ratherfishing

With this, used with "Hide others"-option, it would be very handy to do visibilities and visualizations, + use them in the viewports procedurally.

Once they do it, it would be great if the pickup-symbol/top-rig symbol would not hit so bad on file size. Last time I used the pick-up symbols, file size increased with pickup-symbol size x amount of pickups.

Lot of us here totally know what you are saying. Your issue is a total classic and will appear in many situations. I try to give some context to help. Im sure you already know some/a lot of this. First of all, Lighting Devices are (as I tell this to myself) Plug-in objects, not symbols. Lighting instrument insertion tool activates when you double-click the fixture in Recource Manager. The tool takes the symbol, does its own thing to it, and puts it into the drawing. The tools has a mind of its own. Point being, inserting Lighting device is not the same thing as inserting symbol, even though this is not obvious. The part of the manual you link is about hybrid symbols. Lighting Device can not use the hybrid function completely. The functionality is coming, I have been told. Technically, I think this is answer to your original question. Top/Plan is special view, using 2d components of objects. 2d component can be anything, whatever is the geometry in 2d component of obect. In your fixture, 2d component is built to represent the fixture in certain orientation. Your actual orientation is different, and 2d component has no idea about it. 2d component is not dynamic with fixtures (as sort of explained earlier), so it just shows the only thing it knows. There are few easy ways to tackle this: 1) delete the whole 2d component of the fixture (go to edit 2d component, select everyhting-delete). It will force the 3d geometry to show up in Top/Plan. May not look so nice, but sort of fixes the problem. 2) edit the 2d component of the fixture to represent needed orientation. You can also have a few versions of 2d components in different classes, and turning those classes on/off you can select needed component to match 3d orientation What is good about option 1 is that it will show the fixture (or whatever symbol) correctly even if you go for very odd/random/varying-angles. Option number 2 is what I have done in this same situation.

Thanks! I have tried that as well. It is a possibility, but I still have to configure Saved View when drawing, and Viewport Style on sheet layer side. No way to sync them, so I have to manually add/fix visibilities.

Hi, I have been using VWX for a pretty long time and use it all day everyday. Since day two or three I have found it very slow to manage visibilities of classes and layers in viewports. In WYSIWYG and many other softwares, it is very easy to create scenes or other sets of visibilities, and then use the scene in viewport. If I create a new layer, I can include it in scene and be sure it will be visible in all viewports/plots using that scene. I can also pretty much know how the plot is going to look like from design views without navigating to sheet. In VWX managing classes and layers is a separate operation from design phase. In my dream, I would have a scene/saved view called "Rigging+Roof+Data Tags", containing visibility-settings. I would then use it to draw and redifine it as I go. The plot using this scene/view would update its visibilities automatically and be ready when I want to print. How you all, my dear fellow-users are tackling this? Are class/layer strcutures so fixed that this is not an issue? I see it doing the trick, but it would mean a huge template file, and I like to keep my templates as simple and small as possible and scale up only if needed. I know about organisation dialog, visibility tool, trick to do viewport and use eyedropper, and various scripts somewhat tackling this issue. They help, but not enough for me. Thanks all!

Thanks, I´ll go give a vote.

I came across when looking info about the similar thing. I have my own hoists, and I would like to place the whole thing to my own definition class, like "Hoists-Prolyft-Model xx". I can use the "assign class"-setting, but the chain goes to none class (and gets the objects class in OIP to none as well). The class settings in Hoist tool semm promising but don't help. I have also checked with default VWX hoists and get the same results. My goal is to a) assign the hoist automatically to the right class and b) be able to hide the hoist with that class. So, any news or help with this?

Changing resolution did not help, so I renamed folder-started vwx-renamed folder back to original-started vwx again. It fixed the problem and kept all my stuff intact. Thanks Pat! ps. when I renamed the folder and started the program, it requested reactivation. Is this always if I reset the preferences? The "computer died on the festival site, borrowed a machine, installed VWX on borrowed machine and now I need to wait for VWX people to manually reset licences"-scenario has always worried me, but it seems the same problem appears if the nuclear option is needed to fix the program. I know I can activate three computers, but I tend to have them in use.

Hello, I cant't replace symbols, because the window, where I should select the symbol from is huge and goes over my screen. I have ultarwide monitor, that's probably somehow the issue. Is there a way to fix this? I cant resize the window. Thank you!

Two weeks in with MBP M2 Max/64gb RAM, my VWX experience is like another software. Files open in 1/3 time, navigating around is 2-3x faster. Viewports render fast instead of program crashing. I don't know what it is, but for me Macs have always outperformed PCs in Vectorworks use. Now when I have a pretty powerful Mac for the first time in years, the difference is just huge. Not to mention it is laptop vs tower..

@Peter Telleman I'm pretty sure you can use "insert connection"-tool to create some kind of connection between ladders and truss. I guess it won't be perfect, but may be helpful. @spettitt all kinds of drops and variants of the same thing are very familiar for me as well. I have found Production Assist to be very helpful with these.

I often find coordinates pretty useful, even if it only for the center. With working plane it is easy to get any coordinates. But if I align or distribute multiple positions or want to just check their places in space, I find the coordinates handy. If you have only one truss then it it all the same. The biggest thing still, I think, is the ability to bake all the necessary stuff into same position. If I have a truss position, and I have other objects that are in real life rigging objects, but in VWX symbols, and I want to change height of the whole thing in one go, the only way I know is to have everything as HP and then change the z-height. With truss system I need to have the system, for example LX1, as one thing and then the extra pipes/rig acc + fixtures as other thing. It is in some ways better, since it keeps the hoists attached, but it breaks the position. I also have two LX1s, one is the truss and the other is everything else. How it is different, or does it even matter, depends on the use case I think. I have data mapped to custom records and all the gear data is synced to Excel via few worksheets. I also have users (and not users) of all possible softwares, in many different companies, who all use the files I create. For those reasons, and for me personally, It feels useful to have everything done the same way, even if the way is not perfect or even optimal. When these things are not a factor, I mix different ways of doing things gladly. Many truss-systems are very well done just as you describe. As to how it should be, I agree with you on many things. As for the HP, I would like to change trim with z-coordinate without disconnecting hoists. As I like to keep things "simple", whatever it means in this subject, grouping truss objects goes pretty far as well. For me it basically only lacks the ablity to take fixtures not directly in the truss with it if the group gets moved.

I think both ways have some good and some bad to them. In my view the biggest advantage is that HP is somewhat usable, yet not perfect, container. It gives coordinates about the position, and moving the whole truss is a little bit easier compared to moving the system. Also, very often trusses, even without clear subhangs or dropdowns, contain additional outriggers, calmps and pipes. With HP you can bake everything in and treat it as one. When using truss system, you have to use HPs anyway for some cases (as you said), so you have two kinds of positions, you might need several data tags to report on same thing and so on. I think a lot of people use HP for everything so they can have only one workflow instead of mixing two workflows. Even though, to be fair, it is true that even if you use HPs, you still sort of use systems as well. Handy... I agree with you about changing truss types, and indeed many times working with just truss objects seems like the way to go. I do not know what is the way everything is "meant" to be done. I think both ways are pretty far from perfect.

My objects are (at max) 50 meters from internal origin, so I think that is not the issue.

Is there any news on this? I have had the issue in 2022, 2023 and now 2024, Mac and PC. In perspective rendering only.