Matt Overton

Not really a workaround for us as we break up files that way then kind of just discovered it. But yes dimension handling needs work.

We actually generate our elevations and sections in a reference file so we can set the file units differently to get dimension tools like the benchmark to display correctly. Every dimension like thing should be able to change the display dimensions.

Also means your QA and beta testers get to pace themselves and can be active all year instead of a release crunch that might not time well for some. Let’s them concentrate on a smaller set of features at a time. would like to see a published schedule as part of say the road map. Even go as far as say certain months will concentrate on the same feature group each year. finally a plug for cleaning out the workspace make a new best practices one that allows improvements to slot in more effectively

I believe you can also use a roof with 3 sides set to be gable ends then the roof will add in the walls to infill each side of the roof.

How does BIM/IFC want this to occur? One of things needed in BIM to seperate responsibilities this would seems to be one of those areas where demarkation is required. Say separating Structure from General building envelop and further separating fit-out/interiors from General building envelop. I know, I know the answer is probably that it wasn't considered how to divide up roles as these "standards" seem to have come out of an everything under a single umbrella approach. Still how we work needs either demarkation or double handling. Basically double handling will continue, technology won't make our lives better but everyone will expect higher productivity because of it. Still if there is an answer to the question it might suggest how the feature wants to work if implemented?

Don't quote me if I'm off here going by memory... In Custom Renderwork you can turn off Anti-aliasing as the anti-alias pixels aren't transparent and don't work to a the background* so often end up making a halo instead of a blend. To me mind photo matching anti-aliasing isn't your friend anyway as things like plants are fuzzy to start with and building edges are hard and shouldn't be fuzzy. *this might be just because I cheap out and set it to low which might make to the pixels to big. Edit to add: Nice work on the entourage. Had so much trouble getting 3D cars to sit nicely aligned to the road surface like that in my last images.

@inikolova It wasn't hard to find. It wasn't labeled as such allowing for unwarned destructive action to occur. Also poor UI that it looks visually the same as the non-destructive close window button.

You can then explode the viewport to linework if you want to change a lot of things. or draw over annotation space. Second option is best as It means you need to fix model issues if they are too far out to mask in annotation space.

All this leads me to say..... Vectorworks should ship a legacy and modern workspace. All the Why's would be answered by saying every say 4 years default workspace gets an overhaul (much overdue) plus there would be a Legacy2022 Workspace that gets new features graphed into it with a shoehorn like occurs now each release. Engineers could plan on the 4 year cycle and leave key commands open for planned future items. Every 4 years everything could be up for grabs in order to surface as much useful function as possible. Most likely the first one would be major just due to the level of technical debt in the system but after that the changes at major revisions are likely to be more manageable.

Still Vectorworks "by class" has been a long standing option and would be useful to extend it as an option to hatches.

Might be worth rebooting the survey here. A lot has changed shifted in the market and well also we all had the lets all work from home for various reasons period in our lives the last couple of years. Could product very different results to 2017

Are surface hatches every exportable to dwg? if not or from memory they have to be rendered then exported as flattened which breaks them to mass groups of lines anyway I don't see why we shouldn't be able to use a tile fill instead of a hatch. Make lots of more complex surface treatments more workable. Indeed would be good with more random patterns like stone walling to be able to draw the tile directly over the image.

Word and Excel are both large installs on MacOS than a Vectorworks install. Scripting might be an issue but Python scripting in the confines of an App is acceptable under i/iPadOS. A focus on improving memory use would help Vectorworks users on all platforms. Plus if the iPad version is tied to service select some more memory intensive operations could be offlined to the cloud as long as produced content could be brought back in to file. How much of the app size is reduced if Renderworks is drop and only VWGraphics engine is only on the device (for now).

Is there a reason why it would be bad to have Low-Medium-High detail levels for a class presentation? Take say a rug or furniture item. Low version of symbol is just a white fill with average pen line used in plans to give idea of layout and room use. For Medium we might add a simple colour and make the line weight white. For High - Image fill replaces colour dropshadows turn on. Similarly we could do the same with textures. We could do this with 3 subclasses of every applicable class but then that creates a management nightmare that viewports already have a control embedded of detail level. I realise this isn't the most high-brow use but once you have your head round the concept the use of level detail in the class itself solves many many low level frustrations that leads us to have many variations of similar classes and most importantly it then requires limited management at point of use. By using the controls that are there it encourages the use of that feature for what it can do now leading to improved libraries already configured.

Also Project files are still large and can bring good hardware to a crawl. Too many things still block the main thread. Dividing up a project to WGR still takes too much time to do, when as it should be encouraged as a way of improving workflow. Viewport Styles which might help some of these has languished on the roadmap with no progress since the day the roadmap was published. Hopefully the lack of visible action is a sign of a larger background project.... but I doubt that. Teamwork has never been a thing the company has improved with passion.

If I understand correctly the wish is for 2 parts A) a better system to combine a group of elements together and have that group react to each other if further edits are required. So once you've created the the flat and trimmed it with a baseboard you could combine them to a symbol-like "thing" or a super-group. The Object info would expose some controls from the combined object (like styled objects do) to allow selective changes to the object. ie a Flat with Baseboard could be resized and it would all grow in the way you've told it to grow. B) on the back of new system complex plug-in objects break up in to smaller easy to maintain object, allow 2 complex objects to use the same sub-object so for example a Stair-object and theoretical Balcony-object would both internally use the same balustrade object to the point of exploding either would lead to a group of the sub-objects.

Also why does it render different to the rendering engine in the installed app. Helpful that it is less buggy.

Also - - why does it cancel 5 hours worth of rendering without an "are you sure?" - why does it look just the same as close dialogue buttons. Why Oh Why oh Why?

Which is there for when you do Reflected ceiling plans.

If there is something in the works it could be called "Vectorworks - Director" for those who've outgrown their desk bound career as a Designer but don't think going back to paper should be the answer in this day and age.

But has no problem if done with each viewport done as a separation.

Add iPadOS benefits over base iOS. I'd be willing to pay for another 1/2 license to use on the iPad for users who need access to some but maybe not the full feature set.

Also should report if the Back up file is more recent than than the recent file in the list.

Well I was kind of hoping if they seriously looked at an iPadPro Version of Vector/Nomad it might get them looking at how bad some of the old interface like OIP is regear it totally and make it better for everyone.

When working on BIM projects that are multi-storey doing Facade/Elevation treatments I find a lot of time I'm bouncing from a full model, Active only it would be most useful to isolate just the active layers of the current storey of the building.