Jump to content

Bart Rammeloo

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bart Rammeloo

  1. Only two issues with VectorWorks GUI? NNA must be making progress then And Lee, I have the same issues you have (and then some). Cheers, BaRa
  2. Doesn't work that way. VW doesn't support SAT files. Exporting to DWG converts your organic 3Dmodel to tesselated geometry, so that's not a good solution. The only way left is IGES export. Of course, if your model is "flat", you might as wel use DXF. Good luck, BaRa [ 03-23-2004, 03:40 AM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  3. that's exactly the question: which card accelerates OGL more? RenderWorks is processor based (as are most raytracers), but that's not the issue at hand. I have to make a choice between GFX cards, not between processors. Thanks for replying, Yovav Cheers, BaRa
  4. Shadi, The image you refer to has been made in Photoshop. First export an OpenGL rendered image from VectorWorks, then export the Wireframe. Put both on top of each other in Photoshop, fiddle around with the layer transfer settings, add a gradient, an presto: your image. EDIT: oops, you knew that already. The other mentioned options are probably the best solutions to your problem. Good luck, BaRa [ 03-09-2004, 06:25 AM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  5. Hi all, I'm looking for a new laptop. I've got two systems on my shortlist. One has a FireGL T2 with 128MB, the other has a quadro FX Go1000 with 128MB. Which one is better for VW (think NURBS surfaces, high tessalation, OGL rendering, displayed on a beamer as well)? Thanks in advance, BaRa [ 03-08-2004, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  6. Hi Christian, Rhino exists only for PC - not for Mac. It's mainly a surface modeler, whereas VW is also capable of performing very good solid operations (and it keeps the construction history of those operations, whereas Rhino doesn't). Rhino has a pretty good interface, although it's not really mainstream. Rhino cannot handle 2D operations. Which means that, if you want to create 2D projections and sections from your 3D model, you're stuck. I don't think it can be a replacement for VW. In the current situation, it can be an interesting addition, especially since you can use the IGS format to exchange data between both packages. Form-Z has (IMO) a rather clumsy interface. VectorWorks is easier to use than Form-Z, and has better (more stable) NURBS than Form-Z. I would never trade in VW for Form-Z. But that's only my opinion, of course I never used the Ashlar line-up, but it's more of an industrial design tool. For what it's worth: according to the grapevine Xeon, Cobalt and Co. used to be quite unstable. Don't know what it's like nowadays. Cheers, BaRa
  7. @mike46: I have a Dutch version. Can't tell you where to find it in the English manual. Sorry @propstuff: I could write a lengthy explanation, but the fastest way to understand the difference is to try it. Cheers, BaRa
  8. you need (a) a rotational axis (b) a profile © a rail or path All in 3D, preferably NURBS (a) and (b) should lie in the same plane, and © should be perpendicular to (a). Launch the command, click (a), click (b), click ©. And there you are Cheers, BaRa
  9. Hi Chris, I do agree with what you say. After all, VW is a hybrid of 2D graphics, 2D CAD and 3D NURBS-based modeling. So it's quite unique in its own. However, as far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), VectorWorks and Rhino use the same NURBS foundation, namely SMLib. They didn't develop their own NURBS kernel, it was licensed from another manufacturer (just as the RenderWorks technology isn't "made" by NNA). Rhino has better NURBS tessellation options than VW - or at least, offers more control. There can be two reasons for this: either is has been developed by the Rhino guys, or it's a feature included in SMLib. I'm guessing here, but I think the latter is true. And if that's the case, then it's really a matter of implementing it in (and not developing it for) VectorWorks. B.T.W.: Rhino is cheaper than VW, so it can't be price related. Cheers, BaRa
  10. Hi guys, Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that VectorWorks and Rhino use the same NURBS kernel (SMS's SMlib). However, VW doesn't give you the same control level as Rhino - in different situations. Below you'll see an iges model, imported in both VW and Rhino. In the next image, you'll see the result form an export command in both applications. On the right you see the mesh produced by Rhino. On the left, the mesh produced by VectorWorks. I speak from experience when I say that re-using your model in a non-NURBS-supporting software package is a hell when it comes from VW, because you don't get square-ish tessallation, which is needed to get proper surface behavior and avoid render artifacts. As it seems that SMLib offers the tools to control the tessallation algorithm, wouldn't it be a good idea to implement them in VW? Or is my reasoning totally off? Cheers, BaRa [ 02-17-2004, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  11. There is no (direct) relationship between both characteristics. Physical speed is determined by the distance between two camera views devided by the time it took to go from one viewpoint to the other. FPS allows you to determine the amount of frames you want to use to show that movement. There are a couple of standards. For instance, in Europe it's mostly 25 frames per second for video purposes. For multimedia, you can try to lower this to 12 frames per second. A different FPS only affects the quality of your animation (movie), but not the speed between two camera views. Cheers, BaRa
  12. I guess this is primarly a message for Biplab and his team. I'm very pleased with the way VW has aquired new 3Dmodeling tools, so I don't want to sound ungrateful. However, there are a couple of glitches in the current configuration. One of those flaws is using the 3D move tool on NURBS surface vertices. When you select a set of vertices by hand (by pressing the SHIFT-key and dragging a marquee around the vertices you want to select), you're currently unable to move those vertices - and those vertices alone - by using the 3D move command. In 2D, you can select a set of vertices of a polyline and move them numerically by using the 2D move command. You cannot do the same in 3D with 3D vertices by using the 3D move command. This is a clear inconsistency in the application's logic. I'm aware of the fact that I can use the TAB key to insert this value, but that doesn't solve the inconsistency. Another flaw is the fact that I can't drag a selection marquee around the individual vertices of a NURBS curve. Again, this is possible in 2D with polylines and in 3D with surfaces. There is no logical reason why this option would not be there for NURBS curves. Would it be possible to change this behavior in future versions of VectorWorks? Preferably in VectorWorks 11? Thanks a bunch, BaRa
  13. Hi Kristen, It works fine on all other computers at the office - both PC's and Mac's. But in every single case with at least 256MB. There is no official C4D tech list, but there are great user fora. A couple of possibilities: - www.postforum.com (subsection Cinema 4D) - www.creativecow.net (subsection Cinema 4D) - www.cgtalk.com (subsection Cinema 4D) The last on is my favorite one, but that's of course a personnal preference Cheers, BaRa [ 02-12-2004, 01:03 PM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  14. There's an easy way to create an offset with "duplicate along path": - draw the object that you want to duplicate - convert to symbol, and place your insertion point in relation to the distance you want between the object and the path. - duplicate the symbol along the path - if you made a mistake - if the offset is incorrect - then doubleclick on the symbol to edit it, and move the object inside the symbol till the distance is correct. Cheers, BaRa [ 02-15-2004, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  15. Sounds like either a lack of memory (C4D is memory hungry, don't use it with less than 256 MB Ram installed - just check the application info and you'll see what I mean) or a lack of enough graphic power (graphics card). I've got the same problem on an old G3 with 160MB of RAM. To have a completely correct answer: post your question here: http://www.maxoncomputer.com/support_form.asp Cheers, BaRa [ 02-12-2004, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  16. Hi Gerrit, (of mag ik ook gewoon "dag Gerrit" zeggen?) I've never used Exception before, so I can't tell whether I would like the interface or not. But I do understand how you feel. VectorWorks has a great interface in 2D, and since the introduction of NURBS it also has the technology for very powerful surfacing and solid creation. But it doesn't have an easy 3D interface. It would really please me and a lot of others on this board (not to count the ones "in the closet") if NNA managed to improve the 3D interface. Take a look at 3DMax, Maya, C4D, StudioTools, Rhino, Sketchup (and probably also Exception) - they all have a more fluent way of working in 3D. So NNA, if you're listening, make us 3Dusers happy and please pretty please redesign the 3D user interface. You've done a lot of great things lately - better DWG handling, better image export, better 3D modeling tools, better and faster 2D, to name but a few. It would be a shame if such a nice tool as VectorWorks would stay incomplete because of it's "ancient" 3D interface. (I would model you a guy begging you on his knees in an attempt to convince you, but I fear that with the current 3Dinterface in VW, it would take me waaaaay too long ) Cheers, BaRa [ 02-11-2004, 05:32 AM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  17. Construct both end profiles and use the loft tool. Or: extrude a profile and cut of the start and end. Cheers, BaRa
  18. I hope you mean 1 gig of RAM instead of 1 meg ...
  19. About the interface ... I do like the idea of an adaptable interface. you can currently edit the menu's, tool palettes and shortcuts, but that doesn't go far enough. First of all, VectorWorks needs non-modal managers. Currently, when you launch a command, you get a dialog box where you have to change some settings. Then you click OK to confirm and execute the command. This was great 10 years ago. Today, you're far better of with non-modal managers. You launch a command, you get the information about that command in a dialog box that can stay open all the time and that allows you to change settings on the fly. For instance: if you have to make a lot of symbols, you simply launch the command, you get to select objects, convert them into a symbol, select the next set of objects, convert them and so on without eacht time having to launch the command. Second, those dialog boxes or active tool managers can of course be floating, but you should also be able to dock them in the interface. A great example of a non-model manager is the current Info Palette. You change a value, and you immediately see the result. You can keep it floating, or you can (on Windows) dock it in the interface. Those are the things that would really improve the workflow and speed in VectorWorks. Select a tool or command, change the settings in an active tool manager, and see immediately what happens in the drawing. And about the idea of trying to make VW look more like ACAD: if there is one really bad example of a horrible interface, it's ACAD. Badly designed icons, absolutely no logic in the way the menus are organized and so on. There are, however, a couple of things I do like about ACAD, but they have nothing to do with interface design: one of them is the fact that linetypes can be treated (and re-used) as ressources, another is the fact that you can use viewports. It would make life so much easier in VectorWorks if we could get rid of the current properties palette, and group it all together in the ressource palette. That move should allow us to - finally - use whatever 32-bit color we like to use, and to easily find it by browsing the ressource manager. Same for linetypes and patterns. Cheers, BaRa
  20. About (B): use the command "make generic solid" (or something like that) to remove the construction history from your objects. I had a wheel rim with a file size of 11MB. After stripping the history it was 2 MB. Of course, after that you can't use the history tree anymore to modify your object. Cheers, BaRa
  21. Hi Chris, I see your point. And you're absolutely right. The logic (and the tools) that applies to 2D, should also function in 3D. That would have two benefits. First, it would reduce the amount of tools and commands we're currently using. Add volume would do the same as add surface. Second, it would enhance the user interface, because you wouldn't have to mind whether you're in 2D or in 3D. So it would be a double win if NNA were to implement that. On a side node: IF NNA ever manages to implement this, they should also rethink the wall tool. Right now it's impossible to make a decent logical connection between walls that allows you to place a window symbol in a corner (overlapping two wall elements). It's also impossible to make a windows that spans several floors, because the walls on the different layers have no relationship. We should also be able to incline the wall tool (non-vertical walls). And we should be able to make 2D sections of walls, with the same kind of fill as you get in plan view. Anyway, lots of things that can be improved. Nevertheless, IMO it's still a very versatile and very good application. Cheers, BaRa
  22. Actually I work for one of the VectorWorks distributors. Design Express (the company I work for) is responsible for the Benelux area (Belgium - The Netherlands - Luxemburg). So in a way, I also work for Nemetschek Cheers, BaRa
  23. For the non-believers: check out the following flash movie: http://users.pandora.be/laplacebara/isometric.swf (922 KB) Cheers, BaRa
  24. quote: Originally posted by Maz: Bara: I think you are wrong about that and others on this site are confirming this. Your can see an object in isometric view but you cannot add isometrically-seen shapes to that object while you remain in that isometric view. This is a program limitation that will probably get resolved in future versions. (a) Go in an isometric view. (b) change your working plane, if needed. © choose a 3D-tool, like 3D-polygons, 3D-primitives or NURBS (d) start drawing like you do in 2D - along your working plane. There are variations to this, but it's the same principle. If you need screenshots, just let me know. B.T.W.: it of course also works in perspective view. Cheers, BaRa [ 01-27-2004, 05:18 AM: Message edited by: BaRa ]
  25. You're not alone ! (drama, drama). I too would like to see the (re)birth of this function. I've got that option in Maya and Cinema 4D, but not in VectorWorks. It really slows me down. So, to NNA: does it exist already? If yes, which key combo should I use? If not, what are you waiting for? (Don't take this the wrong way, I am in an enthousiastic mood today. Won't last, of course). Cheers, BaRa
  • Create New...