• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Good

About jnr

  • Rank
    500 Club

Personal Information

  • Occupation
  • Homepage
  • Hobbies
    seeking stable software
  • Location
  1. Hey Zoomer: You forgot to mention the miserable stair tool in the list of essential and needed upgrades! I agree with your post though. I've been trying to use 2018 and have to go back to 2017. It's unstable which is a bummer.
  2. 2018 (w sp1) blowing up left and right, or should I say vaporizing. First began with file lockups, now it just disappears. This is what I get for trying to carry converted 2017 files forward and I should know better. There's a long-term pattern: new versions don't like old versions. period. Does make one wonder why pay for the service select auto upgrade until you get a project you can start from scratch with. I'm a one-man band, but I can't imagine what real offices have to contend with when facing this issue. Me thinks that despite claims to the contrary, there are parts of the OS that all versions access so may be time to clean house, or rob a bank and buy a new computer every time there's an upgrade... Otherwise why would I see the same behavior in version after version (like in how excruciatingly long it can take window or door menus to open in a converted file). Everytime I submit a problematic file to the nice folks in tech support, they can never find anything wrong with it which would seem to indicate there's something wrong with my mac pro despite my best efforts to put it on steriods and keep it clean. Back to 2017. ugh.
  3. Here's another one. This took about two days, a ton of trial and error, and generous support of folks on these boards. But wait, it appears the Archicad interface could do this in 5-10 minutes. If a new tool is designed for stairs, its not a big leap to create the same interface for ramps which would be of enourmous benefit to Landscape and Scene Designers.
  4. The old (more flexible) custom stair tool is unstable in the current versions, so game over. I've had way too many recent projects corrupted and now have to bang my head against the wall with the inflexible current tool: crappy graphics, bad interface, 37 different places to control one variable, buried sub menus, mind bending options (am I on run 1 or run 2? wait is that from the bottom or the top? Wait, I had to mirror the stair, so now where do I control that offset?).
  5. I don't want a tread and riser on the landing. Alas, this tool won't do that but the old custom stair tool did...
  6. I cant take it anymore. The current stair tool SUCKS. The feedback from the some of the wonderful staff at the summit last week is that there is agreement in the ranks that it needs to be addressed. The users have been complaining about it for years. The interface is entirely too complex, lacks functionality; its highly inflexible. We have three of them. The old custom stair tool worked well, unfortunately as a legacy tool, it will corrupt your files. Please let me know who in the food chain is responsible for this decision. The company does a good job at responding to its user base except for this one function which is critical to architects and landscape architects. The Archicad stair tool (if it does what the marketing video claims) makes the Vectorworks stair tool look juvenile. For example, the Archicad technology completed in maybe 20 minutes what took me a half a day to build with Vectorworks for a similar stair and ramp. What's hard to believe is that with all of the focus on advancing technology and functionality, especially with BIM capability, that this tool languishes. The tool needs to be a priorty for the next version, not two or three versions from now.
  7. My experience has been that the custom stair tool no longer really works. Its a legacy tool that when I have attempted to use it in the last two versions, I had similar experiences as well as the file basically corrupting until I removed the custom stair, then replaced it with the less than useful, too complex, impossible to understand interface of a stair tool. Now we have another version with lots of bells and whistles while this essential tool languishes in an almost unusable state. For example, I tried to build a stair with a landing at the bottom (allowed in the UBC and IRC) and it won't do it unless there are two risers. Easy to pull off with the old custom stair, impossible with the current stair module. UGH.
  8. Being perpetually brain dead, did not realize you could do a design layer section viewport. Assuming you are suggesting using a RW camera for the sheet layer viewport to look at the section viewport? Will give it a whirl. If I can master that, might try to do one with camera match. Several examples out there with a photo overlayed by a 2-D section detail. thanks andy. -J
  9. The current stair tool stinks. You can't customize like you could with the old custom stair tool (which you really can't use because it will corrupt your files). It lacks clear logic, its hard to follow what dimensions you're modifying, railings are buried way in the back, changing the weird default graphic parameters are unnecessarily complex. I tried to create a stair recently that had just a landing as the first tread, which is legal in the US, and it wouldn't let me do it without one tread and riser in front (which I did not want). I don't want to add platforms or other independent geometry to cover for the lack of flexibility in the tool. Its a pain, especially if floor heights are still in flux We've been suffering with this for at least two releases. Despite repeated calls for an upgrade (or frankly tossing it out and finding another vendor) we're stuck with the same lack of functionality and unecessary complexity. ugh.
  10. I've probably asked this before but does anyone have a good workflow for creative custom section perspectives? Attached is an image from the interweb. I'd like to start with the clip cube to set view and cut, then be able to render. Ideally setting a viewport that can then render would be ideal. As I understand it, section viewport from clip cube only gets you a 2-D section viewport. Ideas? -J
  11. Well this only took about 5 hours. trial and error. BCD's method combined with a landing at mid level finally worked. Still needs tweaking, but works in concept at least.
  12. Project is in Prague, not me. Glad you liked the projects. when the dust settles will update website. -J
  13. R: Thanks for the tip, and good point about the tight radius. This is in Prague and funded by the EU, so its game on. I think if I build one side in two halves with a landing as you suggest at the tight radius, I can flip the ramp over and mirror it for the other side. Its subject to complete flood immersion so it will all have to be robust cast in place concrete. I can't really rotate in environment as the model is propagated in all sorts of camera match, section and plan views. Gotta suck it up and build it in 3D.
  14. I'm tearing into this today and will try to post later. Other fish in the frying pan, (layer transparencies with referenced files, camera match hell, water textures etc.). Yeah at this juncture, its 3d approximation.
  15. bcd: thanks for the response and taking time to think about this.. I'm running on little sleep so I'm not following how I would keep the shape generated in plan. Seems like scaling factor is yet another exercise of trial and error to get the shape one wants. EAP only allows a single nurbs so I'm not sure how to maintain the shape you want. EAP good idea for the walls/railings. What am I missing?