IanH

Whilst file formats do need to cater for future requirements, there are may ways that formats can be forward and backward compatible between application versions. Unless you are writing out records of fixed data structures, it is quite common for data to be translated to a file record format during read and write. It is highly unlikely that VW is doing this as the files are compatible between Mac snd PC. Meta data in the file, if part of the file format, can give information about each record in the file, and bringing data written by a newer application is often transparent. If new new features were written by the later version of the application were used, then the meta data would indicate to the older application that it could not understand the new data, and the data would simply be ignored. There however is no reason why a file should not be 360'd between old and new application version provided that the few file features are not used. Another technique is for file formats to contain infrastructure for future releases. So if you knew that a future release would contain certain features, the file format could be adjusted advance of the new features being implemented. So when the new features were rolled out, no change in file format was necessary. [technobabble] I used this feature when I worked commercially in IT. It was a banking application used globally around the world and we needed to share information between branches/data centres and different application - the application would not be over 25 years old. It was a server/server application where different parts of the application was shared across different machines - it was way ahead of its time when it was first developed. The application data files contained records of the internal data structures, so were highly dependant on both processor architecture and application version. About 15 years ago, when we went from 32 bit to 64 bit, we put in the infrastructure to support 64 bit long before the actual migration to 64 bit hardware - the format of floating point numbers that we were using was deprecated on the 64 bit platform, however, whilst we did not store pointers so the change to 64 bit, we had to align variables on 64 bit word boundaries otherwise you would have ended up with the 64 bit application being slower than the 32 bit version - a variable straddling 2 different 64 bit words would require 2 fetch cycles. During each release, we would always provide a file conversion to reflect the change to any record structures, and a de-conversion if we needed to fallback the release. However because we pre converted the files for 64 bit, we could swap between 32 bit VAX and 64 bit Alpha processors at will, even within the same application where some parts of the application would run on a 32 bit VAX and other parts would run on 64 bit Alpha. The hardware mix was totally transparent, even to the application. [/technobabble] IMHO, if file formats are planned for and handled correctly, there should be little reason why data between different versions of application would need to be handled in a way that was not totally transparent to the user when sharing a file between 2 (or possibly more) consecutive version of an application. Unless someone is going to tell me that NNA only started working on 2009 after the release of 2008, they should have been in a position to incorporate changes for 2009 into the 2008 file structure. We would then be in a position to be able to share many files between 2008 and 2009 in a far more transparent way then they appear to be handled now. This is especially important now that it looks like there will be a new version of VW on a yearly basis. Even if a file format change is released for a prior version by means of an SP, I personally think that it is important to be able to transfer files between consecutive versions pretty much transparently. Even if this means that having something as simple as a document preference that allows a file to be opened in its original format/saved in an earlier (or its unchanged original) format, without having to worry about exporting it everytime as a prior version.

To be honest. I would not bother. The dongle issue may be visible, but its the issues that you can't see that you will not be able to resolve that I would worry about. I tried 11.5 Student on Vista and had the dongle issue. Tried to resolve it. I ended up with something completely unstable and I could not trust it not to crash. Not good in the middle of an important assignment. In the end, I went 2008, and it was so much of an improvement on 11.5 that I did not regret the decision even though it cost me tons as in the end, the student version was dead money as I knew I was going to need a commercial license before the year was out. Depending on where you are, the latest version of the student edition will either be free or heavily subsidised. Plus you will get the latest 2009 version. Another option is to fall back to XP.

Just got back from a VW 2009 conference. Sorry, if what I am going to dewscribe is not what your issue is but I would post in case it was. We were shown three examples of the extra detail and accuracy that Parasolid would give when offsetting 2D polylines with the offset tool. As far as I could tell, 2009 got them spot on, where as the 2008 examples the lines drifted or even kinked in what could only be described as a non uniform path.

I bet Cinema 4D does not have the amount of data that VW comes with. Even the VW service packs come in at well over 200MB. My Vectorworks install is 4.7GB and the install disc is a DVD so its going to have alot of material. Its more than likely that a VW demo is going to be too big for a reasonable download.

When you import, VW will convert a PSD file to JPEG or PNG so you may be better off converting to jpeg within Photoshop and exporting. However, VW may cause double compression of the file (first in PSD to JPEG export by Photoshop, 2nd on JPEG to JPEG import into VW) in this case but I have seen no visible proof of that. When you import PSD files, they appear to honour the physical page size, whilst jpegs may not. When working with raster files, you need to pay attention to resolution. I work at 300dpi, so if I create a file for import into VW, I work out the image size based on 300dpi and use Photoshop to resized it accordingly. I am of the belief that Photoshop will make a better job resizing and compressing an image than VW will.

If you have Piranesi, you can use the supplied cutouts as image props as they are 32 bit png files with alpha channel. Not sure on licensing requirements though I would imagine that if you owned Piranesi, you could reuse the content.

I am delighted to have seen that an example of my work has been included in the Vectorworks 2009 Landmark and Designer brochures. But I have always wondered about some of the other images in these and previous editions, especially the shot with the water flowing over a lipped container placed on a stone wall. Are some of the photographs just photo's of finished landscapes or, are they photorealistic renders performed in Vectorworks, possibly used as composite shots? Unfortunately as a garden designer, it is unlikely that I will come across a design budget that would allow me to model something in 3D to the sort of level of detail that would be needed to achieve a photo realistic look for a whole or significant part of a garden or landscape. Just curious if others get the chance?

Bum. I just updated my website with VectorWorks information and just found from that article that its been been changed back to Vectorworks.

What about putting the DTM in a separate file and referencing it in?

You pull it. Select the blue selection square towards the centre of the plant and move it to where you want the shoulder to be.

Pat What are your experiences with file format compatibility. Unlike 12.x and 2008, is swapping between 2008 and 09 versions likely to be transparent? I am kind of hoping that the file format change in 2008 contained any infrastructure changes needed to support the new features.

If you have not done so already, take a look at Piranesi - www.piranesi.co.uk It basically allows you to paint on a 3D model, like you would in Photoshop on a 2D model, except, if you set things up right, it understands about 3D, depth, materials, lighting, shadows etc. You either render 'by hand', or use one of the pre built in styles. To get a Vectorworks model into Piranesi there is a Vectorworks export as Epix command which is (certainly as far as 2008 is concerned) unfortunately only included with Renderworks. However, Piranesi will also import dwg files via the Vedute converter, so you could export models from VW in that format. I have never tried this to see how well this route compares to Epix export, which is pretty much seamless. You can decorate your drawing directly in Piranesi, by adding textures (including hand applied) and a large array of symbols/image props for people, vehicles, planting or those you draw yourself. There are also many talented people that have done fantastic work using Piranesi drawing on quite a basic underlying Sketchup model. Checkout the Piranesi Gallery for many examples. And the best thing is, the Piranesi stage does not take very long.

You may want to see my similar comments here regarding graphical plant attributes and use of symbols.

Alas it appears not not work. The moment the duplicate is performed, the encased symbol is simply decomposed into its constituent parts. But it was a good thought - I may even have tried this at some time in the past. One for the wish list. BTW. Welcome to the forum Eric.

Hi Eric Thanks for getting back - wow your first post! However I'm not sure if we are on the same page! I think what you are explaining is what I do now. The problem is, the act of duplicating the plant creates a copy of the symbol rather than a new instance of an existing symbol. So if I want to change the graphic look of the symbol (say you want to present to a client in a different style), I have to do it to all instances of plant, rather than just a few base symbols. From what I can see, the plant tool works similar to the symbol place as group option, when I want it to act as a place as symbol. Purely speculating here, I presume that it has to work like this as symbols cannot be resized, and thus, whilst they remain a symbol, they are a brand new clone rather than just an instance of a single symbol. How the plant tool works right now is that whilst you can edit a 'preferred graphic symbol', once the duplication has taken place, there is no longer a relationship between parent and child, so you have effectively doubled up on symbols for what is otherwise graphically identical. Take an underlying plant, call it 'Bergenia sp.'. Duplicate it, call new plant 'Bergenia cordifolia'. Now change graphic properties for 'Bergenia sp.' and these will not be reflected as a change to 'Bergenia cordifolia' which is what I want to happen. Am I missing something?

Was the deal with NNA/distributor or your reseller? In previous years, there seemed to be an overlap where late purchasers/upgraders of the prior version would get upgraded for free to the new product. When I asked the UK distributors about this, they said that, unless you were a major VW user, with many copies, it would not be happening this time. Still waiting to hear prices. If 2009 update is more than 2008 update, its actually a huge increase as previous versions had a two year lifespan with a mid term incremental update (11.5, 12.5 etc) that was free.

The problem that I find with VW plants is that you need a symbol for each species of plant you are going to plant. Whilst the underlying symbol may be the same, you end up having to duplicate different plant symbols for say Bergenia 'Bressingham White', Bergenia cordifolia 'Purpurea' etc but each being a seperate symbol. It would much prefer it to be able to create instances of the same underlying plant, differing in data (name, container size etc) but not in graphical representation. For instance I have generic symbols representing plants for ultimate spread small, medium and large herbaceous, then similar for shrubs etc. Then, when dropping different plants/species in the plan, only the data, plant name etc differs, but the underlying symbol stays the same. Thus, if you edited the symbol, it would change for all plants/species using that symbol rather than just the single species.

Does anyone have any experience of how or whether a parasolid based kernel will assist in 2D work. The Solidworks wiki says that 3D designs typically start off as 2D sketches which are then extruded. Are the parametric constrains likely to be available in 2D mode? As a garden designer, I find that Vectorworks could be more helpful when designing informal gardens - these are gardens with sweeps based on geometric shapes, but linked at tangents, either by lines or arcs. So for instance, you may have a couple of circles linked with each other with a line at on a tangent between each. Whilst VW does have constraints, I have found them not to be robust enough to be of any real benefit, although line at circle tangent is useful, but only later on when finalising the plan not when nudging and resizing shapes. It would be so nice to be able to draw the circles, link them with lines (or smooth arcs) and be able to reposition and resize the circles whilst the outline lines and arcs adjusts within the limits of the constraints. Taking it further, if my understanding is correct and the implementation is robust enough, it may even be possible to draw up a survey and enter the survey data as a set of constrains, line lengths, triangulation measurements etc, and have the survey set itself out. We are talking about small hand measured surveys here, not large ones taken with total stations. Or am I hoping for too much?

Another benefit of VW 2008 (and 2009!) is the ability to reference external files. Importing dwg files can have other issues when mixing with VW files - its not uncommon to see line properties change. Keeping imported dwg data in its own file, along with all the spurious classes that often accompany a dwg file, make it much easier to manage. I always keep the survey in its own file then reference it into my design files, even If I took the survey myself. VW2008 has something called design layer viewports (DLVPs) which are similar to sheet layer viewports, but reside on a design layer. Thus, a design layer can actually be composed entirely of the contents of an externally referenced file but without the spurious clutter. And having it in its own separate file means that it will not interact with the VW attributes. Being a viewport, you can also override line attributes to suit. It also provides a separate file which you can print out at different scales to 'doodle on' without affecting any work in progress. As the project progresses, I use less and less of the survey data, and replace it with my own data, for example, building outlines become 3D models, so the original survey data is superceeded with the 3D model in the design file. This is very easy to manage with viewports as classes can be turned on and off at will in the viewport. Another advantage is that if you have more than one version of a design file, you still reference the same underlying survey data, so you don't have to manage/backup files containing duplicate data. As the project progresses, I create a new file for the planting plan that simply references my design file. So I am working on a file that only contains planting plan information, not clutter from the design process - a fresh start for each stage of the project. It can even be made up of multiple views of different parts of the underlying design.

That will be the iPhone 2.1 update then! In UK, due to time difference, VW will be released from Tuesday. If anyone wants 2008, they have until Friday to get an order in. Free 2008 to 2009 updates are generally not officially available, so if you want 2009, you need to wait until next week rather than getting 2008 and expect a free 2009 update. For UK users on this website, please give me a call if you are thinking about upgrading. I am a CU reseller and I am happy to discuss discounts. I may not have as much dealer discount available to me as some of the large retailers, but I do it for beer money because I enjoy VW and IT and try and help with users problems, rather than to make a big profit. That said, it would be nice to get a upgrade for a whole office - just a shame that my brothers practice is Microstation based.

Not sure if this is related, but I have just noticed that the file that I am working on is 8MB in size. But all it contains is a DLVP to a referenced 16MB file and an unused reference to a 349KB file. Neither have reference caching switched on. All other design layers are empty except for the sheet layer which contains a drawing border. I've done a purge objects, no difference. The default.sta is 3xxKB and I just created a fresh new file and it was small like the template. I can't remember how I created the big file originally, but possibly I initially had reference caching turned on then subsequently turned it off and now its not freeing the space. Though this would explain the slow file creation, but as my temp test file was still small, I don't think that's it. Any chance of NNA looking at the bloated file to see what it contains?

What mouse drivers are you using? Some people have reported issues with some manufacturers mice. I had a problem with Illustrator until I updated to the latest Logitech drivers. The Microsoft iPoint drivers are also known to cause flickering in some apps.

Just a thought, what projection are you using? You can't use any form of oblique/axonometric projection with renderworks.

Have you got 2 design layer viewports or 2 design layers?

Yes. The Vectorworks and Maxon (CINEMA 4D, Bodypaint 3D) brands both have Nemetschek AG as their parent company.