection - delete

Interesting. I also do not find "Validate 3D Data" in my custom workspace (VW architecture here) Nothing new if you migrate your workspaces. But strange that "Validate 3D Data" does not even appear in the "All Menus" list !?

Before I think too much, my keep it simple stupid approach would be - Rectangle Tool - first point at building corner - holding SHIFT to force a square rectangle - snap to known side/desired distance - Reshape Tool/parallel mode - snap to rectangle - delete rectangle Maybe a Circle would be faster but I would need to first search for the circle Icon in my custom palette. (I never need Circles) I do it all the time that way ... like placing a helper cube to get an auto plane for location and orientation of the rotate tool or such things.

Hmmh, I was basically always happy with the Organization Palette in Visibility Mode. You can select multiple of you properly named Viewports and check and change your beautifully legible named Classes and Layers visibilities very comfortable. I do the same sometimes from Sheets by selecting multiple Viewports or set them by Pipette Tool. And with VW 2024 I may need to explore and get used to Viewport Styles ..... Saved Views were never my favorite Tool for Visibilities. I use them mainly for 3D Exports only. The problem for me always was that the Saved Views were outdated so quick by additional Class/Layer creation while working and therefore Saved View Visibilities got arbitrarily in large parts. So they needed some regular care. But yes, in most cases, all Viewports on a Sheetlayer may likely use the same Class Visibilities though.

I think it is meant to work. If something does not work, I am sure they will fix it.

I see two possibilities, a) the DXF Export was only 2D b) the DXF is 3D but you imported it with 2D option only

I think yes. TM is a standalone App. You export a Datasmith from VW and will "overwrite" it for the next exchange. TM also reads the Datasmith to load it into TM data structure. I think the magic or fails of an exchange happens when you synchronize the Datasmith inside TM again (?) AFAIK a Datasmith contains separate files of each single object or texture. No clue where it is exactly saved, when there come in new objects in Datasmith or ones that got deleted or edited. Enscape is no standalone App. It is only a Plugin that works inside or on top of an App like VW. AFAIK, when adding Enscape Objects, you will add them into VW. As dummy representation for CAD performance needs but final appearance only in Enscape Window.

I had the same problem with some of my Doors after migrating to VW 2024. (Doors with side and top lights) The only thing I found was to use the standard Mirror Tool. (Usually I avoid that in CAD) I am not sure if that was the recommended way and hope it will not harm or risk my Doors.