Jump to content

Claes Lundstrom

Member
  • Content Count

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Claes Lundstrom

  1. I use OBJ a lot when exporting from TouchCAD to various rendering programs as well as VW. The basic structure consists of the OBJ file itself, containing coordinates, normals, and UV mapping coordinates, and which material/texture it uses for each part, etc. In this file, you also have a referral to the .mtl file, which either contains color, material, etc for the model. If the part contains an image based texture, the .mtl also contains the name of the image used. What it does not contain however is the full file structure, so it's super important that these three basic file types are located in the same folder. Also, make sure that the file names in the respective files matches the real file names exactly. If not, you will get such an error message.
  2. The problem with NURBS in VW is that it needs surgery to come up to par with what other programs can do, and to get editing capabilities being similar to other features in VW, such as editing polylines in 2D. The underlying features are there in the library on which is based, so it's all about improving the user interface. Personally, I always import my NURBS objects from an external program.
  3. Don't know what you are doing, but the unfold in VW is rather limited. I always do it in other programs.
  4. Not the only thing missing when it comes to VW and Sweden. Unfortunately.
  5. As always, it's a question of using the right tool for the right job. You can use a screwdriver to paint you house, but why bother when a brush i much quicker. Why do I use Keyshot? Because it's FAST, and offers stunning realtime renderings. The enclosed image is where I was after exactly one minute, twenty-one seconds, after having pressed the Import button, based on a textured model in OBJ format from TouchCAD. It's as fast as it gets if you ask me.
  6. Keyshot actually communicates fairly well with VW in a number of file formats. DXF, DWG, STEP, IGES, Parasolids, 3DS, Collada, FBX, OBJ, SAT, STL, and Rhino can all be imported, with more or less success. Textures works with many of the more graphics oriented formats, though the output seems to be a bit sketchy from some VW generated file formats, at least as seen from Kesyhot point of view. File formats with proper normals are much preferred for rounded polygon based objects, as Keyshot has an inherited weakness in that it does not handle recreating the rounding well (unlike most other rendering programs I should say). This has sometimes been a problem with files coming from VW, as the normals have not worked well in some recent versions and formats (including RW I may add). Haven't done too much experimenting with VW 2020 though in this respect.
  7. Have one too. Works fine once installed and running, though the installer of the drivers for Mac could be way better. The installer pretty much needs a Canon technician to make it work.
  8. I use Keyshot daily, though mostly processing models from TouchCAD. I agree that it's more focused on product visualization rather than architectural renderings. For product renderings, it's phenomenal. You get from A to B quicker than anything I have tried, and it looks good too. The edge is smaller on architectural renderings though it can for sure be done, especially if you make use of the VW texture library.
  9. There is a reason why VW takes longer to learn. It's vast compared to SU. Just compare the program folder sizes.... Also, you always tend to like what you are used to. You prefer SU because you are used to it.
  10. In the Affinity Designer case, the trick to get the scale right is to set the DPI right on both sides. I set it to 300 DPI in VW and 300 DPI in Affinity, and the scale works perfectly. I assume that the same thing applies to Illustrator. It also works fine with CorelDraw, though I don't use it as I mainly use Macs.
  11. I export as PDF with files containing both super high res images and vector data as PDF, Import into Affinity Designer and then re-export it as SVG. It works very well, in fact rock solid, including classes with names, groups, size, etc. To maximize the organization, I use divide everything into classes and then group each class. Images at 300 dpi. for both export and import. Affinity Designer cost something like $40-50 and is a great program available for both Mac and Windows.
  12. Texture mapping can be very frustrating in most programs not having proper UV mapping features, and VW is no exception. UV mapping can be quite complex in many programs, but it gives a way better control over things. Nowadays, I always do this externally for more complex shapes.
  13. I agree. I also make models (product replicas) with super photo realistic high res textures and cutting it out with a cutter. My solution is to compile the high res textures with cutting lines, alignment marks, and scoring lines, dividing it into classes, and then exporting it as a PDF in scale 1:1. I then open it in Affinity Designer, which imports the model perfectly while maintaining the class structure, and then export as SVG into the cutter driver and the graphics to the printer. Works very well. Affinity Designer can be described as something similar to Adobe Illustrator, but for a very modest price. Picture: Real product, paper model, 1.5 meter high fabrics skin model.
  14. SVG export would be very useful. I use it for exporting print and cut scale models using a Silver Bullet cutter. The files include both high res images and vector curves for cutting. My method for generating SVG files is to export as PDF, open it in Affinity Designer, and then export as SVG which is opened in the cutter driver. Affinity Designer is highly recommended as an Adobe Illustrator alternative. Very competitive pricing and very capable.
  15. The point of importing a model is to save time. In this case, re-skinning or fixing it up takes longer than modeling it from scratch. A lot. A few extrude along paths and you have a model in say ten minutes for a skilled user. You get solids, it renders way better, and the model takes up less space. SketchUp does not add anything here (it seldom does if you ask me).
  16. https://www.posersoftware.com/
  17. I agree. Using interpolated controls is way easier as they are on the object and not vaguely beside it. Even better would be to finally update the editing of NURBS objects, which really needs an update to stay in par with other packages.
  18. It's true that there are limits to what you can unfold, but the boundaries are quite vague. VW has clearly made progress on this tool from being only usable on very simple shapes to being more average compared to many other programs on the market, having unfolding features. I did some testing on some objects being close to the limits and found that it did a decent job, though failed sometimes, and sometimes generated more errors than I would find acceptable for my personal use. In reality though there are an almost infinite number of solutions on such models, so it is hard to say what is right or wrong. My personal conclusion is that I still trust the results more from my more advanced program, which can do more and allows me to shape panels to be optimized for unfolding, and it also tells me where it goes wrong and what to do about it. In it's context though , I think the current VW unfolding works ok, as I assume that most users will never deal with more complex shapes.
  19. True that most 3D programs work in a similar way. In theory. However, programs having dedicated boat design programs tend to provide way better shape control than standard CAD / 3D modeling programs. How efficiently it works is another matter. Some years ago, a friend of mine, a professional naval architect, decided to draw a canoe in MaxSurf and TouchCAD. Both have dedicated boat designing features, but the same shape took two hours in Maxsurf and seven minutes in TouchCAD....
  20. I don't know how much time I have spent rebuilding or adopting models to a practical level. You can usually import models i various formats, but the quality varies a lot. One reason may be that the suppliers use production models rather than models specially optimized for use as symbols. On for example a chair, the production model contains lots of details that you don't actually see in real life, or as a symbol, and can those parts can therefore be removed in the symbol version. The production models are simply way to detailed to be practical. You just want them to look good and be easily identifiable as a given product. In my experience, it is often possible to remove up to 90% of the model data and still have a model that looks pretty much identical to the original. It would be useful if the suppliers made an effort to make models for specific use as symbols. It would also be useful to make more use of textures for details, like it's done in the computer game industry. Most of the details is then processed by the video card instead of the main processor, which creates smaller models, still looks OK both with Renderworks and OpenGL, and renders quickly. In this example, the model to the right only consists of 14 NURBS surfaces plus proper UV mapping of textures. The models where renders in OpenGL.
  21. Chris, of course it doesn't work from any view than the top view. What you effectively do is to extract a new version of the model as seen from the top view, rather than actually flattening the model. It's like using a camera to extract a view from the top view. You can't do that from the side unless you have some special software that manipulates the data. What you where used to from your previous program was to manipulate the model in a similar way that you manipulate a selection box in VW in the Object Info palette. Unfortunately, VW does not support a 3D selection box with the ability to manipulate the model in 3D, so the suggested method was simply a way to bypass this limitation. Admittedly it would be handy to do it directly as you first suggested, I do it all the time in my other CAD program, but you can't in VW.
  22. Rhino's unfolding is for sure better, but I would not say that it's all that reliable or top notch.
  23. As a pro boat designer, I doubt that the unfolding in VW will be usable. It's just too limited. I only use VW for basic documentation when doing boat design. Here is an example having about 200 parts plus profiles made of high grade stainless steel, and nested for laser cutting. The unfolds also included on surface markings for precise positioning of connecting parts. The fit was 100% right.
  24. The Wireframe mode dialogue comes after having selected Convert to Polygons. The method will flatten the selection to zero height. If yo still want the object to be 3D, you can convert it back to 3D polygons, or set the Plane to Layer Plane in Object info. This allows you to rotate the model in 3D, though still having zero height in the Z- direction.
  25. How about converting your 3D polygons to Polygons? Menu-> Modify -> Convert to Polygons -> Wireframe mode. If you still want 3D polygons, you can convert it back to 3D again. They will then have the same Z value.

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...