Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral

Personal Information

  • Occupation
  • Homepage
  • Location
    groningen NL
  1. No more reactions . . . . that's a pity. I guess I have to do the modelling in c4d then. But I still think it should not be necessary.
  2. OK, that's strange at first glance, but after I imported your file in my VW model, I saw that your gasket was much larger than mine. And the ribbons I use are thinner. If I scale down your object to the same measurements as mine, it reacts exactly the same; smooth without holes; facetted with holes. In the second image I attached, I imported the gaskets in c4d and turned the display to "wireframe". The difference is clearly visible; the middle ones have holes; the outer ones don't; my gaskets to the left; yours to the right. On the other hand, if I scale my gasket up to yours, it looks great. So, . . . .the problem seems to be in the scale. I work 1:1, which is convenient for mechanical objects like the ones I work with. The gasket is about 150 mm in width. I think that shouldn't be the problem.
  3. I'm sorry, I forgot to update my profile; I use VW 2011. Setting OpenGL to the highest gives a better image indeed, thanks. But that's not the real problem. When I send the file to C4D, but also, when I render it in Renderworks (highest settings), the swept object is perfect without holes; the moment I put holes in it, the quality decreases to an unacceptable level. A workaround, is first converting the sweep to a wireframe object and then the boole, but then I loose editing possibilities. Another one is transporting sweep and hole objects to C4D and doing the Boole in C4D but that's also quirky. An image at: http://members.home.nl/gevelthuis/temp/gaskets.jpg
  4. When trying to make holes (boolean) in a sweep-object I end-up with a facetted object, no matter how I screw up the quality of the sweep. More precise: the sweep-object is a rubber ring (a gasket) with profiling on it. And the holes are for bolts to go through. I set the sweep to "segments every 3 degrees". In Cinema 4D it looks pretty smooth without the holes, but with the holes, it looks the same as if I set the segments to "every 15 degrees" which is too rude for the purpose. What can I do about it. Turning the sweep into something else (nurbs or wire) makes it useless for the boolean operation. Doing a conversion after the boolean gives the same facetted geometry.
  5. Thanks, for all the supporting answers. I bought both Renderworks and C4D in a (price-reduced) bundle. Use the Christmas period to do some studying.
  6. Simple question: I now work on Vectorworks 2010 with rendering (mainly stills) in ArtlantisStudio. I would like to upgrade to Vectorworks 2011 with rendering (stills and animations) in C4D. Do I need Renderworks for that setup ? Or can Renderworks considered to be an "only-stills-rendering-version" of C4D ?
  7. Ariel/bcd, I prefer the fast numeric keypad input for fast switching; thanks to Mr. Gog's hint, I found out that the model should be moved to the origin in all views, but that can't be done halfway the process; all the newly added items have to be moved then also. I guess I have to make another start next time. Thanks to you all.
  8. Yes Pat, I use that option all the time. Problem is, you allways have to think of selecting something before changing view. Besides that, in 3D the option works rather erratic; cmd -1 and 2 for zooming in/out and focussing are "in my fingers". I often have to hit cmd-2 more times, before the selected part jumps to the center. Not very intuitive at all.
  9. Thanks Ariel, I read that also somewhere else. But that still makes it a rather time-consuming matter and hardly intuitive. I hoped there was a simple option to always center the model (or a self-defined part of it) in the middel of the screen automatically. Isn't that what everybody wants ? I can't find out the logic VW uses; if I make a simple cube in the middle (0,0) of a new document, the model is always in the center of my screen (from all angles). At the moment I work on a 3D model based on an existing 2D drawing and now the model "jumps " through space and I wonder "by what rules". But anyway, I will study the "Save View" option.
  10. Next to all the 2D tools in VW, I used another simple 3D modelling program. I ran this program under Classic on a Mac which isn't available anymore under Leopard. So . . . I have to dive in to the 3D tools of VW. Working with the modelling tools is pretty straightforward and in line with the procedures I was used to, but . . . . orientation and navigation in 3D space is a disaster for me; I completely loose track of my models, keep zooming in and out to find them back in another cameraview. There doesn't seem to be way to automatically center the model in every view (at least, I haven't found it yet). Can someone point me to a site, a video-course, a pdf or whatever, that can help me to learn the basic concepts of navigating in 3D space in VW ? The VW manual is not very helpfull.
  11. Thanks Pat, I'll do some investigation. Gerrit
  12. Searching for a plug-in (which was suggested to me by a German VW-user, using the German name for it) I stumbled into the VW plug-ins folder at my harddrive to see to my surprise that it contains 728 items. Confusingly, some are in dutch, some in english, others in french; some have a .vso extension some a .vsm. Looking at the names, I get the impression that not all of them are active in Vectorworks. Is there a document in which I can find info on all these plug-ins and is there a way to activate them ? The manual doesn't help very much
  13. For a client, I have to render (slightly) bended cables through a hole in a concrete wall. I used the "Extrude along path" command from the 3D menu to turn a circle and a slow arc into a cable. But . . . . in Artlantis these cables are rendered with sectionlines. They are thin but I don't want them. Does this sound familiar to someone, and what might be the solution ? I added a part of a test-rendering.
  14. I thought iMacs couldn't do double monitors (we only have Apple Cinema Displays).
  15. For the CAD department, we have to buy new Macs. We are using 4-G4/G5 desktops at the moment All with brand new Cinema Displays. Upgrading to Tiger and Vectorworks 12 is expected to make more power necessary. The dealer wants to sell us 4 new MacPro's. A MacPro with two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon's costs $2500 however. For the same amount of money I can buy three MacMini's with one 1.83Ghz Intel Core Duo. We don't need expansion slots, no large harddisks, no advanced cd/dvd burners and 1 Gb of RAM is probably enough for Vectorworks. The machines will only be used for 2D CAD drawing which is not very power demanding. There is already a fast G5 for Photoshop, 3D and multimedia stuff. One of the old ones can take over the server work from the old iMac. Of course, the dealer says we have to buy MacPro's, but my intuition says MacMini's could do the job as good as. For the difference in price, I can buy 2 new/faster Mini's in the future ( as "upgrade") Am I overlooking any important considerations ?
  • Create New...