willofmaine

Thanks Peter, I pretty much know you're right, but financial constraints may have me in a bit of a state of denial... Also, unless I really don't know what I'm looking at, it seems a Radeon HD 5770 would work with my Mac Pro, and it's only about $160. And a 1TB internal hard drive would be only $60 or so (?). But I know that's still $220 that could go towards a new, faster machine...

Thanks islandmon, that's exactly where I'm headed: an iMac i7 with 8 GB RAM. The only thing I've ever done with my current Mac Pro's flexibility is slide out that little drawer and throw in a bunch of RAM... That said, I'm also wondering if I might be able to get more mileage out of my Mac Pro by upgrading the graphics card. Any thoughts on whether or not a 4 1/2 year old Mac Pro (see specs below) is going to give me a reasonably acceptable experience with 2011? (My biggest project includes a detailed 3D model, 130 Mb file, with around 240 drawings (viewports) across 30 sheets...). Thanks! -Will

Will VectorWorks Architect + Renderworks perform on an iMac just as well as it will on a Mac Pro? (Based on the following specs): 27" iMac, 2.8 GHz Core i5, 8 GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD5750 with 1 GB GDDRS Mac Pro, 2.8 GHz Quad Core, 8 GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD5770 with 1 GB GDDRS Is one mostly paying for the flexibility (and large case) with a Mac Pro, or are its processor & power inherently more capable than those of the iMac? They're both 2.8 GHz, and at the Apple site there's a "Quad Core" icon shown with the iMac... Any thoughts greatly appreciated!! Thanks, Will

Thank you Pat and Mike; I feel better just having heard from a couple of "VectorWorks Addicts." There's no question that complaints and negative reviews far outweigh the positive, particularly on the Internet and in tech forums such as this. Yet, at least comparatively speaking, I actually find the VW tech forum a generally upbeat, positive place. Certainly there are plenty of understandably frustrated people that appear here, but just as often there is appreciation expressed over solutions offered, and there is no shortage of positive comments regarding VectorWorks. But not so for these three particular threads, which seem uncharacteristically negative to me, and which have made me hesitant when it comes to pursuing VW 2011, especially since I have a huge, ongoing project in 2008. A lot of the features added since VW 2008 address a surprising number of items on my own VW "wish list." So while clearly there is a lot of effort going into VectorWorks' development, sometimes, at least when one is focused on a particular issue, NVW can seem terribly unresponsive. That might generate a bit more in the way of complaints. (Based on the 2011 demo, issues I brought to their attention with 2008 still persist with 2011...). But, mostly, I'm glad to hear that the majority of users are not having trouble with 2011; that's reassuring. Thanks again for the feedback.

Hi John, In order to add a vertex, you actually have to click on an already existing vertex (in your case, that would be the top right or top left of your initial wall when viewed from its side). Hold the cursor over the corner until you get a "double-diamond arrow" icon, click, then drag away from the corner. As long as your 3D reshape tool is in the "+" mode as Peter indicated, it will create a new vertex that you can drag to wherever you want it. Click again to establish its desired location. HTH

I can appreciate that both DWG and IFC import/export may have evolved significantly over the past few years. I certainly hope they have, as it would make sticking with VectorWorks, which I really hope to do, a possibility. However... I have a client that probably doesn't need much; a reasonable IFC model would probably suffice. VW 2008 is supposed to be able to export such a model, but all it creates is "Bad IFC" files (even Solibri thought so...). Upgrading for new and enhanced features is one thing; upgrading because my current version doesn't work properly is quite another... Further, and maybe more importantly, I have not been reading good things about the performance of VW 2011. I've consistently read that it's slow; it crashes a lot; it's Open GL is dysfunctional; textures and sometimes objects from previous versions don't work; it has difficulty importing image and/or PDF files; it generates significantly larger file sizes; and, evidently, it can be incapable of importing files from previous versions. If I can't effectively import and work with my 130 +/- Mb files from VW 2008, how can I possibly take advantage of VW 2011's improved export capabilities?... Thirdly, it sounds like my hardware, particularly my graphics card, may not be up to the task of what seems to be a very systems-demanding VW 2011... It all sounds like a tremendous investment to facilitate a questionable upgrade, all for the sake of experiencing a meaningful existence in this AutoCAD World...

There are at least three threads here, including this one, that make VW 2011 seem like a pretty miserable experience in terms of performance: http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=147767 http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=147767 These threads have each persisted at least a few months after what appears to be the latest update, SP2 released in early December. There is little or no presence in these threads by either NVW representatives or by "VectorWorks Addicts." Not sure what that means... The VW Knowledgebase states quite clearly that "starting in Vectorworks 2009, the more powerful your graphics card is, the better your Vectorworks experience will be." They then differentiate between Desktop graphics cards and Workstation graphics cards. Workstation graphics cards are the "best option" for VectorWorks, while terms like "good" and "acceptable" and, in the case of newer iMacs, "generally adequate speed and reliability" are used. Looking through all three threads, I could only find one person using a workstation graphics card; the rest seemed to be mostly Radeon and GeForce desktop cards. I'm wondering if maybe inadequate graphics cards are indeed responsible for a lot of the problems people are having? (Though it is hard to imagine how graphics cards could be responsible for an inability of VW 2011 to import files from previous versions...) Not that replacing desktop cards with workstation cards is necessarily an appealing solution: I could only find one Quadro FX (NVIDIA workstation card) for the Mac, and it was about $1,000...

I don't think VW 2008 is supported in OS 10.6. That's not to say it won't run... just do so at your own risk, I guess. I think there's a thread somewhere here regarding what some have experienced that have done it. I'm running 2008 on an Intel machine.

I am a residential custom designer; I do contract work for architects; and I'm developing small house plans to sell via the Internet. I love VectorWorks and very much dislike AutoCAD. But, except for custom residential design, VectorWorks' incompatibility with AutoCAD is suddenly seeming very problematic for me. Those selling stock plans on the Internet frequently offer AutoCAD drawings as an option, so that their buyers can have them modified locally. My architect client's client, a school, now wants AutoCAD drawings for a huge ongoing project: 6 buildings, each represented by about 240 drawings (viewports) on 30 sheets. Simply exporting files to .dwg format is consistently disastrous: huge text; empty viewports; no crops; viewport scales changed; and on and on... Abandoning the model and attempting to simply send WYSIWYG line-drawing versions of the sheets (un-grouping everything, converting viewports to lines, composing all the line objects to reduce their numbers from 55,000 to hopefully 500, attempting to re-scale and re-coordinate annotations, and on and on...) is extremely time consuming. If I managed to average only 15 minutes per drawing for the above project, for only one building, it would take me 60 hours! Clearly not something a client wants to, or should, pay for. So, I've started looking into IFC... maybe a BIM that I can export and that they can import (they'd even mentioned Revit) is the solution! I'm not sure wether or not this would help me with selling plans via the Internet thought, but it could be a step in the right direction. Only problem is... I can't even import even the simplest little IFC project into VW that I've just exported out of VW! (Well, okay, the very simplest, 4 walls created in a brand new default file did work), but not even a very small, simple model of a little house. Forget the school project. I've followed the online help instructions; my permissions are good. What am I missing? Not a great introduction to the much-touted world of BIM...

I like to give my friends a hard time 'cause they have to use SketchUp in conjunction with AutoCAD. But maybe it's their turn to give me a hard time... 'cause I'm still stuck in 2008!... Which (the major issue of not being able to give my friends a hard time aside) I think I am glad of. Unfortunately. Might be nice if an NV representative made an appearance in this thread. Something with support for our optimism in the future of VW...

I wish you could extrude 2D symbols, both as simple extrusions and as extrude-along-paths. This would be especially helpful when it comes to things such as molding profiles, so that the moldings in a project could be universally changed without having to edit each and every instance of the extrudes and/or extrude-along-paths that are based on them.

umpteenthed + one

I kinda wish you could extrude a 2D profile symbol... then, if you wanted to universally change a molding or other type of profile that had been used repeatedly in a project, it could be done without having to edit each and every instance of the extrude and/or extrude along path...

Try converting your viewport to lines before exporting it. First duplicate the file or the viewport, then render it. Then use Modify > Convert > Convert to Lines. It should then export only what you see. HTH

To get your schedules in numeric order, click on the Database Row Header at the far left, in the cell with the little diamond in it. Then drag the little icons near the top (they're just under the formula bar) into whichever columns you want to sort by, in either ascending or descending order. The "sum" icon will consolidate all rows with the same information in the selected column into a single row (for example, if you have say ten type A windows and only need the schedule to list one of each window type). Presumably this will address both your window and door schedule questions. (This is all based on VW 2008; I assume it's the same in 2011). Not sure about the borders and shading of cells, unless you're trying to change only some cells under a given database row header. All the rows under a database row header (designated with numbers like 2.2 instead of just 2) are controlled by the database row header directly above them (since they're the results of the database row header...). Hope that all makes sense...

I don't think line thickness is meaningful in rendered views such as OpenGL or RenderWorks... I think these rendering modes rely not on lines but on surfaces to create their images. In View > Rendering > OpenGL options you might be able to get the lines a little heavier (in VW 2008 at least...).

Oh, I am. I'm using iMovie to assemble the clips that I generate in VW. For now I'll just limit myself to VW's camera capabilities; with a little creativity I'm sure I can put something together that's reasonably presentable. Thanks!

Is it just me, or is controlling lights for different scenes in VW Architect 2008 ridiculously difficult? Maybe I'm missing something. The Visualization Palette doesn't work. After a couple of uses, it just goes blank until VW and/or the computer are restarted. After hours trying to get it to work, I finally realized that even if it did work, it doesn't seem to offer control over different instances of the same symbol: a light is either on or off for all instances of a particular symbol. What if I have several lights of the same type in a building, and only want some of them on for a particular scene? Kinda crazy, I know. But there it is. Running reports on lights and/or lights in symbols seems useless, too, as there seems no way to report on the status (on/off) or brightness of a light. (Never mind that VW can't seem to report on the design layer that a light object's host symbol is on...). So I've come up with a system: my light fixtures are symbols placed as groups, groups which contain light bulb symbols and fixture component symbols. This way the light bulb symbols can be put into appropriate classes to control lighting scenes, while the fixtures can remain present in the model even if their light bulbs are turned off. Also, fixture components, such as a track lighting heads, can be swiveled without needing an entirely new symbol, etc. All good. Until one realizes/remembers that "Convert to Group" deletes all 3D components and 3D-only symbols from the group when placed in Top/Plan view, and vice versa, all 2D components and 2D-only symbols are deleted when placed in a 3D view. Why is this?!?!?! Why, when a symbol is converted to a group, does it not retain ALL of its 2D and 3D components??? So now I'm making all my light fixture pieces and parts hybrid symbols, simply so they're all included when placed into a file. Which means an additional symbol for the rotated versions of things such as track lighting heads. There seems no escape to the complexity. Am I missing something? Thanks..................

Hi Matt, Thanks for your response. Yes, I did notice how the camera began to pan near the end of the alley. Hopefully I'll have opportunity and budget to acquire AW at some point. In the meantime, to that end, I'm putting together a demo animation for marketing. I'm just doing the best I can with VW's cameras, such as they are. There's no way to set constant velocity between the VW cameras (view points)?!? I assume velocity can be controlled in AW. By the way, I had great success using your CameraMatch plug-in to show a balcony addition to an existing building (the proposed balcony's at the top of the bay window, under the hip dormer, in the attached images). Thanks, Will

Thanks for your response, Jonathan. Between your response and a visit to the AnimationWorks website I've confirmed what I was beginning to suspect... that VW's animation capabilities are quite limited...

Great animation. Nice and smooth, too. While clearly AnimationWorks is necessary to make the gate and doors open and close, was it also necessary to achieve that smoothness? It's what I'm struggling with. There seems no way to create a curved path to go around a corner. Stopping and panning the camera is kind of robotic, and using a series of views following a curve isn't much better. Also, is there any way to make the camera rise (or fall) as it orbits around an object? Or does it have to remain at a constant 'Z'?

Alternatively, rather than creating a special class and script, consider using a 3D Loci in lieu of the "dummy object," positioned at the desired center of rotation. Select the loci before recalling the Saved View, then create the animation with "Center of Selection" chosen. (This does necessitate that your saved view is ready to go (its rendering mode can even be a part of its saved view status) because at this point you can't do much of anything else without de-selecting the 3D loci...).

I looked at Chief Architect not too long ago. Here's a link (I think) to a thread on that topic, if you're interested: http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=146848

I think rendering, with the exception of Open GL, is done by the CPU, and not by the graphics card...

I don't know why the Graphic Card Guidelines didn't link; just click on the "Knowledgebase" link to the right and it's at the bottom of the "Most Popular Articles" list.