Jack Fulmer

RE: Mapped Shadows I left VW at v8.5 and moved on to Maya. But I have a question/suggestion regarding the mapped shadows. Mapped shadows are generated from a disk-based map, which determines the size and shape of the shadow. The larger the geometry, the "rougher" the shadow. In a 3D package such as Maya, one can increase the resolution of the shadow map, which increases the quality of the shadow generated. In Maya, in particular, there is also a filter variable that can be adjusted to blur the edges for a more realistic rendering. My question: Is there a way in VW9 to increase or adjust that resolution? Let me know, I'm curious.

Okay, let me try my hand at explaining this. As someone with experience in both MiniCad/VW, and 3D modeling packages such as 3D Studio Max and Maya, I believe I understand what tom_k is asking. At its core, VW is an architectural CAD package. In other words, when creating a structure in VW, one typically works from plan view, giving objects height and dimension and Z value from the 2D perspective. You can always switch your view and working conditions to 3D, and change parameters of elements via the Object Info palette. However, to create a model in the 3D perspective from the start would be too cumbersome with VW (in my opinion). That is where a package like Max or Maya comes into play. The drawback to high-end 3D modeling packages such as these is that they don't have any of the "built-in" architectural features that most CAD packages have. I'm talking about existing libraries of symbols and plug-in objects such as doors, windows, stairs, etc. In addition, you won't find a Roof tool or a Floor tool in Max or Maya. Does this provide any helpful info? Maybe I've made the explanation too simplistic, but I tried to approach it from a different angle. On a final note, I greatly admire the VW/RW package and find it to be an extremely intuitive and fairly efficient software bundle (the renderer still needs quite a bit of work). Understand that my viewpoint is coming from more of a modeling background than an architectural background. Hope I could help. Jack Fulmer

Okay, let me try my hand at explaining this. As someone with experience in both MiniCad/VW, and 3D modeling packages such as 3D Studio Max and Maya, I believe I understand what tom_k is asking. At its core, VW is an architectural CAD package. In other words, when creating a structure in VW, one typically works from plan view, giving objects height and dimension and Z value from the 2D perspective. You can always switch your view and working conditions to 3D, and change parameters of elements via the Object Info palette. However, to create a model in the 3D perspective from the start would be too cumbersome with VW (in my opinion). That is where a package like Max or Maya comes into play. The drawback to high-end 3D modeling packages such as these is that they don't have any of the "built-in" architectural features that most CAD packages have. I'm talking about existing libraries of symbols and plug-in objects such as doors, windows, stairs, etc. In addition, you won't find a Roof tool or a Floor tool in Max or Maya. Does this provide any helpful info? Maybe I've made the explanation too simplistic, but I tried to approach it from a different angle. On a final note, I greatly admire the VW/RW package and find it to be an extremely intuitive and fairly efficient software bundle (the renderer still needs quite a bit of work). Understand that my viewpoint is coming from more of a modeling background than an architectural background. Hope I could help. Jack Fulmer

Well, you've done everything the exact same way I did. The only difference is that I did not create any new strings or DWORD values, but simply edited the existing ones. But I don't think that should matter. The other MAJOR difference is that I had this problem with Win2000 and you're having it with WinME. Maybe that's the source of the problem. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. Did you try calling Tech Support? Good luck. Jack Fulmer

yoyo - Are you upgrading to WinME? If so, then follow the registry edit instructions I listed in the previous post. That should work for you. Jack Fulmer

Reading this entire thread, you can almost be assured that this is a driver issue. But, that fact that it is a driver issue means that it IS related to whatever OS and software one is using. Which places blame on everybody. As far as the Mac users are concerned, I would place most of the blame on your notoriously buggy and finicky OS. Whether or not X will fix anything will remain to be seen, far down the road. Plan on at least a year from now before most of the 10.0 bugs will be worked out. However, your video card options as a Mac user are pretty limited, so it's really a rock and a hard place for you guys, and I sympathize. I, personally, have been using MiniCad/VW since 6.0, and have never had a display problem, except for the well-known "buttons turning black" issue, which was theoretically a driver issue, but never really solved. Finally, keep in mind that while VW/RW is (IMO) an excellent architectural CAD/rendering package, to this day is not optimized to utilize the amazing capabilities of most current mid to high end video cards, unlike many other comparable programs, whether CAD or 3D modeling. Which should give you some idea about how much priority Diehl/NNA gives to video card compatibility. Again, I have none of the display problems indicated in this thread. Currently running VW/RW on top of Win2000 SP1, using an Oxygen GVX1 with a 600 P3 and 256 RAM. BTW, Win2K runs VW/RW flawlessly. My $.02, Jack Fulmer

Opens just fine in Internet Explorer (5.0).

If I understand correctly, you are creating perspective view renderings of 15Mb files. Are they fully textured? Are you including raytracing? How many light sources do you have? All of these factors, of course, increase rendering time. While I don't often convert to lines, the amount of time you are experiencing for rendering seems about right to me.

Sounds almost assuredly like a graphics card/driver issue. Your upgrade from 8.6 to 9.0.4 should be the clue. The original driver (i.e., the one that WORKED) must have been moved/removed/replaced/overwritten. Do you have another card you can pop in there? (preferably not an ATI card). If not, get a cheap one and check it out.

Doubt that there's anything that needs to be changed from a hardware standpoint. You should have plenty of muscle with the set-up you have. BTW - the graphics card isn't much of a factor with VW/RW (unfortunately). In fact, if you take a look at these boards, lately it seems that the software is operating better with older cards (I presume due to more stable drivers). What are you trying to render, and how long is it taking? I find RW to be a fairly good renderer, but mind-numbingly slow (especially if you incorporate raytracing).

Considering all the current display issues with the G4's in addition to all the apparant conflicts between OS 9.XX and VW/RW, I'd probably consider a wintel machine. The P4's REALLY FLY when it comes to 3D rendering, but I'm assuming (based on experience) that the architecture of VW will not be taking advantage of the revised SSE structure of the P4 chip. In fact, VW is currently unable to maximize on the awesome capabilities of most current mid to high end graphics cards. That being said, I can't even imagine what kind of nightmares will ensue when OS X is unloaded. Therefore, I'd go with the P4's. It's a better investment in the long run (hoping that VW 9 will be a major revision). BTW - I run VW/RW on 600 P3 with 256RAM and an Oxygen GVX1. I'm running it on top of Windows 2000 (SP1) And, VECTORWORKS NEVER CRASHES. I repeat VECTORWORKS NEVER CRASHES. And I push it to the limit with some serious 3D modelling and animation. (I also use Maya and 3DS Max). I kid you not - Absolutely no Vectorworks problems with my setup. And I've seen side by side comparisons between G4's and PC systems very similar to mine and the speed difference is negligible. Hope that helps. - Jack Fulmer

I recently posted this repsonse to a question about hardware configurations, and am posting it again here in response to this thread because it seems relevant: I'm pretty sure that VW/RW isn't currently designed to make use of today's blazingly fast and wonderfully designed graphics accelerators and their respective GPU's. You'll have to ask NNA why. Check the approved application specs on most mid to high end cards (Elsa, 3DLabs, Hercules {which actually is Guillemot}, etc.) and you won't see VW mentioned anywhere. That being said, for the current release of VW/RW you should focus on CPU and RAM. Get the fastest and most you can, respectively. JF

I'm pretty sure that VW/RW isn't currently designed to make use of today's blazingly fast and wonderfully designed graphics accelerators and their respective GPU's. You'll have to ask NNA why. Check the approved application specs on most mid to high end cards (Elsa, 3DLabs, Hercules {which actually is Guillemot}, etc.) and you won't see VW mentioned anywhere. That being said, for the current release of VW/RW you should focus on CPU and RAM. Get the fastest and most you can, respectively. JF

I had the EXACT SAME problem when I upgraded from Win98 to Win2000. Several different reinstallations did not correct the error. I was able to correct the problem by editing the registry, and including the serial number for Renderworks at the following address: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Graphsoft\Vectorworks\Registration. However, I highly recommend that you contact tech support before editing the registry. But I am thoroughly confident that the above remedy will correct the situation. I suspect it's a bug within the registry structure of Win2000 that caused the error.

Same thing occurs under Win2000. The Task Manager generally reports 100% CPU usage whenever VW is running, even without a file open. And, yes it is the only program I have that behaves that way. I'm including Photoshop, Illustrator, 3DStudioMax, Maya, and Lightwave in that statement. Have no clue why this is, but common sense would tell you that there's no way that VW is using 100% of the CPU's power, because I can still open and use other programs while it is running. VW is, in general, a pretty sluggish program. I'd be curious to see whether or not the CPU usage is different with a machine running VW only and not a VW/RW bundle. Let's hope our statements generate some NNA feedback on this topic, even if it is only for curiosity's sake.