mike m oz
-
Posts
4,879 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by mike m oz
-
-
I concur.
Two other issues for me are:
- the delay in responding to a new selection in the information
fields (often for a second or longer).
- the annoying habit of it not registering a selection correctly
within a group. It either registers nothing or tells you 'x'
objects are selected (even if none of them are). The only way
to get the OIP to register properly is to exit the group and
then re-enter it for more editing.
It is frustrating and it needs to be fixed.
To my mind it is a fault and it should be a priority fix.
-
Short answer is yes.
Chris Manus here in Australia has the program tweaked so that he is able to estimate the costs and materials very accurately using the reporting and scheduling functions.
You need to be conscious however that having accurate quantities is only part of the solution. To estimate costs accurately you also need to have:
- accurate up to date prices; and
- the ability to make informed decisions on risk items such as
site constraints and the like.
-
The other big advantage of VectorWorks with RenderWorks is that you are doing all of your work in one program.
This is a significant advantage over doing the model in one program and exporting to another for the rendering. Make a change and you have to re-export and do it all again. I've been there - it becomes time consuming ($) and boring!
It may be justifiable for high quality output where the client is paying you to do this. For the average user however this is not the case - you need to be able to do it quickly and easily as part of your normal workflow. VectorWorks Architect with RenderWorks allows you to do this.
There is also the added advantage of not having to purchase, upgrade and learn two separate programs.
Your decision should be made on the basis of fitness for purpose. Don't run with the sheep just because it is what everyone else is doing - make a clever decision.
-
VectorWorks Architect with RenderWorks would be your best option.
Suggest you do a theoretical cost of ownership for the next 5 year period using historical data. You should include the costs of:
- initial purchase;
- upgrades;
- additional modules which may be necessary for functionality;
- additional libraries which may be required;
- training:
- support; and
- any hardware upgrades that may be necessary.
I am sure you will find that VectorWorks Architect with RenderWorks will come out well in front. An added bonus is you won't have to change to Wintel machines and the nightmare of managing a Windows environment
Whilst SketchUp looks like it might be good for design, having to go back and start again in another program for the design development and contract documentation phases would be frustrating and time consuming.
One of the big plus's of VectorWorks is it's integrated hybrid environment which allows you to work in 2D and 3D at the same time without compromising the output of either. Depending on your client's willingness to pay you can choose how far to take the 3D - if you want it can be not at all. You will still be able to do all of your work satisfactorily.
-
We wish.
NNA - any chance of it being added?
Winders on a square plan I mean.
-
Short answer - yes
The functionality and robustness of 11 is definately worth the upgrade cost.
Architect is even better value and if you are not currently an architect user you should be.
-
Went to an ArchiCAD 9 demo last Tuesday night - just keeping tabs on what the opposition are up to. Many of the new features they were pushing are capabilities that VW and even MiniCAD have long had.
Two things that stood out in ArchiCAD 9 as being better were the dimensioning and text handling. (Apart from live sections of course).
The ArchiCAD dimensioning has the functionality that VW should have - NNA really needs to bring the dimensioning up to a similar capability. (Even if only in Architect.)
The new text handling capability is also impressive - works like a word processor with all of the options for formatting available. (No mention of how it would export to dwg and the like though)
Also the ability for text to retain its orientation when the 'container object' (eg. module) is rotated.
-
The problem could well be due to mirrored objects.
See my post on this problem in WALL SYMBOL FLIP INFO IN OBJECT INFO PALLETTE on the WISH LIST.
The different rendering problem seems to apply to mirrored objects whether they are or are not symbols.
To do with the 'surface normal" direction apparently.
-
This is included in 11 - Object Connect tool with Option key held down. Covered in the manual and also in the "New Trim & Extend Capabilities" QuickTime movie which can be downloaded at www.nemetschek.net/movies/index.html
Alternatively you can download Katerina Panagiotakis' Extend To PIO from the VectorDepot website www.vectordepot.com
"A very useful PIO to extend entities to a specified line."
-
Tee thing that frustrates me is I have seen posts with embedded images. Why some and not others?
Given that we are all image based people a picture would be helpful. In this case the image shows the problem in a way which words cannot adequately describe. The image would be invaluable.
I accept that we should not be able to post images directly so that malicious people can't post innapropriate images. We should however be able to send images illustrating problems to the NNA tecch people and have them insert the images on our behalf.
-
Notice that NNA has not bothered to insert the image for me.
Neither have they bothered to answer my emails asking if there is a method by which I can do this myself.
Are they too busy? Or is this a problem they don't really want to talk about?
-
Surely I am not the only person that this annoys!
-
Robert - yes it does make the initial setup easy
Unfortunately what model setup will not allow you to do is make subsequent changes to the heights of individual storeys of the building (ie its layers) apart from when you add or delete a storey
Any adjustments to storey heights has to be done manually through the layer dialog box.
This is messy and definately not how it should be - I hope you are working to correct this for version 11.5.
-
Even more annoying when you are trying to show a client an OpenGL rendered model on screen. Every time you stop rotating all these 3D loci 'jump' into prominence.
If they had a class of their own they could be made invisible except when needed. it could be argued that for most PIO's they would hardly ever need to be visible.
-
This issue still bugs me (no pun intended) Surely I am not alone
It can't be that difficult for NNA to deal with.
What do the rest of you think
-
Still definately in need of an update
Come on NNA
-
The wish list has been partly resolved.
I would still like to see better control over how the dashes are defined - preferably units
-
VW needs to take this next step so that it can compete effectively with its opposition.
Please say it is coming!
-
Definately needs to be added in the next release
-
I would like to see information returned in the OIP about whether a door or window inserted in a wall has been flipped (ie mirrored).
The reason for this is that the the appearance of glass differs when rendered in Renderwork depending on whether the symbol has been inserted in normal orientation or mirrored.
Currently there is no way of knowing until after you render the image. You can correct 'the flip' for symetrical doors or windows quite easily but this problem means that left and right hand versions of non symetrical symbols need to be created for a correct rendering rather than just mirroring them.
The problem is not restricted to just surfaces with transparency - I have noticed variations with other surfaces as well.
Julian Carr of OzCAD has advised me that it is to do with the direction of 'surface normal' and that nothing can be done about it. I accept this as being correct. However the issue needs to be explained in the renderWorks manual and in my opinin the orientation (ie. flip or mirror) of the PIO or symbol needs to be returned in the Object info pallette so that the obvious inadvertant mirrors can be picked up easily and corrected.
PS I did try to paste an image showing this problem into here without success. I will email it to the NNA tech people and hopefully they will be kind enough to insert it in for me.
Image added 14 Jan 05 - this quite clearly shows how different the appearance is when the same symbol is mirrored.
[ 01-15-2005, 10:08 AM: Message edited by: mike m oz ]
-
VectorWorks doors and windows frustrate the b... out of me.
Place a door or window on the page so you can edit it to what you want for placement in a wall, or to turn it into a symbol.
To see it from the front you have to go to a back view, and...
To see it from the back you have to go to a front view.
Ditto for left and right and the various isometric views - all opposite hand.
Whilst I assume the reason for this relates to the mathematical degree protocol - the in use logic is a nonsense.
THE FRONT SHOULD BE WHAT YOU SEE IN A FRONT VIEW! And so on?
A simple change to the PIO?s would solve this annoying logical conundrum and make the use much more intuitive (particularly so for new and novice users)
And yes I do realise that you can turn the PIO?s around after placing them so that you do see them from the front ? the point I am trying to make is that the program should be geared to the user?s logic and not the programmer's logic. The endeavour should always be to make the program as easy and intuitive to use as possible. The current door and window PIO logic is the antithesis of this.
-
Both stair tools need a make over so that they can do what the users want.
For example the lack of being able top do 'square' winders paticulartly frustrates me.
-
A plug in that would create odd shaped windows such as circles, half circles, hexagons, triangles, etc would be a boon.
Particularly if it would also create an empty opening.
-
I also support the need for variable vertical elbows.
Ductwork quite often has to offset up and down to avoid obstacles or go into areas with lesser head heights. This is invariably done with angles other than 90? to lessen the resistance effect of the elbow on the airflow.
Please add this improvement.
Please share your VW11 + OSX gripes
in General Discussion
Posted
In my experience much of the wierd behaviour in VW 11 is due to the autosave, which interrupts what you are doing.
My advice is to turn it off and get into the habit of manually saving often. if you don't want to do this set the autosave period to 30 minutes or more.
The auto save function caused similar problems in ArchiCAD 8.5. As a result the autosave in ArchiCAD 9 has been changed so that it now waits until you are idle before it operates.
The VectorWorks 'autosave' implementation needs to be like this