Jump to content

Markvl

Member
  • Posts

    875
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Markvl

  1. Wondering if anyone else has had this happen to them.  I've got a roof face where the eave finishes like a "Vertical Miter" but is chosen to be a "Double Miter"  If you look at the pics attached,

    you'll see that the roof face is selected and shows the "Double Miter" as the out line yet finishes like a "Vertical Miter"  Is this perhaps something that should be filed as a bug.  I've had it numerous times on other projects and some times I can make it go away and other times not.  Now having said all this it happens when I mirror the opposing roof face, cause if I redraw the polygon and use the Roof Face tool it doesn't give me the vertical miter.  Something for the  engineers to look at?

    ScreenHunter_34 Jan. 30 15.11.jpg

    ScreenHunter_35 Jan. 30 15.12.jpg

    ScreenHunter_36 Jan. 30 15.13.jpg

    ScreenHunter_37 Jan. 30 15.13.jpg

    ScreenHunter_38 Jan. 30 15.26.jpg

  2. Wow 900 dpi!  That is very high.  The above image on an A2 sheet we typically don't go any higher than 400 dpi.  900 dpi definitely accounts for high render times.  Do you have a reason for going to 900 dpi.  Perhaps a screen pick of your work would help me to understand.  I have done some Renders at 600 dpi because for one reason or another fine line detail was needed.  Thanks for the compliment.

     

    One other thing that came to mind is high polygonal models/symbols could contribute to long wait times and crashing.  I have found it only takes one bad apple to wreck render times with crashing.  Good clean models/symbols is essential.

    • Like 1
  3. On 11/27/2018 at 1:58 PM, Jim Smith said:

    I agree Kevin, & I might add that like everything in Architecture Use drives everything. For example the Royal Ontario Museum added the  Carbuncle    Chrystal entrance & abandoned the old main entrance & made it chair storage. After a few years of use the old entrance has been quietly refurbished and users get to ignore the Carbuncle Chrystal if they choose - & they do.

    I never liked the Chrystal entry.  I so often find that modern finishes just can't compete with the ways things had been done in the past.  The original entry is so much more grander than the new one.  You feel like you're going into a museum.  Anyways I digress.

  4. @Jim Wilson  Another thing I noticed was an option that was available at least in 2017 but is not there in 2019.  It's a folding door configuration.  So for instance in a corner cabinet setup with an inside corner there never is a two door setup it's always a folding door.  The cabinet will only show the two door setup.  When you apply a door handle, two handles will show up on the inside sides.  Would you be able to find out why this was changed, removed, forgotten?  The pic provided is a screen shot of the OIP from 2017 for the corner cabinet.

    ScreenHunter_29 Nov. 27 14.50.jpg

     

    This is how it should look. 

    ScreenHunter_30 Nov. 27 14.59.jpg

     

    This is what the cabinet looks like in 2019.

    ScreenHunter_32 Nov. 27 15.01.jpg

×
×
  • Create New...