HP Sauce

Funnily enough, after much mucking around i also found the light type created by the Set Sun command to be the way to go. My boss noticed that shadows on certain elevations aren't quite accurately represented, but as its purpose is to show depth in lieu of line weights more than anything else he's not that fussed. He's not taking the transition from 2d autocad line elevations to FQRW VP elevations so well, though, but that's another topic altogether. I have already come across the problem you mention of B/W version elevations looking way too menacing/evil/muddy. Will have to try what you suggest, although i'd rather the boss invest in a colour plotter considering it's not 1983 any more. The only change i made from your described set up is that instead of using classes to turn lights on/off per elevation, i use the Vis Palette. Not noticed any downfalls to this as of yet but we'll see. Anyway, cheers again.

I was attempting to use ARchtxt (TTF version), but the bloody thing isn't supported on some level or another. It's visible in the drawing, yet disappears when printed or exported. Shame as it's a nice one, and free.

Thanks

Despite having lights in the drawing, the vis window refuses to show them. They're there if you click in the empty space, visible if only for a second, but there nonetheless. This makes the entire vis window useless, obviously. What's causing this?

Thanks for the help. Embarrassed to admit that it was little more than some 2D elements being projected. Fixed now but thanks for the alignment tips, Peter.

Pete/andesign, What light types are you using for those elevations?

Attached is a PDF of one of our "guinea pig" VW BIM projects. If you refer to the hidden line/fqrw elevation at the top of the page, you'll notice a line at +14'-0" elevation that seems to show through everything on the right-hand side. The line is where the first/ground floor walls hit the second. How on earth do we hide this? Floor settings:- 1: Z = 0, DZ = 14'-0" 2: Z = 14'-0", DZ = 14'-0" I couldn't find any similar topics but if you know of one or have any tips, it'd be greatly appreciated.

All we need is the sill added, yet when we apply one we're left with item 3-Height all the way around. If the window isn't placed in a wall, just the sill is visible as we'd like. What step are we missing here?

The plans we need the grid on are all separate files (Site, Floor, Foundation etc) to allow more people work on the job simultaneously so we need a way of using the same single grid drawing on all 3, at different scales each time. Having multiple versions (one on/for each file) allows too much room for user error, and indeed chasing up when it changes... unless i've missed something? Another thing I can't get my head around: Grid Bubble numbers can be rotated horiz/vert using the ObjI checkbox, but the dimensions between refuse to show vertically rotated. Our Dimension Style is set to use Horiz/Vert, why don't these dims adhere to that? Edit: Ion, thanks, that may have to be "Option B".

Should Grid Bubbles be made in Annotation space or as a separate drawing that is then referenced onto the relevant plans? We need to use the same grid on multiple plans of different scales and obviously don't want to have to do it through Annotation space anew each time, so we made a separate drawing for the grid that'll be referenced into the plans as needed. The problem with this is that the grid annotations don't scale up/down automatically like they would if drawn in Annotation space. Hopefully that makes sense. If anyone has projects of similar requirements please detail how you dealt with such things.

Christiaan, Is this still the case? We'd like to incorporate Revision info into the title block itself instead of using the separate and rather ugly Revision Block option.

In an attempt to reverse-engineer the example BIM given here on the NNA site, we're stuck working out what they did for details and wall sections. So if you're using BIM and the supplied PIOs, how do you create window sills/heads/jambs in detail for example? Also, the example section viewports show all building elements in a single grey hatch/pattern. This is of no use to us or our contractors. Is it possible to create sections/wall sections etc that show useful block coursing and so on without having to overlay much?

Thanks, and yeah of course:-

Here's one we made a while ago from the example given in this thread. The rendering itself has lots of obvious faults but the grass came out really well compared to the single colour/standard grass textures we'd been using before.

You've cranked up Resolution px/in in the pdf/image export dialog options or the Document Settings?

Drafting in 1/4" scale? As in your design layer scale is set to 1:48, right? (As opposed to having the layer scale set at 1:1 and drafting as if it's 1:48 (yes, it's happened before)). The extrude tool is very simple; if you tell it 50', it is 50'. If you fancy attaching your drawing to a post we can have a look.

From the help file: "This command creates an OpenEXR file. This is a good choice for export when touching-up the image in an imaging program; the exported image is ?lossless? and will not have quantization artifacts when color or exposure is further adjusted after export." As you can see, using this method for export will not result in the massive ramp up in visual quality you are expecting much like any other export option. Your quality problems are a result of the rendering settings themselves, I would assume. What are the settings you are using for Batch Render? I am not familiar with the batch function myself but if there isn't an option for DPI, ensure your Document Settings has 240 set as the Printing Output as that may be the culprit.

Well the seating thing is easy enough, just use the Seating Layout tool in the Furn/Fixture tool set. What problems are you having with extruding the ovals? A quick sketch of the general shapes needed might help people solve your problem quicker.

As long as your sheet layer's DPI is set high enough (240 is fine), all render modes produce a sharp image. Use an HDRI environment for your lighting as cad@sggsa suggests (the supplied Simple Light Dome 1 is usually fine). If Final Quality Renderworks doesn't produce the quality you're looking for, tinker with the Custom Quality settings.

To follow on, we've tried adding our own images for use as Renderworks Backgrounds. Obviously this isn't as simple as setting the Background Image size to whatever your sheet layer page/viewport size is. Am I right in thinking that to get an image to cover the extents of your viewport, you must set the image width as the sum of viewport width page units multiplied by the viewport scale? Only by using this magical equation can we get anything usable. The only problem we have left is that when using these backgrounds, especially when scaled up dramatically, finished viewports are shown greyed out with an X through them and require copious amounts of zooming in and out before appearing properly, if only for a split second before reverting back to a grey blob. The supplied help implies backgrounds are related only to page units alone when this seems not the case.

Dave, thank you. Oddly enough the page size needed to be 1000" across, an odd number given the sheet page size is only 11" or so. Either way, all sorted, ta.

Help! MediaFire link If you'd be so kind as to download the linked drawing and render it up using a Renderworks mode, could you please tell me why the two windows you are facing are opaque whilst all the others show the RW background beyond? At first I assumed it was the lights, but no, turning them off doesn't solve it. Then I wondered if the wall had some odd geometry that interfered, so re-modelled that. But no. Now I'm completely at a loss. Any help much appreciated. HP

If you are doing a rendering, you would be better off using the "Create new resource -> background" option in your Resources panel, then selecting the picture from your camera.

Increasing the DPI to 400 worked a treat. Thanks again

Hi Dave Sorry, yes we'd like to see the tiny indent created by the control joint. The building is so boring we're hoping the joints will pretty it up a little.