Jump to content

bbudzon

Vectorworks, Inc Employee
  • Posts

    659
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bbudzon

  1. Just wanted to chime in here, try out the new Vision 2019 SP3 release as it contained a fix related to focus of instruments. Basically, some fixtures were modeled with a 90 deg tilt. Some fixtures were not. Because of the way the code was loading fixtures from ESC/MVR, it was loading the fixture as it was modeled and not applying any sort of "physics tick". We now perform one "tick" of the fixture on the physics engine when loading via ESC/MVR and now these fixtures that were importing with a 90 deg tilt will import with 0 deg pan/0 deg tilt. Let me know if this hasn't resolved your issues and we'll continue working to address any problems! Thanks again guys!
  2. I know I'm digging up an old post here but there is some good information in here and I wanted to acknowledge that. I'll be making sure to pass these notes along to our product planner so they can gauge how we can fit this into our schedule. A few things I'd like to note: This should already be possible in the code. So, I think we simply need to get the content updated to contain these parameters. I'll pass this along to our content guy πŸ˜‰ I can't believe it's not already doing this! Thanks for pointing this out. We have some support for multiple selections so it shouldn't be too difficult in theory. The biggest caviet might be that this will only work when a homogenous selection of conventional fixtures is selected. This was actually fixed in a recent release. I'm not sure which one, so I would just download 2019 SP3 as it was released a few days ago! I'll need to pass this along to someone who knows more about the entertainment industry than myself. I'm just a lowly computer programmer πŸ˜› While this still isn't entirely possible, the new MVR importer in Vision will certainly help. I believe the way it is currently implemented you will lose your focus data. However, if you assign focus points in VW they will come over to Vision properly via ESC or MVR. I highly recommend using MVR though moving forward! Hopefully this helps in some areas and gives you a clue as to what we are looking to address in future versions. Thank you very much for your feedback. It is highly valued!
  3. @Charlie Winter This is a great post! Perhaps to get things started, you could give us some examples of how you are incorporating Vision into your workflow. You never know, maybe I'll have a tip or trick to save you tons of time or get you much higher quality renderings! πŸ˜‰
  4. I just wanted to chime in here to say this in on our list of things to look at. One reason this would occur is if framerate is low, but I'm not so sure that's the reason in this case. It could also be an issue with the content as we've recently discovered some fixtures candella values are off by a magnitude of 10 (ie; 66,000,000 instead of 6,009,070). @Charlie Winter If you have access to JIRA, you can open a ticket against the Vision Product (there is a field for Product when creating the ticket, just select Vision). If you include your sample file and a DMX Recording, it may help speed things along. Either way, we're looking into it and will hopefully have a resolution soon!
  5. I'm not sure whether it'll make a difference or not, but if you repost this in Entertainment Forum you may get more feedback from other users. This forum leans slightly more toward the Vision Previsualization product πŸ˜‰ Hope you get an answer soon!
  6. Unfortunately, attachments in VW do not come over to Vision. This is, in part, due to some deep low-level differences between the way VW and Vision handle attachments. But we have also had a pretty severe bug in Vision related to attachments. It has only gotten pushed down the priority list because it seemed it wasn't affecting enough users. I'll make sure to pass this along in my meetings and let everyone know internally that are starting to get reports of issues related to attachments. Thanks!
  7. I'm excited for you to play around with it!! It's still a work in progress, for sure. But in my mind, certainly, it is a far superior VW/Vision workflow than using ESC. πŸ’― I believe that @Simon Allan is opening a VWX in VW, exporting an MVR, and then importing that same MVR back into VW. It is not yet possible for Vision to create MVR files. The reason, in my mind, that we pushed out this update for SP3 was because we felt it had too many benefits in the VW -> Vision workflow to hold it back from our valued customers. That being said, its primary benefits to our products and our customers were in the VW -> Vision workflow. That's not to say we aren't working hard on improving this functionality in future releases!! πŸ‘ Vision has seen DRAMATIC improvements to workflow, quality, and ease of use; all by simply allowing MVR import. We aren't even fully leveraging the MVR standard yet in Vision to boot!! So you can imagine how bright the future is πŸ˜‰
  8. It's probably worth pointing out that while the goal is to eventually support imports back into VW, this is not the key workflow change we have made for Vision SP3. The primary benefit of MVR, in relation to Vision, is the improved workflow and quality when sending to Vision. I pointed out a lot of the key benefits above in more detail. So while your test is valid and something we want to get working, the main reason you should be using MVR at this point in time is to get better workflow when moving from VW to Vision. I hope to have things going back from Vision to VW sooner than later, but we'll just have to see how things shake out! If you have a copy of Vision, I'd suggest trying that workflow out and providing Vision feedback here! If you have any questions about sending VW documents to Vision via MVR, I can do my best to answer those as well!
  9. I'll make sure the Spotlight team gets this feedback. Unfortunately, I can't help out a whole lot here as it sounds like your issues are outside of Vision. There are some issues we are discovering that didn't get caught during testing. We're hoping to resolve them as soon as possible!
  10. It can! In theory, esc should support this as well in 2018+ πŸ˜‰
  11. EDIT: @nate.8olson@gmail.com Let me get in touch with some people internally and we'll get this worked out πŸ˜‰
  12. I just wanted to take a moment aside to stress the importance of using MVR moving forward when exporting from VW to Vision πŸ™‚ MVR has solved a LOT of issues for us with the Vision application. ============================== - For starters, ESC files always had a textures folder next to it which was annoying. MVR has everything baked into the file so no more lugging around extra files/folders like you had to in the past when sharing ESCs! - Next up is the improved rendering quality. Because the MVR file format uses a more standardize backend for its geometry, we can use 3rd party libraries to correct some things at import time. This allows us to enable the "Use Normals" checkbox by default for the MVR file format! ESC Truss: MVR Truss: This is just ONE SMALL example of the improved quality of renderings when using MVR. - MVR also now exports each object uniquely, regardless of whether or not they share a texture! No more exporting each stick of truss into it's own ESC file!! - MVR now names geometry according to the data contained in the MVR! This means that you can name objects in VW and they will come over to Vision with the proper name instead of coming over with MeshShape everywhere! If you do not provide a name, we will default to the name in the OIP. Straight Truss will come over with the name Straight Truss, Slabs will come over as Slabs, Doors will come over as Doors... you get the point! No more giant lists of MeshShapes with absolutely no idea what is what! - MVR contains a unique identifier that allows Vision to detect updates when merging an MVR into an existing MVR document! This means you no longer need to do special exports when you move your truss around. Simply export the entire scene via MVR from VW and merge it into your existing document in Vision. It should auto-update everything for you without duplicating anything! - MVR contains proper local coordinate systems which allows for proper DMX XForm Rotations! ============================== I'll try to field questions here, but I'm excited for you guys to play around with some of this new stuff!!
  13. Can you locate the `Lights.wad` file on your MAC? If so, it is cross-platform/cross-product capable so it should work on MAC/PC/VW/Vision. Once we find that wadfile (should be located in the directories you mentioned above), we should be able to just copy them into place on your PC and get Vision recognizing it on PC. Once we get that working, then we can try to figure out what's going on with the VW side of things πŸ˜‰
  14. @NoahAAA I just wanted to double check with you that this issue has been resolved!
  15. With Vision 2019 SP3, MVR support has been greatly enhanced and is the new recommended workflow for getting from VW to Vision. MVR will not group objects in this way πŸ˜‰
  16. So aside from not being able to update the mode in an existing file; You are seeing the new fixture in Vision on MAC but not on PC? And you are not seeing the new fixture at all in VW?
  17. @nickvaphiadis I've talked with our tech support and sales teams. They should be in contact with you shortly!
  18. Thank you! I'll inform Tech Pubs and we'll get it included as soon as possible!
  19. FPS is Frame Per Second and is often a good measure of the performance of an application. I always recommend free 3rd party software as it's unbiased and does not effect performance. FRAPS on PC is great. That being said, if you click into the Scene Graph Dock and press the 'o' key, it will cycle through some debugging output modes. One of the modes displays only the FPS. This mode has the least impact on performance and what I would recommend if you are struggling to find an unbiased 3rd party software! I believe this is in the help documentation, but if not let me know and we'll make sure to get it added!
  20. Not being able to changing the mode of an existing v3s is a pretty serious UI/UX flaw that went unnoticed. I'll look into it and we'll see how soon we can get it taken care! The recommended way to do this currently is in VW, followed by another Send to Vision or Export. As far as new fixtures/modes, updating Vision on the same machine VW runs on should work. If you're having issues, open a ticket or call tech support. I'll start the ball rolling on our end πŸ˜‰
  21. This is very easy for us to do in the code. Just needed the request! If you have other things you'd like DMX Controlled, let's chat πŸ˜‰
  22. Hahaha, yea... believe it or not this is an improvement from 2018. Most undo/redo things simply did not work in 2018. In 2019, we re-worked the undo/redo system to function in the most basic cases first and foremost. This means allowing certain actions to be recorded upon the codes request. The problem with the redesign was we didn't have enough time to fully flush it out in the time frame we were given. This means that sometimes, multiple undo actions will be required to "undo a single event". Not ideal for the end user, but better than no undo at all! Our solution to having to run undo multiple times involves allowing the code to "group" recorded actions so that multiple actions can be stepped back with a single undo command. Your example with multiple selection is a perfect example of this. Unrelated to your original request, but we've been discussing your workflow internally as well. Namely, I want to select a group of lights/meshes and move them "+12 inches along the Positive X Axis." This is currently not possible and is seen as a large deficiency in Vision's workflow.
  23. We have had some people complain about the color that temperature is rendering out at. We can maybe work on this a little more closely together to figure out what is going on.
  24. This is a great suggestion! Giving users quicker access to preset is always a good thing!!
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...