Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

493 Spectacular


About markdd

Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Lighting Designer
  • Homepage
  • Location
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

3,094 profile views
  1. I have had issues like this in the past. Beyond the usual Class/Layer viewport visibilities, try outputting the sheet to a PDF file and see if the geometry shows up then..... If it does, then see if downgrading your graphics performance to "Good Performance and compatability" in Vectorworks preferences will help to temporarily solve the problem.
  2. When you create a Hanging position with a Pipe, group it first. The Label will be horizontal, regardless of the angle of the pipe. The Data Tag tool is what you need for this.
  3. Not easily. The AutoPlot tool solves the Accessory problem and I can add Accessories retrospectively with relative ease now. When I get some time I am going to make a video of the workflow that I have come up with which I will publish here. As with most things CAD related, this tool is fiercely logical and understanding how the tool perceives what is Top or otherwise is the key to understanding why it works in the way it does. It's all about the Axes within a Symbol definition. The tool renders the hidden line geometry entirely based on how the X,Y,Z axes are orientated within the source Truss Symbol, or if it is embedded within a Hanging Position, where those axes were orientated when the Hanging position was created. Once you get that, then the way the tool behaves makes perfect sense. I hope that helps a little!
  4. I have been spending way too much time on this of late, but have now developed a workflow that seems to work with the Schematic View command. Accessories were a sticking point but @Sam Jones's AutoPlot Place Devices and Accessories command fills the gap where the VWX accessories tool is lacking at the moment. After running the AutoPlot tool, the trick is to manually attach them to the Rigging object. (make sure you un-check the object in the resulting dialog or they will dislodge themselves.)
  5. Hi Tom Saved views doesn't save the sort order of the Navigation Palette, so just the ability to retain the sort order in the Nav. Palette and Organisation Dialog from one session to another would be helpful. Sounds more like a document preference......
  6. I guess some people use layers as a way of grouping objects more expediently so that they can turn visibility on or off etc. and not necessarily geographically as you are describing. The stacking order of layers does not change if you sort them alphabetically, so I imagine this is more about locating them quickly, especially if you have more than just a few. Persnally, I think @halfcouplehas a good point. Once you make a change like this, then you would expect the document to retain it from one session to another until changed. Gets my vote!
  7. Did I not change the colour of the light from the visualisation palette as an override for that viewport? Sorry, it’s over a year ago since I did the webinar. Last month was a repeat!
  8. I don’t think you can control the actual colour of the light from a lighting device’s emitter using classes. I have never actually tried though. however, a light object can be assigned a colour by class and be placed within a 3D symbol and controlled that way. Was that not the workflow in the webinar?
  9. I think, having read all of this and other posts related to this issue - The Top View refers to any lighting position seen as if it is laid down on the deck. This applies to Ladders, Lighting Pipes and lighting pipes turned vertical to form booms. If you want to use hanging positions - Build as usual but strip out any 2D geometry - You don't need it Convert to Hanging position Hang your lights Rotate the Hanging Position into the position you requre Re-orientate your lights using the 3D Rotate tool on the lighting devices (if you need to) Run the Schematic Views command and select Top View This should give you a good representation of your boom which you can adjust according to your needs I like to show boom arms as well and I have found a nifty way of adding them en masse which takes just as much time as my old workflow. This extra hardware does not become part of the Schematic View and it was this need of mine that was bogging me down. This thinking seems to give consistent results. However: Here is a list of issues that I think need addressing before this tool can be thought of as fully formed. Schematic Lighting devices showing in a Top/Plan view first with the ability to show the device in all the other Orthographic views when required The ability to integrate Accessories with this tool without having to regenerate the whole Schematic View. It is currently very difficult to add an accessory to anything other than the uppermost lighting device on any sidelight position. This means that changes through the design process are nigh-on impossible without a very cumbersome workflow. The ability to use the Ganging tool on Schematic Lighting devices All Schematic View lighting devices need to have all of the functionality that Lighting devices have with regard to the Spotlight Preferences dialog box (ie. Class and Modify color functionality) To be able to specify an insertion point for the Schematic View on creation. Fully functioning Label Legends on the Schematic Lighting device that work independently of the Model Lighting device. Some sort of Glyph by each lighting position to show that a schematic view already exists. This is a biggy, but well worth it in my opinion. The ability for Schematic View objects to use the respective component part of the lighting instrument symbol or Truss symbol for each kind of Orthographic view. This would mean that we as users could precisly tailor the output of any view according to what we had made in the components portion of the symbol. I am sure others will have even more ideas to add.
  10. I have just discovered that the focus point distance has either been changed or is now behaving differently to the way it has done for years and years. What used to be a fall off distance between the ground and the focus point perpendicular to the layer plane, has now changed to the distance the light travels between the focus point and the ground. This means that we all have to start remembering our trigenometry classes to get the old functionality back. Is this change intended? Surely not.
  11. @Daniel B. Chapman @TomWhiteLight I can see that this new tool is the direction things should move in, especially as the CPMV command really does not adress the problem of integtrating the 3D model with Vision and other rendering options such as Blender etc. The issue it seems to me is that when used with Hanging Positions, a Hidden Line component is generated of the Hanging Position as well as the Lighting device. What we really want is a Hidden Line View of the Hanging Position and the ablity to use (perhaps by default) the Top component of the Lighting Instrument Symbol. That way Label Legends would work as normal and the Lighting device would look as intended. Accessories are a problem at the moment. There is no way to add an accessory to a 3D lighting device. So creating booms in 3D virtually rules out the use of accessories for booms. A solution to this needs to be found soon, so that those of us that still use conventional lights can create sidelight positions that use Top Hats, barndoors etc.etc.. We are currently in Service pack 2.1. The tool has improved since Sepetember and I hope that with the advent of SP3 and upwards some of these concerns will be implemented. I agree with @Daniel B. Chapmanthat it would be really good if a developer from Vectorworks could come forward and answer some of our concerns or if the folks at Vectorworks Training could produce a good quality training Video showing a workflow that works for various different scenarios. Perhaps in the process of making the trainimg material the problems that users like ourselves are experiencing will become all too apparent. It is worth saying that the Create Plot Model View function still has it's uses. I do not find it innaccurate or buggy. However, it is a huge problem for many users because it is tricky, and no workflow was ever demoed by Vectorworks to explain it properly. Many users deride the tool as over-complicated, which it certainly is. However, once you get used to it, it becomes quick and predictable which I really like and I have managed to achieve some really great results using it.
  12. @TomWhiteLight Sadly, the new schematic Views command seems still to be very much a work in progress. What is frustrating is that while this is so, functionality of the old Create Plot and Model View command has been removed (focus point behaviour). Here are a few observations: The new tool assumes that we all work with lengths of truss and moving lights and that no rigging hardware is required to fix instruments to rigging positions. Accessories are almost impossible to make work properly Label Legends only work in Top View. That's pointless as the whole purpose of schematic views is that you can see the vertical layout (or otherwise) from one of the other orthographic views. A suggestion with the new tool would be the ability to change the 2D Component View of the Lighting Device in Schematic View to a Top view so that a 2D Label Legend can be applied properly. The Help section suggests that this tool is going to work using Component Views. Perhaps this could be made clearer as using component views of Instrument Symbols and Hanging Positions could be a really nifty way of a user being able to tailor what they see of a lighting device and a rigging or hanging position for each of the 8 orthographic views. Although this is a useful tool and a most welcome addition, retiring off the Create Plot and Model View workflow has forced me to present work now that I am unhappy with and has set back my workflow about 10 years. If you could put back the focus point functionality of DLVPs then at least I and several others will be able to carry on as normal while the various quandries surrounding the new Schematic Views are ironed out. Thanks
  13. Just a thought - If it is none of the above, and the changes you have made are within symbols, it could be a result of symbol detail levels being switched automatically with the setting in Document Preferences.
  14. @klinzey Why has the functonality of focus points been removed from DLVP's? It seems such a retrograde step as the new Schematic View command really does not answer all our needs yet by quite a significant margin. Drafting booms is NOT possible if you want to represent boom/side arms in 3D. Also, as @rseybert suggests, label legends on the Schematic View objects are not really working and the workflow to make them work is very cumbersome. So much of old functionality that has been superceeded by newer tools is retained by the developers and removing a really good function without warning means that many of us will struggle to achieve what we need to achieve. It will also immediately make obsolete many of my old files, some of which are still in development or ongoing. Please, please can you put the focus point functionality back until the new Schematic tool is at least a couple of versions old. Many thanks


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...