Kevin Allen

Well, I don't know that I entirely agree with this broad statement. As I recall we had more low fog, and a slower render engine.

Well, I don't know about the architects and landscapers, but I'd like to have the ability to show scenery moving and lighting changing either from within VWX or with and updateable export like "send to Vision. I remain a fan of Julian Carr's animation works PIO.

I use a combination of symbols; my own and the VWX Libraries. When I write, teach or lecture, I rely on the libraries, then show my own as examples of what might be done to personalize the work. That said creating your own symbols is usually pitied the classroom or lecture hall. That said, I don't have zoom capability. Do you then have an additional parameter in the OIP? Setting the beam and field as you suggest should always give you a soft beam, as I understand how the vWX Light Objects work. I'd like to be able to control zoom, and edge of the beam. As such, I'd like to also NOT maintain a set of custom gobos that affect beam shape and edge quality.

Similarly, I hope there will one day be a means for VWX Light Objects to 'know' what should be a square or rectilinear beam and what should be a round beam. There's also a difference between circular and oval, different units, different expected results. The same issue seen here is true of devices like Kino-Flo units used in film and tv. On a related note, I think all SLDs project a hard beam, with no option for focus. Some types of lights create a hard edge. Often we designers will want to soften those edges. To render, I add a custom gobo. Other types of lights have a soft edge; Fresnels, Kino-Flo, the magic panel. Spotlight should know and reflect these differences. And one more thing, not to pile on, but... Most units have some type of beam adjustment. On a Fresnel, that can be spot or wide. There are zoomable units of all kinds, There are units PARs and the like where the oval beam can be rotated. These features should be in VWX and transfer back and forth between VWX and Vision As an aside, as a set designer, I was collaborating with an LD, friend and colleague on a project. The look was a specific gobo on the floor in specific places. The plan was to use s4 zoom units. Since VWX does not allow for zoom, and since the fixed beams were all wrong for the throw, I simply put the gobo in a PAR head. Sharp focus, perfect throw, looked just right. My friend has never forgiven me for putting a gobo in a PAR.

Could you just make a 3D Poly and texture?

I'm so NOT a fan of WYG. That said, I would like VWX to make some things easier, or have options. I like focus points, but shuttering could be easier and somehow interactive. I'd like to be able to eyedrop and flip shutter cuts. Adding a gobo in LW ought to add the gobo in VWX and Vision...

I am a fan of the closed eco-system, if you will. I think VWX should do all of the things. Acquiring Vision is, in my mind, a serious step in the right direction. I understand the time required for integration, but the simplicity of an interactive export is critical to team work and collaboration. Currently collaborating with an LD, I'm the SD, and the LD is working with WYG which he prefers to Vision at this point. Many extra steps involved in sharing information, and updating files. The more VWX can do, the better I can present and she info, and the less I'll have t argue other's choices.

Well said, pretty critical. Missing one point. I think prior to 2010 there was also (?) and option for low fog, that would be great to have back as well. Especially important for performance pieces that lay down bed of fog on the ground, or to help illustrate cryo effects

Yes, this is kind of a bug, as the preferred workflow is draw in the desired class. As it is now, I class later because of this issue.

It seems that the Add Edge tool in 2018 now only adds a single edge. I'd like to also be able to get the old behavior of adding the edge all around. Is that function buried or gone? Similarly, this maybe a bug, Add Edge doesn't always seem logical. I can add diagonals, that's great, but I cannot always connect from one side of an object to the other.

thanks!

Yes, but I'm seeing that this isn't always intuitive enough.

I'm not sure this is in the right place as it refers to the forums, NOT the program. That said, the website should have a more responsive design. I just learned that if the browser window is not wide enough, the search function disappears from view. I checked this just now. If my Safari window is generally fully open, I see the search box. If I make the window width smaller, the search data filed drops to the second line. If I narrow the window further, it goes away. Additionally, I get as much or many of the forum posts as I can as emails. I'm old school. On my system, that's not too bad. on my iPad (admittedly for now a Mini 4) reading can be tolerable. On my iPhone 7 these emails are useless. As I am often in the field, this is in now way desirable. They are unreadable. Of course, I can pinch in and scroll around, but that's a HUGE PITA. The emails should respond to the type of device being used.

I've had the render work from a local machine, and from a sent folder.

yes. I thought I added a disclaimer<g>. Similarly, you can use Move by Points as you describe with a Locus Object.

yes, simply edit a duplicate.

You should also be able to do what you want in the OIP, depends somewhat on the type of object.

I thought the PDFs were accessible through the help website, but I no longer see the links?

I agree with a lot of this, I also wish a basic 2D rpiztive could be converted to a subdivision object

Not a bad idea to allow customization of that drop down.

I agree about the components folder, but wonder if title block styles need there own place in the RM drop down? We can have one document with many different size sheets and therefore different title blocks.

As a Mac user, I'f like to see the MacOS interactive spell check work in VWX, everywhere.

I void OpenGL, so I generally wish it produced better (for me) results. I generally agree with the list above, but I also really wish for better texture visualization. I often feel that If I'm going to render in OpenGL, that's one set of textures, and if I'm going to render using Renderworks, that's another set of textures.

Has the lease version been posted? I think I'm using RC-1 and have not seen notice of a new version?

no. It's a flat image with greater depth and can by used by VWX to add/augment light in scene . I don't know what VWX needs to make Panorama background. I thought those were procedural not image based?