Jump to content

Diamond

Member
  • Content Count

    728
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Diamond


  1. Yes there is a demo. Obviously this app is for rendering and animation not CAD, but the tools are still able to be customised.

    It is funny what you say about palette docking. Coming from Mac, I hated it at first, but after a while on a PC it grew on me, now I am enjoying palettes again. But I was never one to move them around too much as many do (mostly Mac users in my experience).

    Having a bias towards extremity I have my workspace set so that my even the length of mouse movement across the screen will be minimised, thus saving fractions of seconds. I know, I know...a tad, well....extreme!


  2. Yes, I certainly agree on the multi screens part.

    If you are having problems with clutter, it might be time to look at spaces, and get the stuff off your desktop and into a holding folder for filing or deletion. That said, I tend to be a bit of a neat freak! :)


  3. The next CINEMA 4D User Group Meeting will be held on June 24th at Adimex.

    As always we are looking for people to present and it was suggested that some of the presentations cover using C4D with CAD applications. I understand that this topic may be of interest to only a small portion of our members, so I would suggest we mix it up a bit to keep it relevant to as many people as possible. I look forward to your feedback on this one guys.

    Please also send me a short confirmation email if you will be attending so that we can get an idea of how many seats we will need.

    All the best

    Nigel Allen

    Senior 3D Animator

    Brains Intelligent Design

    nigel.allen@brainsdesign.com

    Email from Nigel Allen, the user group organiser regarding the Sydney C4D user group. The next meeting will partly focus on CAD (mostly Vectorworks or ArchiCAD at a guess) workflow integration, so if you are seriously considering this please RSVP.

    6-8pm

    Adimex:

    5-7 Cleg Street

    Artarmon

    NSW 2064


  4. The irony of what you are saying Christian is that the PC version of VW is far more unified view like than the Mac version. The three years preceeding mid 2009 I was on PC's. As a die hard Mac power user, that took some swallowing. Coming back to the Mac was harder in many ways than it was to go to the PC. Maybe because as home I was using an old mac, and my Mac power user skills went out the window.

    Getting into Cinema 4D at the moment, and I really appreciate its unified view. I think the learning curve is much simpler. Having looked at the link the you quoted and its reference to Logic Pro, I can completely agree with the comments. People speaking of their frustration of earlier versions, and the extremely steep learning curve (I speak as one who had a license of Logic and sold it due to the exact issue described - and life took me in another direction).

    This brings up another point. In my current professional position it is my task of beginning to plan methods of training for 50 people in three offices around the globe. This is made much harder without the unified interface. Everyone has their own way of working (which is great for creative types) but with those that struggle the palettes can create an even greater struggle. I know the VW interface is very Mac (and very old school Photoshop) but I do think it is time for a change. Cinema 4D changed their interface in a recent version, and every review I read raves about it. Given they are in the same stable of Nemetschek, maybe we have this to expect down the road. Although given that the VW interface was only given a scrub up in version 2008, I wouldn't hold my breathe.


  5. Jeffery,

    Yes that is what I do as well.

    When splitting your building up so that each level is an individual file, how do you deal with the stair tool? The stair tool allows for an upper and lower floor, or do you have to forgo this for the sake of file organisation?


  6. Thank you Jeffery for that breakdown on the IFC data. Very helpful.

    I know what you mean by less is more. I am struggling with that as well, as others coming across my drawings find the multi-layer set-up confusing. Especially where everything is in the one drawing. Having worked in smaller projects this hasn't been a problem, but in a larger office on a larger project, breaking up a project is so important.

    I liked what you had to say about one person generating a model, and others detailing from the model in the viewports (instead of in another drawing whilst I am modelling, as is happening with the project I am working on at the moment). I think this was the single most important mind shift/productivity tip that I have had after reading the Ellicott Heights white paper. This and breaking the floors up into individual files. I think that would prevent a lot of confusion for those that find the multi-layer per level set-up confusing as noted earlier.

    In your less is more layer structure, you don't mention your grid layer. Where does this information go now?

    Thank your or your prompt reply. Really good stuff.


  7. Hello,

    This is probably a question for Jeffrey W Ouellette (the BIM-ologist in residence).

    I have been reading the BIM in Practice page on the Nemetschek Site, and are trying to work out how what is best practice for the setup of layers, and how are objects translated in the IFC export?

    Are they translated through the IFC entity classes, or through VW classes?

    Do the objects have inherent IFC classes, or do we need to add them?

    Years ago (back in VW 11 days) I was sure I read that when building a building model it was advised to have a separate layer for the floor. It seems Jeffery you are advocating this in your White paper with the slab & structure going on this layer. I have been doing something similar for some time, but wanted some clarification.

    Are there any other VW materials for some more reading on this topic?

    Thank you.


  8. I have been noticing my fonts to the markers changing size and font type as well, especially with viewports at differing scales. Has anyone had any experience at countering this issue? I change the markers in the 1:100 scaled viewports and the markers in the 1:50 scaled viewports goes tiny (and vice versa).

    Any clues to solving this?


  9. I didn't have that ticked on mine. Although I do know I ticked it wondering what it did. What I had to do was delete all of my Keynote Legends. But thanks for the tip that led me to the solution to my problem, and hopefully putting an end to any more time wasting.


  10. Well done markuskolb.

    I had thought I only needed to turn them on in the design layer for them to show up in plan Sheet Layer Viewports. Problem solved. It didn't twig in my mind to toggle the pull down menu. Two years of frustrations solved!

    Thank you!


  11. Thank you Jeffery.

    That works well. Although doesn't show correctly in plan, but at least better than an extrude to edit on the fly.

    An interesting note. I have found by rotating the object 90 deg in front view enables me to have a fully vertical column.

    Just have to make sure that the steel section object within a symbol that I used (in my case, a round hollow section) is converted to a polygon.


  12. I would like to add to this, for both the floor and the roof tool is an upgraded to how they are rendered / modelled. If you look at the column tool, it renders the curve more like a curved NURBS surface. The roof face and floor tools do not do this.

    If you look at the way floor & tools are rendered, especially in hidden line, they look ugly. I am trying to encourage colleagues to use the hybrid 2D/3D objects, but if the VW objects compromise the presentation of their designs, it creates a large problem for adoption.

    Also I have to use viewport annotation masks for 3D elevations where I have a curved slab or roof face.


  13. Hi Mike.

    I just checked that the class of the Section Marker. It is in the "None" class. Just to make sure it was nothing inside it, I converted the Section Marker Object to a group and ungrouped it to check if anything was in another class. It wasn't. To double check this again, I turned on every class in the viewport just to make sure. The marker still doesn't show.


  14. I use the viewport section markers regularly. What I think is confusing this discussion is that they do not seem to show up in viewports. This was a problem in VW 2008 and does not seem to have been addressed in VW 2010.

    I have to draw in the regular section marker over the section instance to make it show in a viewport. I have had similar issues with design layer viewport not appearing in sheet layer viewports as well.


  15. ArchiCAD is very much architecture based, where as Vectorworks is used in many industries. I disagree with the production team thinking, especially with VW 2008 and later, as there is at least one architecture firm in Japan that has 3,000 licenses. Yes, ArchiCAD might be more elegant in this regard (in keeping with it's price), but it's 3D modelling is not as sophisticated as VW. I believe it's architectural objects are more specific, and translate a bit better into IFC objects (although I believe VW 2010 is much better at this now). 2D drawing is better in VW.

    They are different companies, and they do go head to head. It is about owning the funnel of the dollars that the user base contributes as different apps work better in different global markets, and fending off Autodesk. Let's be real here. We are all in business to make money, and if you are not, it is time to move out of your parents home and get a job! ;)

    In time there may be intellectual property that will go back and forward, but it may just be that Nemetschek eventually pools all of this knowledge and creates a completely new package. The iPad (and related off shoots) might be the very vehicle for this shift. After all, many packages have good and bad points, but as a pro-user of VW, I don't want to wake up one day, to find out that VW has been changed into something that works like ArchiCAD or Allplan, and all of my training just went out the window.

    I agree it would be great to get them to talk to each other. Unfortunately with any language, there are always translation issues, so for now IFC is probably the best way, and may alway be the best way to go.


  16. Renderworks is a simple in app rendering solution. Yes, it is getting better, and to be honest, I use it mostly for shadow diagrams (which I would not do in C4D). What is great about it, is that with some lighting knowledge (this is what I am lacking in, and what I am currently reading up on), you can do it all in VW. This is a great way to get started. Our office uses it extensively for montages. What it cannot do is full cinema quality photo realism which I am personally pursuing, but it seems to be able to get close. Have a look at the Renderworks examples on Nemetschek's website.

    If Nemetschek makes C4D, why can't RW just be improved? Architectural process is iterative - the scheme needs to be constantly worked and reworked, analysed, presented, presented again, etc in one program.

    Nemetschek has a wide base of users. To simply say that they should just roll all of their knowledge into all of their apps is short sighted. VW is already used by a massively wide spectrum already. It does certain things, other apps do others.

    What you have to realise is that high end photo reaslism cost time, money & skill. The Avatar movie cost $600 million for a good reason. It takes highly specialised people to do this work at a very high level.

    Assemblage - Have a look at the ArchiCAD workflow movie at Maxon's C4D architectural edition website. The workflow for VW is very similar. The VW file can be progressively worked and updated in C4D without losing all of your work in C4D each time you reimport the base file.


  17. The reality is that in Australia many (I say many, not all) consultants whinge about not being supplied drawings that they can simply get to work on! Lazy, lazy, lazy!!

    I suspect it is the same in this case. I give PDF's as well so they can see exactly what we see, beyond that, no more is normally needed.

    As architects we can help them as much as we can, but they should be drawing their own drawings using ours as a reference. They often get paid considerably more for doing considerably less! Don't stand for their crap! ;)

    Julian Carr has written 2 tech notes on this at;

    http://www.ozcad.com.au/support/techsupport.html

    Minor rant over! ;)

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...