Jump to content

Stephan Moenninghoff

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Stephan Moenninghoff

  1. That's what the gradients are for. But you may be right after all. I suspect it would be too much of a paradigm-change 🙂
  2. Yes, and I was only proposing a substitute for scroll bars for tool palettes, not the RM. I don't think it's too critical though, just a detail. However - It goes to show how difficult it is to craft a UI for two platforms if you don't want to create your own UI. The treatment of scroll bars is quite different on Mac and Windows and needs some consideration. It can be done though and it can be done quite well. Agreed. That's why I am proposing a popover window instead of a menu. A popover is something that allows multiple choices and each choice is carried out or applied immediately. No confirmation necessary. Klick outside it and it goes away. As shown in the last prototype movie.
  3. BTW a scalable UI is nothing too exotic. Blender has had this forever. Not surprisingly - as they use vector-based UI-elements. Pixel-alignment is not too great for non-multiples of whole pixels but it applies only if a low-res monitor is used. On Retina/5K monitors, the blurring is negligible. Blender.mp4
  4. I know what you mean @zoomer about those scroll bars. It can be irritating. Nevertheless, tool palettes are unlikely to have a large number of hidden buttons if they are standard out-of-the-box palettes. If they are made by yourself and you know what's hidden, that's also ok. So I would really love to see how this works in the wild. Interesting though what happens when people start to use horizontal tool palettes. Does every user know about the Shift key for horizontal scrolling? So, yes, there is some uncertainty there. But this is what user testing is all about. I firmly believe any radical departure from the status quo needs very thorough user testing.
  5. Here is an excerpt from another proposal I made in 2016. This is about how the Quick Prefs and some other UI elements of the main drawing window might be improved. It already looks quite dated now which goes to show how quickly UI, icons, dialogs etc. start to look dated. In other words: it's not enough to do it once. Just like other features are improved and updated every few years, so should the UI. Not easy to do.
  6. Accepted! Nice way of doing this, @Peter Neufeld! Thanks for sharing. I wonder what other methods will arise. Did @Jim Wilsonnot have plans to show us his? 🙂
  7. Yes, I don't think that's actually a bug that would merit logging. More like a limitation in what surface modelling can and cannot achieve.
  8. I like @elepp's surface method. It may be more work but it creates an even cleaner geometry than mine. I try to solve everything using solids because the surface modeller always creates hollow objects which may create problems down the road (Push/Pull does not play nice with most surface objects). I have a few more challenges up my sleeve. I'll dig them up when I have a few minutes. Thanks for contributing, guys. This was fun!
  9. @elepp and @markdd I think you both have solved it. In Mark's example I am still not sure the bottom is a true circle. If it isn't, it can't be considered as solved! The sides don't curve inwards BTW. It may look like they do depending on the view but the sides are straight. Here is how I did it. Curious to learn your methods. Körper.mp4
  10. OK, not bad. The top must be a rectangle though, not a square. If you can do that I would consider it solved.
  11. You are very close, in fact it looks like you have cracked it. And yes, you are right, it's not done via a loft. The loft will not give you any precise control over the alignment of the curves. Is that a true circle at the bottom though?
  12. I had to create this shape today: A circle which morphs into a rectangle. The shape had to be absolutely symmetrical. Sounds easy but is it? Who can do it?
  13. I should add I am working with build 445255 because I am beta-testing the German version. This may well be fixed in the final build. @Selin has already contacted me about this and she did so shortly after my post so I believe this is a high priority affair. @line-weight give them a break. 2019 feels good. I need to work with both 2018 and 2019 currently but going back to 2018 really feels like going back. The multi-core OpenGL in 2019 is so liberating 🙂
  14. Here's a video of a school bus conversion project carried out with interiorcad, using a point cloud and AR for early prototype viewing. All CNC code is generated straight from the model and the entire interior will be custom-built. AR is the thing to have. I really hope for more capabilities of AR in the future. I want to be able to tap a drilling in a part to see its specifications. I really think AR needs to be where the production takes place - on the workshop floor. This would close the widening gap between construction office and workshop. The current trend is for production documents and CNC code to be generated end-to-end and those production data are then given to the guy in the workshop running the CNC. He may be given some sections and detail drawings but that's kind of old school. If he could just look at a 3D model in AR, his life would be easier, production would be more streamlined and the whole process would be less error prone.
  15. Grain matching and sides to floor will both be in the upcoming minor update. Framed fronts are in the works for the 2019 version. We also know about the dovetail drawers. As another US customer has so aptly put it: "Americans still love pickup trucks, guns, and solid wood dovetail drawers".
  16. This may not be supported. I'd file a bug (with extragroup). It makes sense to have that feature.
  17. Thanks for the update, @Woodychips ! If you have the time, could you give me an idea as to which are your top three features missing from the new cabinet? What are the barriers you find with it? Thanks!
  18. Hi just a little update on opening triangles: This now works out of the box, no tweaking required. As an added bonus you can also have additional information about front size and fittings used. This works for drawers also.
  19. Hi @Anna X sorry I am replying late - I have just seen your post now. Do you already have interiorcad? In that case, simply choose the dowel from the mode bar when the single connector tool is active and click on the grids that appear once the tool is running. Hold down Shift to place dowels on all grids of the same type simultaneously. Same for connectors, drawers, hinges etc. Let me know if you need more help and I'll make a short movie for you as soon as I get the chance!
  20. You are right, the contour is not designed to adjust the router's z on the fly. As for the drillings, conversion is done automatically in cases where no matching drill is found for a given diameter. I understand the need to stop the tool to return home between each milling. I'm not totally sure it would do that, actually. AFAIR, it only returns to safe distance between different directions of drillings. There is a setting for that in your machine configuration. Anyway, if this works for you, that's fantastic and the result looks promising!
  21. Ok, I thought you had VectorWop, our VWX-to-machine interface. It comes with a built-in DXF output (and one for Hops, too, actually). You are the Bert I know from "forest+", right?
  22. Hey Bert, I was wondering how long until you came up with something in Marionette. You know you can use interiorcad's DXF output to get the milling info? Post us some photos when you're done. Nice work!
  23. Hi Ron, the Classic system needs manual migration. The new system will migrate itself. However, since you are still on Classic, you need to set up your tools for the custom-parts-based new system first. Where are you based and who is your dealer? I can contact them and advise how to go about.


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...