Jump to content

Shengxi Wu

Vectorworks, Inc Employee
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Shengxi Wu

  1. I believe operation at group level was proposed in the original design for batch processing. For some reason (probably because of the minimum viable product requirements, or might be technical challenges), we decided to not go with it. Anyway, we will investigate if that is possible in case that resolves Kaare's concern. I can't reproduce it. Could you attach a sample file so we can look into that? Thanks Andy.
  2. Hi @Kaare Baekgaard, I am sorry that we haven't addressed your concern in time. Just want to confirm, would it be helpful if we enable the "Remove Texture Override" command from the context menu at a group level?
  3. For the case where the two original objects are using the same texture, I believe we've fixed this in VW2022 SP2. The behavior shown in your screenshot, where the two objects are using different texture, still remain. I am wondering if that is what Kaare would not prefer.
  4. Hi @Kaare Baekgaard, sorry for the late reply. We were swamped with different tasks recently so we might not have a chance to revisit the Texture task in a moment. I'll bring this up with our engineers, and see if there is an easy fix for this. Just to clarify: rather than having the behavior shown in @Andy Broomell's post, you think it makes more sense for new faces resulting from boolean operation to either have no texture (if the original object has no overall texture), or have overall texture Is that correct?
  5. Thanks James for the feedback! One additional question to confirm for the Window Installation Legend you shown here. I realize in the plan/section view that not only the window, but also the host wall of the window is shown in the legend graphic. I am wondering if it is important or necessary to include and display host wall in such legend (I am guessing the answer is yes since the dimension of Finished Opening needs to be labeled on the host wall🙂).
  6. Hi all, thanks for bringing up the discussion. We'd be very interested in learning how people create a graphic legend for their project, so that we could make informative design decision. If you have your own unique way of creating a graphic legend, or any complaint about the current workflow, please share it with us in this thread. I am quoting some responses from above, all following questions and discussions are open to everyone. For the graphical symbol part of your legend, are they usually 2D line works (i.e., lines, arcs and 2D polygons)? Will a symbol in a legend looks 100% identical with the actual one you placed on a drawing? If no, how are they different from each other? What additional information are included in a graphical symbol part of a legend, but not shown on the actual one placed on a drawing (and vice versa)? Do you think it would be helpful if graphical symbols of your legend are smart objects (e.g., fill/pattern, 2D/3D symbol, plug-in objects) instead of 2D line works? Should the graphic legend live inside a viewport (e.g., as 2D Symbol/line works in viewport annotation), or an independent object that can be associated with a viewport/sheet layer? By saying you want to "...create a legend for a sheet", do you mean you want to associate a legend with a specific viewport on a sheet layer(i.e., only includes symbols/objects that appeared in a specific viewport), or ALL viewports on a sheet layer? Is there anything that you don't like with your current legend workflow? Will you anticipate the ability of being able to update a legend (i.e., automatically add/remove a legend line) based on its associated viewport/sheet layer?
  7. Hi @Kaare Baekgaard, thanks for the feedback. I am trying to reproduce the bug and it seems that those unwanted texture overrides will appear as soon as you perform a boolean operation among two textured objects. This is a bug for sure. I will submit a bug report to document this behavior. I am not sure how the latter part of your description ("give the new object textures by changing its class") would affect this, please see the video attached below and let me know if I've missed anything. RedundantTextureOverride.mp4
  8. Hi @MarcelP102, thanks for the suggestion. Just like you've mentioned, I remembered internally we've also brought up similar enhancement idea. It might be a good idea to add a Tool Preference for the Texture Tool, with toggles to enable/disable mapping attributes picking for the Pick Up mode. We will keep that in mind once we have the chance to improve the Texture tool in the future.
  9. Hi @Kaare Baekgaard, thanks for your feedback. In fact whether a face should be selectable is a big debate while we designing the new Texture tool. If the purpose is to help users applying texture on complicated object with hundreds of faces, that probably means we not only need to add the ability for users to add faces to a selection, but also a more robust way to select faces (i.e., loop/ring selection, expand/shrink selection, soft selection... etc), which could be a complicated topic that requires further investigation and research. We decided to start by addressing the basic problem first. Click-to-apply seems to be a much faster way of applying texture on a simple geometry (which is what the tool is designed for at this stage). The Texture tool will evolve and we will think about how to improve it.
  10. Thanks @Andy Broomell and @Jesse Cogswell for the explanation and video! I am able to reproduce this bug now. I've submitted a bug to document this issue. Will also bring this up with engineers and see if we have resources to fix this.
  11. Hi @kklik and @Jesse Cogswell, Thanks for the feedback. Do we have this bug documented in Jira? We tried and could not reproduce this bug with the information you provided. Could you please described your workflows in detail? A step by step guide to reproduce this bug, or a video script would be helpful.
  • Create New...