SamIWas

Member
  • Content count

    222
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Great

About SamIWas

  • Rank
    Journeyman

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Entertainment Lighting Programmer/Technician
  • Homepage
    sam.samandemily.us
  1. I'm not sure I necessarily agree. At some point, the program becomes too bloated from it's true purpose. At what point does it go from beefy CAD program to full 3D animation program? Then, people will want all the features of full 3D animation, which is a massive set of features. Not to say that VW couldn't use a lot of work on a lot of features. I'd love to see Cinema's level of texturing, lighting, true 3D coordinate system. But, I'm in the camp of letting complimentary programs do their strength and work with each other. At this point, it's almost like we just need Cinema to have some of VW's tools...then we'd have everything we need!
  2. Thanks everyone for making me think. I got it all working. The original problem was not drawing on the "ground". That as fixed by either using 3D polys, or using the 1160 variable. Then, I couldn't get the polys to go away. That was fixed with the DelObject calls, which for some strange reason, I missed.
  3. No issues with the Extrude Along Path tool itself. It's when I run it through Vectorscript that I can't seem to make the original shapes disappear.
  4. I couldn't figure out how to make that one work at all. I have managed to get the strange rotation issues dealt with by using 3D polys as the path and profile instead of rectangles. But I still can't get them to go away once the extrude is made. I'm left with the extrude and floating polygons.
  5. I am trying to do a very simple extrude along path in Vectorscript to basically make a square or circle tube box. When drawing, I simply create a rectangle for the path, a rectangle or circle for the profile, and run "Extrude Along Path". I have managed to get Vectorscript to make the object, but I'm running into a few problems: 1. It seems to draw these things on screen plane rather than using basic world coordinates. I tried setting the plane, but that didn't appear to do anything. 2. It leaves the 2D objects there. This is a test section of code. It should create an 80x80 box of 2" square tube. It does, but it is always perpendicular to the camera, and not flat on "ground level". I tried using "SetWorkingPlace". I know I'm doing something wrong, or leaving something out. Any leads? Rect(-40,40,40,-40); struc1:=ConvertToNURBS(LNewObj,FALSE); Rect(-1,1,1,-1); struc2:= LNewObj; struct:=ExtrudeAlongPath(struc1,struc2); Move3DObj(struct,0,0,10);
  6. No. I believe what Cinema does is just save the object as two splines, their location, and the location of the sweep. So, instead of saving a crapload of polygon info, it's just saving the poly line definitions, which is just a few numbers, and the locations, which is just some coordinates. It's a tiny snippet of text. As far as the more complex geometry, I'm assuming it just has a different method of storing the definitions. The 1Mb file size for the symbols sounds much more reasonable. For me, the main issue is transfer and storage. It's pretty much impossible to email a VW file. You have to go through web transfer of some sort, which is a pain. Some of our Dropbox folders are multiple gigabytes (one show is 35GB), which just chews up hard drive space when you are linked to multiple shows. I have a 6-year old iMac that I run on at home, and it is also quite stable.
  7. Man, that's just wrong. A file with 100 simple sweep objects taking nearly 50MB of space? Just tried it in Cinema with 1000 4x4 sweeps with 1˚ increment and 1˚ detail on the rounded profile. 3.2 MB file. I've always thought the file sizes of VWX files were a little ridiculous. That sounds like an engineering issue to get such a huge file size with 100 simple sweeps.
  8. Should parametric 3-D parts take much space at all? A sweep should take very, very little space. It's two poly lines to the program, and the file shouldn't have to store the actual 3D info. But, VW may not function that way and may save the full 3D information. Cinema 4D is much, much better at managing file size. Even my biggest projects with tons of high-poly sculpted 3-D objects are well under 200MB. I have some where an entire museum gallery model including a sculpted sand floor, a lighting grid, a ramped glass deck, and a dozen sculpted poly objects has a file size of 10.5 MB. Another is an entire museum exhibit...every wall, case, scenic object, pipe, and lighting fixture, for a 10,000 square foot exhibit...total file size is 45MB. Contrast that with my current smallest soundstage with a simple mid-size apartment set, a tiny room set, and a few lights...file size 155MB. I do have a lot of lighting symbols and some textures files, but still...
  9. I have dozens of scripts that do exactly this on my 20 or so user-created Lighting Device fields. I don't recall not seeing changes in the OIP, but maybe that's true. I did have to add a ResetObject to get the data to change on screen.
  10. I have had constant issues with laggy pan and zoom on my top-spec MacBook Pro, even with all settings to use the best graphics. With the same file on Vectorworks viewer on a cheap MacBook, a co-worker had extremely smooth zooming.
  11. The container solution is exactly how I do DMX addresses, because it's the only real way to deal with it. An alternative, but error-prone way of dealing with it, is to use a user field for your display info. I really want VW, or at least spotlight, to have an "auto calculation" parameter type where it could auto-create certain field styles based on a combination of other field info. I use this extensively in Filemaker. For instance, when I have a Universe and Address field, I have a separate field which auto calculates to the universe, a dot, and then the address in three-digit mode (Universe 6, address 37 calculates as 6.037), for paperwork. This would be invaluable for things like circuit name and number, so that circuit 2A 5 doesn't become 5 2A when you rotate your symbol.
  12. Not still the case. I have a class with 36 characters, including spaces and dashes.
  13. I programmed Vectorscript for ten years before I finally delved into creating custom plugins. I don't know why it took me so long. If you can write Vectorscript, it's pretty simple to create a custom plugin. I've now created numerous tools for cabling, networking, racks, and others. I did it for the same reason you are looking for: to have the info on the shape panel instead of the data panel. And because with a plugin, you can do drop-down menus, checkboxes, enter actual dimensions, hide parameters based on others, etc. So much more versatile than data.
  14. I have been a Vectorworks and Filemaker user since around 2004. I write complex scripts in Vectorscript and entire multi-table, relational, script-driven databases in Filemaker. I still, after more than a decade of trying, cannot get VW and FM to talk to each other over ODBC. Every few months, I get the desire to try again, and every single time, it's an abject failure. Something that should be fairly simple (especially for someone with a fairly deep understanding of scripting) and would change the way I develop my workflow, but I just can not get it to work. If someone has managed to get VW and FM to talk over ODBC on a mac, I would love to hear from you!! Obviously, it can work because LightWrite and Vectorworks do it.
  15. For me, Cinema4D's UI is the best UI out there. Infinitely customizable and easy on the eyes. You can arrange your windows however you want, group them, tab them, adjust the font and color or every item. Just great. And FAST.