BLINK Design
-
Posts
95 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Marionette
Store
Posts posted by BLINK Design
-
-
No, given the pattern, it's more complex than a rail. Please elaborate if I am missing something and thanks.
-
Yeehah, it attached!
-
The attached image (which refuses to attach despite the MAC OSX / Netscape browser?) indicates a solid object that was sliced at a 30 degree angle from a 360 swept drum. The object will eventually be a stool. I am not certain if the X shaped surface pattern will be recessed or raised but I am wondering if there is an easier method than what I have started here.
In front elevation, polygons are constructed and then extruded (in between the X's) which are then used to modify the wedge. Only the bottom most triangle has been applied thus far.
I extracted the edges from the solid object and cut them at third points to create accurate 3D snap points and then used Nurbs curves to create the X's. 3D polys were an option but in both instances, the lines are flat and do not follow the outer curve of the drum, thus the dilemma. I would extrude along path if I could follow the face of the drum.
How best to create a double curving lattice object? My best assumption is to create a 30 degree slice and array it 12 times in plan to complete the circular stool.
-
Christian indeed, but it's the repeat blows to the back of the head that really get me down.... My version of your quote was as much to say that I could not find the discontent or lapse of judement in my assessment. As a matter of fact, I still hold to it including my total committment to the software.
I moved to LA 6 years ago which has about 1200 arch firms yet only about 50 use VW and started teaching it to see wht impact I could make. I worked it out professionally and feel disappointed that many little issues were overlooked as I stated. All is well, and hopefully soon, $695.00 will not feel like a big hunk a cheese!
-
jan15, being right isn't all that's it's cracked up to be. I come here for answers and not personal comments from people who have too much time on their hands like Petri appears to have. His response is to show me that he knows more than me about a topic. Isn't that why we come here? That's like a pedophile driving an ice-cream truck for gosh sake; a vampire of the uninitated!
I am an architect and USER of Vectorworks and have little interest in the programming, the creation of macros or the more challenging formats that databases require. Despite this, I figure them out by asking as well trial and error. If a person such a Petri understands this, it is my view that we all could benefit from this knowledge though we get to hear blithering rants that do not translate into practical application mostly and the comments are personal as well. I for one have little interest to understand a person of this nature and would rather steer clear, but he hunts you down to further demon-strate himself! I think I will start calling him Petrified on those occasions that he meanders by. Back to VW...
-
Petri, each time I have an exchange with you I am most convinced that you are an inane idiot and should be stripped of your intelligence for the betterment of mankind...
You must practice being a 'duly enshrined' annoyance!
Good lord man get a life!
These are some more of my views...
-
Robert thanks,
Re LEVELS, when a building is not rendered and an object needs tweaked, rotating to elevational view is the best way to see where it is but at the same time it's incredibly muddled due to the density of the lines. Turning off classes does not work because I need the WALL class ON to complete the task. I am thinkng that if each object was ALWAYS relative to a UNIVERSAL ZERO POINT (not unlike the elevational flags capability to do the same), then the bottom of the wall for example could be displayed in the OIP as Z (bottom) or Z (top) and no relative tweaking would be required. Universal 2D coordinates already exist but are not too useful to architects in the day to day. STACK LAYERS still evades me!
Re WORKGROUP REFERENCES, the updating of a file that several people are working on at the same time is the most challenging issue. For now, I separate out the 2D sheets from the 3D sheets as a separate file to accomplish this goal.
-
A side note, download the incredibly valuable and free "eDrawings" which allows you to see the .dwg or .dxf once exported. This software is simpe and includes zoom capabilities and tells you what you are exporting BEFORE the consultants see it and complain.
As far as the Exporting sheet layers, I have had the same problem as well the layers rescale to a single scale to be autocad compatible. If you have a sheet of details, fuggetaboddit! One layer at a time.....
-
Katie, considering my first three sentences I did not discredit the software but as I use the software for hours each day I am commenting on the daily use features that have not been addressed and feel disappointed that the focus was on features that at least to me are less significant. FInding data means drag and drop, graphic clarity and database searches (I do understand MAC OSX spotlight is now compatible...yeah!) Sorry PC Users. Shoulda bought a Mac!
I use VW for 2D / 3D / Rendering etc and discovered that I am one of the few that use worksheets having spent innumerable hours getting beyond the limts of the previous iteration and opting for Excel to save myself and clients money. I purchased INFO EDITOR and got to know Charles, I chat with users and Julian Carr and others to get the best answers and feel that my concerns are learned and appropriate. I also still find it easier to create a separate 3D file rather than to try and make component walls EASILY do what I tell them to do. Can't drag and drop or 2X click a compnent wall!
Other examples: Why not create a universal level that is evidenced in the OBJECT INFO so that every object can be easily referenced to this rather than lnked to the layer it's on. I make complex custom houses with non orthogonal shapes on steep hillsides at times and have to create multiple layers when for example ALL the roofs are not on the same vertical level! I uncheck the link to layer button and then spend hours tweaking groups or even unlocked layer links to get the vertical alignments I need fpr the myriad of elements than cannot all be placed onto separate layers but rather are located relative to each other (requirng elevation views that are very hard to see what is what in wire frame). Maybe if I had STACKED LAYERS.....I have never been able to use it!
Futher, browsing a document for symbols verses exporting a symbol is cool but not high on my priority list for example. Why can't viewports be renamed? Why can't the palettes have user defined fonts? Why not make Workgroup Referencing actually work so the Autocad Users can finally shut up for having ONE feature that works better than VW! Easily renaming Style classes or place the Standard naming alias column right in the Resource Browser for Direct easy access such as Style-12 on the left and Wood Birch on the right unique for each project. Many people have asked for this. And the most important ohmygod....please allow annotations to be classable or somehow visible in a saved view (to avoid overlapping data everywhere) and giving them a unique look so you can tell if they are indeed an annotation versus text on a design layer for example!!!!!! I do not use Annotations for these reasons! I still use Saved Views at times. Imagine that! You did address the flipping back and forth and back and forth between viewports and design layers thank you very very much!
$665.00 is an expensive experiment and for the record, I ought to be given complimentary stock in Nemetscheck for the marketing I do for the world's best BIM software. I taught VW for three years at a local Los Angeles University, I happily badmouth most anything autocad and I hire only VW users espousing why VW is the best choice blah blah blah blah blah. You gotta broaden your shoulders there a bit katie and take the constructive criticism. To each their own. These are some of my views.
-
Hi Katie. I am not sure that I understand your answer. I originally upgraded from the academic version so I have all the modules. Are you saying that the particularl workspace I am using (customized) includes items that are part of Fundamentals and therefore is not available to a workspace that include Fundamentals features?
Thanks...
-
Why are STACKED LAYERS not available in VW 12 for some users? This was one of the reasons I purchased the upgrade and eventually gave up trying to make it work.
Since I purchased VW12 and upgraded to to12.5, my workspace relentlessly states that Stacked Layers are not available do you still want to save or something like that. Other users have mentioned this same problem and I have not seen a solution as yet.
-
I have been using Vectorworks since it was Minicad many years ago. I am therefore clearly a supporter and consider VW to be unparalleled BIM software. I am an architect an designer and instructor as well I use this software and hire only VW users for my company. Nuff said! Now for the bad news, besides the incredible Two-way worksheets which is long overdue and usurps the attempts made by the author of the 3rd party add-on called INFO EDITOR and Julian Carr's Aussie version of the same thing, as well the Return to Viewport button, I am disappointed with the new featuers in the latest release. Who needs to draw walls in 3D when you can rotate in 3 seconds?
I have not purchased 2008 but I have reviewed the featured videos and frankly I would not readily pay $665.00 (upgrade price) for these features although the Two way worksheets are so desperately needed I might not have a choice! :eek: What about a graphical update and a resource browser with better resource labels, you know, the many little things?
-
If I was not clear I am specifically referring to construction drawings. I too use Saved Views as a working environment and I generally name them according to the sheet where the information will ultimately be printed (IF ONLY TO FIND THE DATA). A-1.0 PLANS for example.
The issues of things disappearing, export issues a well naming need solutions. I'm not railign against VP's. I feel like I'm reading a book and must wonder if the next page will actually be visible and centered! I must be able to quickly find and quickly edit a sheet that remains as I last left it. I suppose it's how I work. I design and compose at the same time.
Drawing at 1:1. Never thought of that one. Somehow I think that would be a line weight nightmare.
NAMING: - Why when you choose SHEET LAYERS in the ORGANIZATION Dialogue are VIEWPORTS not an available list? Also, when I see the list of VP's, I can't make heads or tails of which one is which and Preview does not respond.
Viewports should default to VP-(Name) so they can share the same name as the primary layer or data or detail they are sourced to. This is a concern for projects that require many sheets and many layers and classes.
-
I feel this is a very important topic. I hope that others add their views regardng the differences between VP's and SAVED VIEWS, particular those that used VW before VP's.
Historically, I have used SAVED VIEWS to draw and compose, but with the advent of VP's, these are, at least theoretically, used for composing final sheets. You cannot draw in a viewport but you cann ANNOTATE which is another issue altogether.
The advantages of a VP's, in my opinion, are the ability to change the scale (the only way to place a 1/4" Floor Plan on a 1/16" Site Plan for example without converting the plan to 2D). VP's are also essential for presentation and rendered views which in my mind is why VP's were invented. VW though intends for VP's to be used now for all final sheet compositions and warns you NOT to use both SAVED VIEWS and VP's in the same file.
In theory, you build a model and extract details by zooming in on aspects of the model, setting the rendering tab and scale appropriately and annotating the cropped viewport. If you are hyper line weight conscious as I am this does not work. Weighted lines are available with the ADVANCED Tab, but this means that the lines weights of the model must be considered as these will later be lines weights for plans and details too with a sliding % scale rather than manual control.
I am still of the school to convert all elevations and sections to 2D after cutting the model and taking advantage of the precision cuts and 'elevation beyond' information that this method offers.
My issues:
REGISTRATION: Historically, you draw plans on top of each other so the different levels regsiter perfectly. The NAVIGATION Palette empowered this process tremendously but is available only in the SAVED VIEW mode. If I turn on another Viewport to achieve floor to floor registration, I must return to the SAVED VIEW (LAYER) to edit it so I might as well register the SAVED VIEW and be done with it and have the confidence to know that it will not move. Back and Forth, Back and forth! VP's in this instance seem redundant.
VIEWPORT POSITION: VP's are indepdent of the original model in scale and with graphics, but NOT with position. If you move the original model on a DESIGN LAYER, this relocates the object within a viewport which is maddening.
Depending on how far it it moved, it might vanish outside of the cropped are which you find an hour later. I am wondering if "DON'T SAVE" solves this having read other user comments?DISAPPEARING VIEWPORTS: I suspect this is why users are warned not to use VP's and SAVED VIEWS in the same file, but quite often when selecting a SAVED SHEET, the VIEWPORTS are invisible. This is solved by remembering which DESIGN LAYERS are turned on and selecting them in the pull down or returning to the SAVED SHEET and selecting the SAVED SHEET again, sometimes several times!
VIEWPORT ANNOTATIONS: I would rather use dimension classes rather than ANNOTATIONS such as Dims-FIRST, Dims-SECOND. Why? You cannot see annotations while working on the DESIGN LAYER and any way you slice it, the DESIGN Layer is where you build your design. This is true for notes and symbols as well. These often overlap when you can't see the dims and must open an annotated viewport to see if they align or not. It's much easier to turn on a class or turn off a class. Back and forth, back and forth!
DETAILS: I personally do not recommend using VP's for details. These must fit into preassigned rectangular areas typically which means they must be composed WHILE they are being designed to a scale! I suppose you can include the border in the VP, but you cannot change the scale, or the border changes scale too! Assuming you are NOT annotating the details, the details are already complete in the SAVED VIEW. Simply set up several layers at different scales to accommodate them. Viewporting details is therefore redundant.
EXPORTING: VP's at times shift from a registered position once exported to a .dwg format. Any reason why?
-
I feel this is a very important topic. I hope that others add their views regardng the differences between VP's and SAVED VIEWS, particular those that used VW before VP's.
Historically, I used SAVED VIEWS to draw and compose, but with the advent of VP's, these are, at least theoretically, used for composing final sheets. You cannot draw in a viewport but you cann ANNOTATE which is another issue altogether.
The advantages of a VP's, in my opinion, are the ability to change the scale (the only way to place a 1/4" Floor Plan on a 1/16" Site Plan for example without converting the plan to 2D). VP's are also essential for presentation and rendered views which in my mind is why VP's were invented. VW though intends for VP's to be used now for all final sheet compositions and warns you NOT to use both SAVED VIEWS and VP's in the same file.
In theory, you build a model and extract details by zooming in on aspects of the model, setting the rendering tab and scale appropriately and annotating the cropped viewport. If you are hyper line weight conscious as I am this does not work. Weighted lines are available with the ADVANCED Tab, but this means that the lines weights of the model must be considered as these will later be lines weights for plans and details too. I am still of the school to convert all elevations and sections to 2D after cutting the model and taking advantage of the precision cuts and 'elevation beyond' information that this method offers. There are elements in models that do not belong in details though and class control managing models and details simultaneously is futile for a building of any complexity.
My issues:
REGISTRATION: Historically, you draw plans on top of each other so the different levels regsiter perfectly. The NAVIGATION Palette empowered this process tremendously but is available only in the SAVED VIEW mode. If I turn on another Viewport to achieve floor to floor registration, I must return to the SAVED VIEW (LAYER) to edit it so I might as well register the SAVED VIEW and be done with it. Back and Forth, Back and forth! VP's in this instance seem redundant.
VIEWPORT POSITION: VP's are indepdent of the original model in scale and with graphics, but NOT with position. If you move the original model on a DESIGN LAYER, this relocates the object within a viewport which is maddening. I am wondering if "DON'T SAVE" solves this having read this above?
DISAPPEARING VIEWPORTS: I suspect this is why users are warned not to use VP's and SAVED VIEWS in the same file, but quite often when selecting a SAVED SHEET, the VIEWPORTS are invisible. This is solved by remembering which DESIGN LAYERS are turned on and selecting them in the pull down or returning to the SAVED SHEET and selecting the SAVED SHEET again, sometimes several times!
VIEWPORT ANNOTATIONS: I would rather use dimension classes rather than ANNOTATIONS such as Dims-FIRST, Dims-SECOND. Why? You cannot see annotations while working on the DESIGN LAYER and any way you slice it, the DESIGN Layer is where you build your design. This is true for notes and symbols as well. These often overlap when you can't see the dims and must open an annotated viewport to see if they align or not. It's much easier to turn on a class or turn off a class. Back and forth, back and forth!
DETAILS: I personally do not recommend using VP's for details. These must fit into preassigned rectangular areas typically which means they must be composed WHILE they are being designed to a scale! I suppose you can include the border in the VP, but you cannot change the scale, or the border changes scale too! Assuming you are NOT annotating the details, the details are already complete in the SAVED VIEW. Simply set up several layers at different sales to accommodate them. Viewporting details is therefore redundant.
EXPORTING: VP's at times shift from a registered position once exported to a .dwg format. Any reason why?
-
P. Retondo I just figured both questions out and have returned to answer my own questions. Clear on the greyed COMPONENTS Tab.
Regarding the control ponts, these are indeed movable by placing the curser over the control point at the CL of the wall, it slides along the CL creating symmetrical offsets. It can also be dragged forward or backwards relative to door trim etc.
Excellent! The text states that precise pacement is possible, and then sends you on your journey to trial and error it for hours. The first many times I attempted this, the walls remained engaged but the cursor grabbed the door symbol rather than a control point.
Be warned, using compnents looks accurate but it's very time consuming during CD's. The connections are tenuous and the slightest move aong a wall that is already joined elsewhere disconnects previous joins! Componets joins do not work with curved walls. Very annoying 2D patches are required!
MAC OS 10.4.9 (VW 12.5)
Thanks for te response.
-
I recently stumbled upon the fact that the first insertion of the door into the wall seems to set the control points. Reducing the door width allows the jamb to orient correctly and not become buried in the wall but this seems backwards and counterntuitive. There ought to be a setting that permits an offset at the jamb(s) similar to the way the door or window can be offset forwards or backwards.
Does this exist?
Thanks
-
Greetings, am I the only who is has uncooperative door jambs?
1. Why is the components TAB grey in my OBJ. INFO Palette even when a wall with components is selected?
2. The jambs are buried in the wall or standing away from the wall relatve to control points that I cannot manipulate! WHY? How to manipulate the control points? The book suggests these points can be controlled precisely but does not explain how.
Many thanks
-
islandmon, is that the Caribbean islands? I spent seven years in Jamaica and barely escaped with my dignity intact. It's a place that if doesn't kill ya' it'll make you stronger.
Re worksheets, I am familiar with using records (ie: checking the box in the OBJ INFO DIALOGUE) though I have not as yet created a custom schedule. When I purchased INFO-EDITOR (two months ago), the advice I received from the VW tech / author threw me for a loop. Further, it 'worked' when I turned ALL the records off!
It is not obvious to me and many others how to compose forumlas after weeks of effort of getting 90% of the schedule correct and having two or three columns that won't cooperate. What to do? Export, no! Stay up all night, yes! Place white polys over the aberrant data and handwrite the answers in, maybe! Delete the column(s) and use text instead, maybe?
It seems a no brainer to me to list all the basic formulas for each of the standard associations that at a minumum are part of the sample door schedule that VW provides. I have asked VW numerous times about this including RA above and am redireted to the techs (by phone) who give half answers so here I am with the same question.
As for explanations, these take care and patience. If you are here I assume you are here to help. I received my MARCH (1992) the year after computers were mandatory so I was not weaned and am entirely self taught. I taught design and VW at the university level for six years in Jamaica and here in Los Angeles so I am well versed in the difficulties in explaining. It's not so hard actually! I am very appreciative when someone takes the time to help. Confused by the opposite.
-
Petri, are you listening to yourself? Do you realize that your delivery is wholly self-serving and wreaks of someone starving for some sort of recognition, apparently any sort?
Stop bothering me is a clear request that matches my needs that you clearly understood, yet you persist. Get the picture? Some advice (for free), try bungy jumping or pierce your nipples, stalk a celebrity or if you are an architect or designer, design something cool and enter it into a competition! This will be undoubtedly be far more rewarding than your current approach that begs for specific questions that match your no doubt mental superiority so that you can further grace us all with your shining genius. On the other hand, maybe you live on the dark side and need pain instead, or maybe you ought to put your Mom on line so we could have a little chat? I'm here for you my friend. Best wishes...
-
Pete,
thank you for this HOW TO and your time. Though I will resist the complex formulas in favor of straightforward PIO links for window and door schedules, my real experience was that 'no reasonable data to create an understandable report,' appeared or no data at all resulted due to an inaccurate formula.
Several simple questions....
1. Is the default (FIELD NAME) in the EDIT REPORT DIALOGUE the default header in the spreadsheet? I am experiencing a mental disconnect between the actual object, the desired data to be displayed and the speadhseet result, and more specifically, WHERE to enter the data to achieve the desired result. Then the formulas kick in and it drives me to drink!
2. Creating a new FIELD NAME enables current data (PIO data for example) to be displayed in a corresponding column (such as a USER FIELD) yes?
3. Have you used INFO EDITOR? Tracking down the corresponding data requires visual recognition from one of the say 100 columns. No search is available and further, the columns use the DATABASE HEADER name rather than a FIELD NAME which if incorrect, finding the corresponding column header is pure guessing to get it right in some instances.
INFO EDITOR is excellent, besides this one issue, and works in both directions (updating INFO EDITOR updates object data directly), unlike standard VW spreadhseets, which must be updated at the source and recalculated.
-
Pete, what is an index label and how do you create one of these creatures? Somehow I think we are inventing words to describe our experiences. By index label, do you mean the identification label that results when you use the ID LABEL Tool, or similarly, a window or door dialogue entry? If so and according to VW techs, this is NOT a RECORD by the way.
-
Petri, you are not helpful at all. I am NOT REFERRING to WORKSHEET FUNCTIONS that calculate various object(s) data, I am referring to the formulas that generate associations with specific object data such as door width or sill height. You seem motivated to impress us with what you know and to harass rather than contribute. I will get my answers elsewhere. The questions are clear and my comments are sourced. What I do not know is qualified in the very first post. Please stop botherng me.
-
Petri, you have an attitude and it's not appreciated. The words 'have I bothered' is judgemental which makes your comments undesirable and useless. The reality of resolving an accurate spreadsheet is indirect and not too clear and problems that arise have no clear answer. If you could not speak Greek and I placed the Greek alphabet in front of you, you would still not be able to speak Greek right?
With that said, a VW tech told me that VW 12 abandoned records for database use because of migration issues. The English cannot be more clear than that. Records conflict with INFO EDITOR on the MAC as well and when deselected, it works!
A record has an associated text file and a PIO utilizes a macro. That's apples and oranges to a computer processor! The current spreadhseets read the database data when "INCLUDE ON SPREADHSEET" is selected and offers an ID LABEL option. You can also create an ID LABEL separately which it will read. When it does not, I don't know why. Do you?
My request to VW is for the publication of the DATABASE HEADER formulas. The techs know them by heart and can tell you when you ask them, but this is not so good at 3AM with a deadline in the morning.
Lastly, EXCEL spreadhseets destroy both the format as well the smart spreadsheet capabilities. With the intention to use VW properly, it is preferable to know how to make it work without having to export in frustration!
converting geometry (3d mesh) to walls?
in General Discussion
Posted
alextoevs. a core strength of Vectorworks are it's intelligent walls that allow objects(3D doors and windows etc.) to be plugged into it while at once calculating volume and area with on the fly adjustments to width and height. This same object has both a 2D graphic and an independent 3D aspect that accepts unique textures for rendering that are linked to classes or it can be independently managed. VW is incomparable to sketch-up. Most modeling programs are not specifically for the building industry. It's inabilty to convet your object to a wall therefore makes sense to me.
You can work with the 3D objects in VW to create you own openings for customized doors etc, but it's less efficient and does not perform the intelligent tasks noted above. You can also create a plug-in object (say a custom wall opening) which plugs into walls.
Walls and 3D objects happily co-exist in a VW model, but they do not interact too well together. As I recall though, you can cut an opening in a wall object with a 3D object but the edge modifications for example do not work on walls. On the other hand, get a VW wall the way you want it and convert it to 3D.