Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Anttti

  1. I'm kind of confused that there isn't a Data Tag Style showing simply the object name in the basic Vectorworks Libraries. You really have to do it yourself? Like, isn't a tag with the name the first, most basic thing you'd want to have? If we think about Data Tags as sort of smart Callouts? Or am I missing something fundamental on the idea and use of Data Tags? (If I understood previous replies correctly, assigning a Data Tag with the object name was in fact not what the original problem in this thread was about eventually, but anyway I wonder)
  2. Do you assign the part ID manually? Does the list include all objects in the file or do you somehow separate objects to be listed from others? Did you find a good workflow for having several cutting lists in the same file, in different sheet layers for instance? I've been messing around with cutting and parts list type of worksheets a bit with some success, but haven't really reached a conclusion on what the best workflow would be. Things tend to turn a bit messy when you start to duplicate the worksheets and create workarounds on how to include/exclude some objects and so on. By the way, there used to be a preformatted parts list functionality in previous versions of VW. I gather it's a legacy tool now. I guess using data tags and worksheets is supposed to replace it?
  3. Thanks @grant_PD! For some reason I didn't realize that you can do an even circle with the deform tool. Perfect solution for wrapping a cylinder! Doesn't solve wrapping on ellipsoidal or wavelike forms though, but happily I don't need that for now...
  4. Thanks @markdd! The result is beautiful and the procedure simple enough - for making just this kind of railing. But if we think the lacing should curve along the rail, 3D loci don't solve the problem. We wouldn't get the wanted results with different geometry, if the rail would have larger curves or the lacing would have curvature for example. After all, my example drawing was simple enough to be drawn with just polylines. So I have to look into the marionette capabilities a bit deeper. Thank you @Hans-Olav for the tip!
  5. Hi all I'm wondering if there is a way to wrap or fold a polygon or other object along a path, forming a 3d path - and then possibly extruding a profile along this path. Difficult to explain, but I draw an example. Let's assume it's some kind of a railing. In 2D plan it has some kind of free form - in the example just a couple of corners with fillets, but it could be a bezier curve or an arc as well. Then we have the elevation of the thing unfolded. It's planar. Here it's a continuous pattern, but could be freeform as well. Is there a way to process these into the 3d structure shown in the top left corner? And as a cherry on top, it's possible that someone would like to extrude a profile along the 3d path object thus obtained. I know the extrude along path command, but I have had difficulties making it work with 3d path objects. Cheers Antti
  6. Isn't that just the same as projecting the star onto the cylinder? The form of the hole (the star) will be distorted when the surface is unwrapped flat. This thread was started about 16 years ago. I'm wondering if there has been any development since then?
  7. Thanks for the tip on Twinmotion! I started to look into it already and it seems quite promising. I can't really define whether I'm thinking using this kind of previsualization to communicate ideas or for ”purely technical” purposes - trying things out as a part of my personal creative process doesn't fit into either of these categories, but I'd say that that's what I'm interested in first instance. It doesn't necessary require the visualization to look totally photorealistic, but it shouldn't look like either. That is a prerequisite I guess most of these abovementioned tools fill (not so sure on MA3d though...). But using a console (even a virtual one) with Vision sounds a bit clumsy for my purposes, so in that sense Twinmotion is maybe the choice here.
  8. Thanks Tom for the information. Still looking for the tutorial, though. For my previz purposes there exists also other options besides Vision - I know some people use Cinema 4D so you don't need to hassle with the console and DMX, Blender would be free but importing from VW seems far from easy etc. - and I'm really looking for a overall picture here how the interface works with scenery just to know whether I should start learning it or opt for some other application. I thought that you can't directly import data from Vision to stage mechanics control systems but I'm interested if someone has some sort of workflow for utilizing the programming done in Vision. For example, can you export an text file with ques and revolve rotation angles, flybar movements and timing?
  9. Hi there I've been trying to find a decent tutorial or a presentation of some sort on Vision with a focus on how you deal with stage mechanics and moving scenery. Any tips or recommendations? Our theatre is not a user of Vision yet. The light guys are using MA3D for preprogramming, but it seems moving to Vision might be a good idea. As a stage designer I'm interested in what would we the best workflow in previsualizing moving scenery on revolve, lifts, flying in and out etc. I'm under the impression that you can do that all with Vision but would be interested in getting to know how the interface works and is there any way to use the preprogrammed data on stage with the actual stage system.
  10. I'd need my drawing labels to position to the upper left corner of the viewport crop. So I'd love a feature that you could somehow customize how the labels automatically position also vertically in proportion to the viewport... Thanks!
  11. I would appreciate this feature too. In fact, I was a bit surprised that it doesn't exist in the program yet, as it doesn't sound like a difficult thing to engineer. In addition, it would be great if the feature would make it possible to make your own title preferences instead of standard TOP, FRONT, RIGHT etc. - for example if you are making drawing to be distributed in other language than English.
  12. I have 2020 sp2.1 so that could be. I'm about to upgrade so I'll look into this again after that. Thanks for all your help!
  13. This is what I thought first - that it would be basically a problem with the user interface and adjusting the view angle wold do the trick. But it doesn't seem to work like with other trusses. I tried with the F44 series and and they work fine. In fact also the F44C30-95 inserts nicely into the right position. But if I try to insert the F34C30 I can insert it in only three of the four possible rotational positions regardless of view (and I have tried in the same view angles where the other pieces work correctly, of course).
  14. Stupid me, thanks! That's what the -85R/L stands for... There still is an issue with the connectivity, though. A had a similar problem (with the same kind of corner piece, I think) in earlier version, which the was found out to be a bug (that's partly why I was so keen to think the 85° to be a bug, too). The corner piece doesn't want to connect from one of its ends/legs. I can rotate it separately (see picture) but if I try to drag it to be a part of the same system, it turns around. This is the F34C30 corner piece with all 90° legs.
  15. From what I gather from the manufacturer's data, Global Truss F34C30 is a basic 3-way 90° corner block. (See it yourself: https://globaltruss.de/en/TRUSS/Truss-25-30-cm/F34/F34-3-way-corner-C30-90.html) When I insert a F34C30-85R or F34C30-85L into my drawing, I get these oddly angular pieces. One of the ends is not in 90° but in 85° (not sure if totally accurate or approximated, but anyway). Is this supposed to be? Am I using the wrong symbol, doing something else wrong or is there a bug in the symbols?
  16. Anyone familiar with the Cosmic-Global truss library? I'm confused about inserting the T-parts (F34T35 for example). It seems that I can insert the T-part only so that it's the single end of the T that is connecting. Even if I create the T-part separately, then rotate it in 3d and try to connect it with a horizontal truss, it automatically orientates back if combined to an existing system. Of course I can use them as separate objects and just move the rotated T-part to correct position side-by-side to the horizontal truss preventing VW to combine them to a single system, but then the Braceworks functionality will be absent. Can anyone say is this really meant to be like this or is it a bug or something? Or is there a correct way to do this? I tried with the Prolyte truss library and it seems that the Prolyte T-part connects from all ends.
  • Create New...