wvancampen

I have had problems with OpenGL not rendering properly. I usually resort to using the Flyover tool to "jiggle" it, and eventually it renders.

Thx all helpful suggestions.

What is the easiest way to convert a 3d model to 2d? For example, I have modeled a building, but a colleague who is only conversant in 2d skills wants to work on the elevations. So I have to take my modeled elevations (in Front, Back, Left, Right views) and convert them to 2d form (vector not bitmap-based, of course). As a corollary, this example shows a larger issue/problem I have with BIM. It raises the bar on skills, because it ideally requires all participants to have both 3d modeling and construction knowledge. We all know these people are rare. In the past, the lowest common denominator was 2d drafting skills, so even the most inexperienced person could be useful. So I find BIM (which I personally love)--on a practical level--makes collaboration more difficult.

It would be useful to adjust the position of a window sash relative to the jamb, instead of just centering it. The ability to do this would be useful in making more realistic windows, especially at the working drawing/detail level. Similar to distinguishing interior and exterior jambs in the "Classes" settings--simply adding under "Jamb and Sash" separate dimensional settings for interior and exterior jambs might do the trick.

Yes, both of your suggestions do the trick....thanks!

I just noticed when the Window tool makes a double hung window, the (lower) operable leaf is outboard of the fixed upper leaf (as viewed from the outside). Which is the reverse of the norm, where the upper overhangs the lower--for logical water-repelling reasons. If I'm correct, it's a minor mistake, but somehow telling. Also, is it not possible to adjust the position of a window sash relative to the jamb, instead of just centering it? The ability to do this would be useful in making more realistic windows. Similar to distinguishing interior and exterior jambs in the "Classes" settings--under "Jamb and Sash" adding separate dimensional settings for interior and exterior jambs would do the trick.

The attributes of some of my section lines often disappear i.e. they lose their fill, line thickness etc. Invoking the "Make All Attributes By Class" command at the bottom of the Attributes palette.... restores them (albeit usually temporarily). This has been going on for a number of versions, so it's annoying.

It's not that many. It does seem strange one can't do this, since you can make global changes for other (albeit simpler) objects. I do understand about "symbolizing" but you would have to make a unique symbol for every size, which might not be practical if there were many different sizes. Wish list time...

Yes, I should have been more clear. It is the second scenario I'm enquiring about i.e. some of the windows' exterior trim use Class B and some Class A....I want them all to use Class B.

Is there a way to make changes to multiple windows and doors, for attributes not shown in the Object Info Palette? E.g. let's say I want to change the Exterior Trim class setting for all my windows. When I select more than one, the Settings... button is grayed out. So does that mean I have to change each individually? Thanks in advance.

Shaun, I'm glad I'm not the only voice crying in the wilderness. (Yes, I know this is unchanged from previous versions).

No. How would you make the jamb, sash and trim darker (like the walls) and the sill light? Again, the door tool does this automatically and as per convention, but the window tool does not....as far as I can tell.

In 2D, how do you make a window appear with a different (say darker) fill for the cut parts (eg jamb, sash) and lighter fill for the rest (eg the sill below)....as per graphic convention? With a door it's straightforward--the fill attribute appears for the leaf and the jamb/trim, and everything else not. With a window everything (jamb, trim, sash, sill etc) gets that fill. As far as I can tell, differentiating parts via Window Settings/View/Special Classes only affects rendering and 3D, not 2D projections.

I remember now....in Unified View Options I had "Show Page Boundary" unchecked. Never mind....

On some files, I cannot make the page boundary appear in design layers, even after confirming that "Show page boundary" is checked in Page Setup... I seem to recall there was another setting that affected this, but I can't remember where.

What is the easiest way to translate MiniCAD 4-5 format documents to VectorWorks running on MacOS Snow Leopard? I have VWArchitect 12.5.3 and 2010. I believe the earliest format either can translate is MiniCAD 7. I have earlier versions of VectorWorks that could open MiniCAD 4-5, but I assume they won't run on Snow Leopard. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

I found the answer: the delay was caused by having an Adjacency Matrix open. I guess every manipulation to a Space causes the matrix to have to update.

I am working on a file with about 180 Space objects. Whenever I manipulate a Space (eg moving or resizing it) there is a delay of about ten seconds. This naturally makes doing quick schematic layouts a pretty excruciating experience. It seems to be related to the large number of Spaces--but if one is working on a building with a large program this is inevitable. Is there a way to speed this up eg by turning off some settings?

Is there a way to have a worksheet sum the Proposed Area values for Space objects? The =AREA function of course only sums the actual area values.

When I used the Camera tool to create a perspective, and then made a viewport of it--the viewport never matched the perspective (it was usually from a higher vantage point). After nearly pulling my hair out in puzzlement over this, I discovered it was because I had Unified View activated in Top/Plan view when I clicked "Display Camera View." I guess in Unified View the layer Z heights affect the calculation of the camera height. So I've figured this out, but I am curious: is this a bug? Shouldn't the camera view be WYSIWYG with the viewport whether unified or not? And a further question: Unified View is obviously necessary to displaying 3D correctly, but is there ever any reason to be in Top/Plan and Unified views simultaneously?

I usually put door and window ID information on elevations as well as plans, so I wish this was possible. Sort of like what "Show 3D Hinge Direction" does for door and window operation. Similarly, I like to put section markers in sections and elevations, as well as plans. So I wish, perhaps in Section Line Instances, there was an option to display section markers not only in 2D Plan but in 3D.

When dimensioning in views or projections other than 2D Plan (eg isometric, oblique etc)--by making the dimension string a planar object it displays correctly in 3D. However, the dimension value only displays as a blank box. The ability to display the dimension value would be very helpful, as I describe a lot of elements in 3D. Or to put it another way--what is the point of displaying dimension strings unless you can actually assign values to them? I know this has been a much-requested item--I hope one more voice will make a difference.

Before I submit this as a wishlist item.... When dimensioning in views or projections other than 2D Plan (eg isometric, oblique etc)--by making the dimension string a planar object it displays correctly in 3D. However, the dimension value only displays as a blank box. Is it possible to display the dimension value? This would be very helpful, as I describe a lot of elements in 3D. Or to put it another way--what is the point of displaying dimension strings unless you can actually assign values to them?

I'm glad I'm not alone in this. Maybe (to echo willofmaine) because oblique projections are traditionally used for "mechanical" i.e. objective description, there was not felt the need for the naturalistic rendering modes. But I think they would be useful. Also, the phenomenon that Horst M. describes makes me think it might be a bug. I will report it.

Am I mistaken, or is rendering in obliques projection (cabinet, cavalier) limited to wireframe, hidden line and polygon modes? And if so, why?