Tom G.

It sounds quite likely that you will be designing unique 3d elements for some of your clients. If you do, you can render in OpenGL but to get to the better rendering options and settings, Renderworks is worth the money. Even though you say rendering will be left to others, once you get started with simple rendering to check your model, you haven't very far to go to get really good renderings while staying entirely within Vectorworks.

Classing to control elevation views is a good way go but for a lot of users, especially new users, it creates too much overhead in the management of the drawing, given certain alternatives, in my opinion. I've just finished a movie on the process I've described above and will post it soon.

If your model is together with layers snug up as you'd intended, but appears off the drawing page, use the Fit to Objects button at the top of the Menu Bar. Select your object or objects first (Command + A or Ctrl + A). If they have an unwanted vertical separation, VW is imposing an automatic addition of height (Z) that is taking place on the Layers palette. Call up the Layers palette, and strip out all the input for Z, replace with 0 and instead set the heights of your objects, NOT the layers, solely in the Object Info palette. The input boxes on the Layers palette work well for those who already know the elevations of their stories / walls before they start. If you determine your wall elevations as you work on the model, as I do, then controlling Z height of walls, (or any other object) by using the OIP can be helpful and perhaps more important, predictable. While many if not most users employ a Z setting for each layer, it is not a requirement to successful modeling. Jeffrey's proposing you use the modern method of assembling layers into a 3D model--Stack Layers. If Model View tool works for you, then great!

There is a bit of discussion here on setting up elevations where the model has been developed substantially in 3d: http://techboard.vectorworks.net/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=113638#Post113638

Jeffrey: On the the blog noted in the post above I've laid out the reasoning for wanting exploded lines, plus a solution to get to that condition while using Stack Layers. As the model becomes more complex, editing over the model in Annotations begins to take substantially more time than using an exploded line process, especially for those of us who want full control of line quality. I just wondered if anyone at NNA felt that having a means to get to an easily edited line condition was worth pursuing. Might we see a similar--optimized--feature in V. 2010, for instance, where we could reach into a model to edit lines. The last paragraph notes that Sketchup 7 has just added a means to "explode" drawings into vector and raster elements, for ease of editing.

Absolutely agree. This, however, is the best I can do with limited time and format. I have tried to write as clearly and contextually as possible.

The Seattle Vw Users Group newsletter, #32 is now available at http://converttolines.blogspot.com/ The core of the writing pertains to using Stack Layers to generate editable Hidden Line renderings.

The Seattle Vw Users Group newsletter, #32 is now available at http://converttolines.blogspot.com/ The core of the writing pertains to using Stack Layers to generate editable Hidden Line renderings.

There is a bit of discussion about printing pref's here under "Adjusting Preferences for Printing". http://converttolines.blogspot.com

Was Snap to Grid off when you created the poly?

Jeffrey: What is the official NNA position on how to most effectively get exploded lines from Stacked Layers; what I referred to as "the products of a traditonal model-on-layer"? Thanks

I was going to say just use the Model View tool but I see it's in the Legacy folder too. The Create Layer Link command should be in the Legacy folder but it's not. It IS in the All Menus group. Obviously, by its action in hiding these tools, NNA is telling us to use Stack Layers but they haven't provided a means to enjoy the products of a traditional model-on-layer. However, there is a backdoor way to create a classic model using Stack Layers and not Create Layer Link or the Model View tool (as has been discussed recently on the List Serv). I'll be detailing a work-around soon and will post a link here.

Convert to Lines #31, serving the Seattle VectorWorks Users Group, is available at http://converttolines.blogspot.com/

Render your roof in OpenGL and trace the resulting intersection. Copy the marker and Paste In Place once in an editing view of the particular roof face. If you have trouble getting a line to stick atop the Open GL rendering, turn off Stack Layers or, if it's already off, the 3D Select tool may be on, rather than the preferred 2D Select tool.

Layer Links (via the Model View Tool) versus Stack Layers can be thought of as the difference between the process of developing your drawings and displaying your drawings--potentially two different things--which means that layer linking is not entirely obsolete.

bolts, etc. are discussed in the latest Convert to Lines newsletter under "3D Fasteners". http://converttolines.blogspot.com

I've been a subscriber since the first of the year and am quite happy with the quality of the user group material. Since Jon has made back issues available to new subscribers, this seems to me to be a heckuva value. Disclaimer: Jonathan has been generous with his time and his help toward the Seattle Users Group so I have an interest in seeing him succeed, however this has influenced none of my opinions.

This is unlikely to help Markus, but..... For those that prefer a simple title block, placing your graphic (plus primary text) on its own layer will allow global changes to primary information (total page count, date, client name, etc.). Sheet specific info such as sheet titles and individual sheet numbers can be added to each sheet, directly. Alternate methods from VW Help: file:///Applications/VectorWorks%202008/VWHelp/wwhelp/wwhimpl/js/html/wwhelp.htm

More discussion on the Slab Object tool can be found here: http://converttolines.blogspot.com 3D objects that don't show well in Top Plan view should simply be moved to a layer of their own. This layer might also include banding, columns, stairs, etc. I'd let a simple poly represent the 3D object in Top Plan and not spend any time trying to solve the problem via use of classes.

Photograph the existing site and then measure the distance and your elevation from your camera tripod to say, the main story floor, and then apply the same amounts +/- when placing the Camera tool into your Top View drawing. Render and export the image into Photoshop, add it to the site photograph on its own layer and see what you did wrong in setting up the model, then try again, etc. until you get it reasonably close. You can do a little warping of the adjoining buildings in PS to get them to align better with your model. One has to be impressed, when reading the input parameters of Matt Panzer's Camera Match, as to the several settings which remove guesswork in comparison to VW's own Camera tool, which has lots of power but leaves you with little to go on when compositing with a site photograph. Thus, given the low cost of the plugin, and the high cost of your time, it may be an idea to pick up Camera Match and save yourself the hassle of winding up with an image which you don't feel really good about.

Convert to Lines #30, the newsletter of the Seattle VectorWorks Users Group, is up at http://converttolines.blogspot.com/

Cut 2D & Cut 3D Sections tools are perfect for what you want to do which is make a quick cut on which you can directly measure, then make the adjustment on your layer, and cut and measure again if need be. (This tool is so much easier than the alternative for designing complex roofs, for instance.) Delete the automatically created layer once you have your information. You do have to dredge these tools out of the dumpster (Legacy folder) using the Workspace Editor which, if you haven't used it yet, gives you the perfect opportunity to rework your toolset to better reflect your preferences. While you're at it, fetch and install the Slab Object from vectordepot.com (allows better control of edge textures than the Floor Tool). Alternatively, you could also create a new layer to which you might temporarily send elements (use the Object Info palette), adjust them there, then send them back to their original homes. This removes all clutter without the need to create a (hide) class for everything.

I also agree with Brudger's POV. It is up to me, my client and builder to settle on what constitutes a working planset. If someone's software tools don't help in this regard, one is likely to consider alternatives . If I can spend less time using tools that force me to do work-arounds I might HAVE time to layer on more information ala BIM. Don't put the cart in front of the horse, of course. The real battle for ground in the coming years will be with CADware that moves toward simplicity* rather than complexity. *See Sketchup

The roof tools are generalized and not likely to give you or anyone complete satisfaction when dealing with very complex roofs, as you say. If working with a solid form gives you the desired shape when rendering, then that seems like a good solution, with some additional line work needed during sectioning. The roof tools you have can do pretty much anything you wish, just keep on experimenting and you'll eventually get a good methodology which will work for you again and again.

I recently had cause to go back to 12.5 to do some instructing and I was surprised at how painful it was to use compared to the more effective habits I'd developed using V. 2008. Some of those improvements are the data display bar linked to the cursor, the icons for screen control and rendering now on the top of the page instead of the bottom, selected items now glow with a color and groups glow with an infill color--trust me, this is much better when trying to identify and select items. Plus lots more tools have been improved or simplified. I'm not prepared to give you a full accounting of V. 2008 improvements nor address your speed issues which I have not encountered. My own renderings take only a minute or so so I would say there is something fixable in your 12.5 file/files that should allow for much, much shorter rendering times and that an upgrade will not likely fix your speed issue but should add speed to your work processes. I design on a Mac, both Motorola and Intel CPU based. Perhaps someone else can suggest some fixes to the slow rendering times?