Steve B.

I use Lightwright 5 In LW I added a text column called Temp to VW. In it I place the "T" symbol, this column does not print in LW, but it maps to the Gobo 1 field in VW and places the symbol into the appropriate label legends. All my VW legends as well have a "Use" field that is also in LW and can either be a truncated purpose name and that sits right above the color, or nearby. I can put the actual template number into that field in LW as well if I want to see what template number for which instruments on the plot. SB

I'd make duplicate plots and LW hookups, one for each plot/piece/company in use. Then use classes in VW to grey out the units not used in a particular plot but common to all plots and hookups. Create a master plot and LW hookup, then duplicates for the changes. You can easily find which units are for what plot by Marking them in LW (in the Marks field), then use Find and Modify in VW (Spotlight - Find and Modify - Find All "Light" whose "Mark" "=" "XX") to find all those units marked for a particular piece. Marking particular units also allows LW to filter only those units in the Worksheet (and print) that you desire. Make sure that you adjust the automatic map that exchange uses to include those LW fields you want VW to see.

That assumes you deal continually with a person using a pirated version, which is (in my experience) typically not the case. It's usually a one time (and infrequent) experience, with a file sent sometimes from an agent for a visiting act, or more likely from the LD/Superviser themselves, who might well be aware they are using a pirated version. In that scenario, I don't know this person from Adam and while I will tell them that I cannot open the file (and why), I am in no position to play Software Pirate Police with them, nor should I be asked too. I simply find the change in policy extreme. The older method of simply opening a web page to notify of the pirated copy was sufficient. If you wanted to expand, possibly keep track of the IP address that keeps reporting attempts to open a pirated file, and/or keep track of the user license and then an e-mail to the user that supporting pirated versions is in violation of the spirit of the en-user agreement, might well suffice. SB

So what you are saying is that a file created on a so-called illegal version, cannot be opened unless we/you can track down the user and have them upgrade to a legal version. Is that correct ?. As note: I don't "work" with these people. I often times have no clue who the original user/file creator might be. Usually it's a file for an event that is visiting our theater at some point in the future and is sent as an -email alongside all the other tech info. And to be clear and if I'm reading your (Juan) post correctly, you remove the restriction caused by the file being created on an illegal copy, the moment the user of the illegal software upgrades to a legal version. What would be the point of that ?. Once they upgrade to legal, they can send the damned file again, with NM having no need to get involved. And how do I deal with a file that comes up illegal that has been given to a advance person who's not the creator of the file. We potentially can have many layers of folks between the original and an end-user. So everybody now has to track down the illegal copy user and "correct" his/her errant ways. That's not exactly the way to encourage folks to want to use the software. I do understand the problem of pirated software, but this is absurd and doesn't exactly endear me to Nemetschek as a customer EDIT: And I think that I just now understand that the file that was created with an illegal copy is still useless, until the user pays up and VW converts it to be legal.

Totally agree. NM is shooting the messenger here. The work-around (which is what I am doing) is to open in my version of 2009, then save then re-open in 2012. Absurd to have to do this. Steve B.

Yes It's a tour rolling thru tomorrow. The LD had also sent a pdf and I had to adapt, so couldn't use the VW file anyway. Just curious if Nemetschek changed their policy

I received a VW file yesterday, that when I attempted to open, bumped me to the web browser and a Nemetshek site that told me the file I was opening was created with an illegal copy of Vectorworks. OK, I think, I have seen this once before a few years ago, when I used version 2009. I was still able to open the file. No longer. 2012 seems to not allow a file from an illegal copy to open. Is this the case ? and/or am I doing something wrong. SB. 2012 Spotlight SP2.

Ah, Ye Olde SP2 !. That did the trick, Thanks Kevin

Just upgraded from 2009 to 2012, using LW5 as well In '09, in order to keep track of used and no-longer-needed xml files, I had created a desktop folder where I would send my xml files from VW and where to look in LW. 2012 seemingly does not like this. When I save the xml, using other location (then where the VW data file is stored), the LW file can't read it and I get the "You need to doan export in VW error in the LW window, If I choose to have VW save the xml in the same folder/file location as the VW data file, LW sees the xml with no problem. Is this a LW issue or a VW issue ?. Seems like a VW as the xml exchange from a different folder works fine in 2009. Steve B.

Swap them out for some incandescent fixtures. No gel or color correction will help, as the LED source leaves little to correct. This is one of the problems with LED's - poor color rendition index. Lot's of very specific light in very defined wavelengths, but not much across the broader spectrum we are used to with incandescents. The cheaper LED's used in flashlights and Home Depot stuff have the worst CRI. This is one of the reasons LED's are not popular for any kind of stage lighting or human faces. They work well as back light or as set washes/cyc washes, and as you've discovered, make food look very un-appealing. Steve B.

Yup That's annoying. There should be a toggle, to "Always Start at 1" or "Continue with last number". SB

Yup, that's the ticket. That's new in '09 ?, I assume, as it's not in my print dialogue box for 12.5 and is something I wished for way back in 10 Still learning '09, just had a student show me the Windows trick of pressing and holding down the scroll wheel to move around the page. Found out that was available in 12. Sigh..... So far liking most of '09, refresh instruments takes twice as long and not liking that. Thanks for the help Steve Bailey Brooklyn College

Just upgraded from 12.5 to 2009 I'm converting assorted documents created in 12.5 or older and am having a class visibility issue. I assign certain units on a plot to a new class called Non-Plot, which is a class for units not used current, but staying hung and in Rep. I go to Tools - Organization - Classes, set NonPlot to Grey visibility. The fixtures show background grey on screen, but print with full visibility, just as background behind the pipe (position shows as a line thru the fixture). If I set the class visibility to invisible, they will disappear on the print. So how do I get the grey visibility to print as greyed ?, as in, what's different in '09 that I took for granted in 12.5 ?. Thanks in advance Steve Bailey Brooklyn College

Ben Thanks for the info I'm saving it as a Word file for future reference. SB

Sounds like you have copies of the fixtures layered over each other. When you do an export to LW, count how many fixtures are being sent. Is it more then what LW has in the file ?. You can clean this up a bit by doing a fresh export from VW to a new LW file. You should then see units on a position with same unit numbers but different UID. Just a thought SB