Damon Design

Yes, I prefer it to show right up as well- it just comes out so darn tiny with the image hosting. Maybe that's just as well so as not to be mocked for my modest and rather conservative residential designs when so many of you are on the cutting edge of architectural design, new materials and techniques and large scale projects haha Hey, any ole' project one has secured is not a bad thing in this era of such a dearth of available commissions right?

Duh! OK I'm feeling a little bit stupid- thinking a code had to be inputted (via Forum's FAQ description of image uploading) as opposed to just using the file manager. Thanks Starling75 Testing this out with new pic: Aha! That's a little bit better I still like the way most of you are able to have a nice image just pop up on the thread without an additional click, so I'll keep trying to figure out the best way to accomplish that. Cheers

On elevation hatching you could also go "old school" (when they were hand drafted) and do a partial hatch (no line weight) on the particular plane with a callout note to it. Sometimes I think this actually looks a bit cleaner than covering every single plane with a cladding hatch. [img:left][/img] Edit: Well that is nearly impossible to discern- I am having problems with image hosting sites and getting the image to a decent size. I asked about this years ago and someone mentioned a widget upload but that doesn't seem to work anymore. Anybody have any suggestions for someone without a personal webpage to host and post images here? Thanks

Hey Nathan, It would be helpful in the future if you would include on your profile your VW version, OS and hardware information. On line weights for elevations remember you can override your class line weights in your viewports, also, I tend to use just a few- maybe four, distinct line weights in setting up the document, and find that they will represent the view graphically quite well. I will draw a polyline outlining the building with a heavy light weight to represent the "edge" of a building, and another to represent the ground but that is typically it in elevation annotations. If you don't have VW2011, it is still pretty quick in annotation mode in a viewport (save viewport cache for a hidden line view) to draw a polygon over a wall, clip the windows and other necessary geometry, assign no line weight, send to back and assign a cladding hatch for elevation views. edit: You can also try to use the paintbucket mode in polygon to create the areas to hatch but I find that doesn't work as well as it should sometimes. For creating custom doors just find one that is similar and use that as a template. Set the parameters to be as close as possible to your custom parameters, particularly the overall size and size/swing of door leafs (this may take two different doors or types of doors to use as templates) and either break apart that door with the ungroup command or just add and locate doors within the rough opening that you want to use. It will take a little trial and error but once you've done it a couple of times it will be quick- and you can save these doors you have created as symbols. edit: Make sure you are in a 3D view when you modify the door to a group or else it won't retain its 3D geometry- or at least that's what I have found in the past. Good Luck.

It seems the better "apples to apples" comparison is: VW2010 Final Quality vs VW 2011 Custom RW>Settings>All Low Quality, which seems to achieve a similar quality rendering, in about the same amount of time; at least in this simple to render file. I haven't done more than a toe-dipping into radiosity previously because of hardware limitations, perceived or actual, and I imagine these high quality renderings are where the real time savings are being achieved. Am I on to something here Dave or other moderators/rendering experts? I don't want to dog the new version of the program. I am liking much of what I'm finding and am confident that this version will work even better for me as I get used to best use practices.

Good idea, Cheers to you too,mind you it's 20:00 over here so I won't be drinking on the job :crazy: I had to give a proper Hallo! to a fellow Swede, well, I'm a bit removed here in the new country but my Father's family all came from G?teborg and settled in a tiny town in Nebraska named, you guessed it, Gothenburg! A wee bit early in the morn' here to imbibe as well- but if I can't get this darn render thing figured out....

Thanks for the quick reply Vincent, I've deselected the indirect lighting option for both, trying to achieve an apples to apples comparison, thinking as you mentioned, that starting to fiddle with this will give you radiosity-like quality in 2011. The textures from my old file seemed to transfer just fine into 2011 so there doesn't seem to be any issues there, I haven't added or removed any textures from either file, and do not have any transparency settings invoked either. I will still fiddle around but hoping this is an anomaly or can be explained, and rectified. Sk?l

Perhaps this is related to my earlier post about my demo 2011 RW not working, but having got it now working I'm finding Final Quality on Identical Models/Files with identical settings for lights etc... to be 3x longer in 2011 then 2010. I've tried with a very simple model; Four walls, One Roof, One Door and Four Windows, One Floor to represent the ground plane and one simple background, two textures, no lights- this will render in about 1.5 seconds in 2010 and six seconds in 2011 Then with a more complicated model, a Craftsman house project I'm working on with it will take about 2.5 seconds in 2010 and about seven seconds in 2011. Are we to compare 2011 Final Quality with 2010 radiosity? It certainly doesn't appear too different in quality with these simple settings. Playing with other files with higher quality parameters inputted seems to slow things down even more. I did increase my RAM recently but it is of the same specs, just another chip- and my video card is not among those mentioned as having issues. No crashing or anything, just slow renders. What gives?

Thanks Dave, Just got on line here this morning. Well, after re-launching and checking in the folder for CineRender and right clicking open (which didn't seem to do anything) it is now working. I am presuming the fragmented large rendered elements popping up over the wireframe as opposed to the page slowly revealing itself is the normal rendering visual. Off to explore the new features. Cheers,

I just downloaded the VW2011 Evaluation Copy Designer/Renderworks to take it for a test run-(Paid Copy being delivered in a few days) I have opened up an existing file to 2011, and I understand that I will have to update/change the textures, but textures or not, my model will not render at all at Final Quality/Custom RW; the page is blank white, I can get preselection cues of the geometry with the cursor, and select objects, but nothing will actually show up as a solid rendered object. On the existing sheet layer, the viewport with custom renderworks mode, updated will show as a wireframe model. Also, I opened up a new, blank file, drew a few walls, applied a native RW2011 texture, and attempted a render, same thing. Open GL, with the "old" lightworks textures, renders just fine, although the textures in the resource browser are black. Any ideas? Some preference, setting, lighting option I am missing? Thanks.

Thanks Jonathan, I installed StoneCad (or, rather, re-installed but it is still called StoneCad 5 so don't know if this is an update or not; I have only used this App. before by saving the stone textures as images into a folder and then accessing the folder from the resource browser and selecting an image as a new texture, I have never used StoneCad to directly send/save textures or hatches to VW), selected the Vectorworks Icon as the target destination for the selected hatches, and the custom path as Macintosh HD:Applications:Vectorworks:Libraries:Hatches and the hatches are installed as individual .mcd files in the target folder; when trying to access them from the resource browser the .mcd files are grayed and not accessible as a resource, leaving me with the same dilemma as before. If you (or anyone else) have successfully used this, could you please tell me how to direct the StoneCad App. to send/save the hatches so that they would show up in the VW resource browser as hatches. Thanks Much

Thanks for the quick reply Jonathan; I'm over on YouTube watching your and your pal Architectural Technologist's VW videos as I was awaiting a reply- always learning a new thing or two with you- thanks for posting the vids. But, I'm still not understanding. The file that contains the patterns has no defined resources in the browser. The pattern in this layer is defined as 351 3D polygons (why they are 3D I don't know but if you go to a orthogonal view, there they are lying on the ground plane) and so they are not recognized as a resource available for importing.

How does one "import" a hatch? I have a file that I think I obtained through a link here at the forum, StoneCad Hatches, that has all these beautifully detailed hatch patterns, each in a different layer, that seem ready to go but I don't know how to make these patterns a hatch. Is there a simple command to do this without actually going into the hatch editor and try to recreate these complex hatches by hand- which would defeat the purpose tremendously it would seem. I do manage to come across other nicely detailed hatch patterns once in a while that work great as they are already hatch definitions. Thanks.

Just put in one light and you will have a great deal of control over many aspects of it.

I would delve into the class settings for the dormer and see if any of the attributes of any of its elements are "none" or clear. You might have to break it up (ungroup) to apply the attributes you wish.

This may be obvious but check to make absolutely sure that it is a closed polygon- I have created many polygons that I failed to click on the right start point to make it closed. And of course they never rendered correctly-(usually got the sides but not the middle.

Hey thanks for the replies Eric and Peter, I thought I was being shunned for some reason haha It is an Xfrog plant, a cypress tree. I find most of the Xfrog Trees, though beautiful and probably properly scaled, to be way too large for presentation documents with my mostly residential scaled projects. I was trying to get maybe a 8' to 12' instead of 30' high tree and when rescaling it seems to just rescale the plane that the image is projected upon, thereby giving you a partial image of the original sized tree on the smaller X planes. Do you have to rescale both the symbol and the image prop?- I am somehow not getting this. I thought I had somehow stumbled upon the solution before but since this post (and the related one in General Forum) is being frequently viewed but not responded to maybe this is not possible, or I am just not being clear. Trying to entourage this schematic design up just a bit more for presentation and Historic Review [img:center]http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h78/Tsporty/UrbanVilla.png[/img]

What is the best way to resize symbols that are linked to image props- I could have sworn that I have stumbled upon the solution to this before but am thus far befuddled as I try to create a presentation document for a client. Thanks in advance for any help

I could have sworn that I figured this out before, and imagine it applies to all symbols linked to image props. Anyone? Since this isn't exclusively a Landmark question I hope a cross posting in the general forums may illicit a response other than an angry moderator.

What is the easiest way to resize 3D plant symbols? I am having major issues in trying to figure out what I think should be a easy edit. Edit: I should add that what I am trying to resize is a symbol linked to an image prop. Thanks in advance for any help.

OMG! They were related to the section style class and that class had an arrowhead turned on. Turning off the arrowhead button while in that class fixed the problem. Thanks!

I'll try that out, Thanks

Hey Michael, I got in a sneaky quick edit to better explain the issue just as you were replying. And that is the whole confusing crux. I can't select them on the annotation mode, they indicate that they are part of the design layer, but I cannot see them in the design layer. ?? I can select the cupola roof with the arrows in a square, while in the design layer and the OIP says its a roof, with no arrows selected (which doesn't make a difference selecting them or not) in the attributes palette.

Here is the example at a section viewport on the sheet layer. [img:center][/img] These arrowheads are inherent to the 3D objects; they are not connected to a line or other 2D object that I can discern, they are not selectable nor editable in the annotation mod, also, they are not visible on the Design Layer that contains the objects. Thanks for any suggestions

Thanks for the suggestions. The file is at the computer at work so I'll send it off tomorrow. What you are seeing is a top view of a small simple gable roof with overhangs (a cupola) created with the create roof command from a rectangle and the arrowed square is the lines that represent the bearing point I guess, or the original rectangle that defined it, which has long since been erased. But the ordinary view would have that rectangle as part of the Top view, just can't figure out how it has arrows. This is in a Design Layer view. Other arrows on elements (but not many) are showing up in Sheet Layer views only. The file is for a new patio cover roof that extends over the house to provide insulation space for a vaulted, non-insulated living room. So I have actually modeled most elements: beams, rafters, joists etc... as extrudes or walls to help me visualize the space and to create accurate section viewports. In annotate viewport mode some of these extrudes; like the end of a beam shows arrows (actually just half of an arrow) that is part of the top and bottom, as if I drew very short lines with one arrow at the top and bottom of the beam and send them to the back, yet this is part of the beam object. I definitely have made sure that the attribute palette do not have arrows selected.