Jump to content

Eric Gilbey, PLA

Vectorworks, Inc Employee
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


53 Excellent


Personal Information

  • Occupation
    Landscape Architect
  • Homepage
  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hello site designers. As you know we have invested in creating tighter connections with real-time rendering applications like Lumion, Enscape and Twinmotion. We are looking for some examples of the work you are doing which involves these connections. Along with that, we would love to hear how these connections have benefitted your workflows in going from design to presentation. Please let me know if you have examples and stories to share. Of course, you could reply here...or, you could send me a message here in the forum...or you are welcome to email us at landmark@vectorworks.net . I look forward to hearing from you soon. Best regards, Eric
  2. Hi @Anders Blomberg I have recommended layers be used for visualization hierarchy (think stacked layers of mylar/vellum with each design layer containing areas of work. For example, From top to bottom...Upperstory planting, building, constructed features, understory planting, surfaces, terrain, base plan, survey, aerial. You could also apply phasing, alternative designs, etc this way. I recommend classes to be the drawing tool (they line color, lineweight, line style, fill, etc) for elements and/or their components. Many still will apply design layer-like treatments like making a class for plants-proposed vs plants-existing while there are still plants-component classes. This is up to you, as you could easily do that with design layers too.
  3. @hollister design Studio you are correct...not your library...its the place where the plant data originates if you are using it...if not (sounds like you are not), you are all good.
  4. @Tom W. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I did not see the prior comment until you called me out for this, so I appreciate your follow-up. I will bring this to our development team's attention to see about fixing this issue.
  5. Hi @Tom W. There is a way to disable the cross planed image prop...if you right click on the plant in your resource manager, or in the plan, you have options to edit the plant style...choose the "Edit 3D Component". This will give you the image prop, which you can select. Once selected, the OIP will display the options, and it is here where you can disable the "crossed plane" option. See the image attached here. Hope this helps...let me know if otherwise. Best regards, Eric
  6. @hollister design Studio Hi Bruce. This message happens when you have the linkage between the plant and the plant catalog activated. I'm not sure if you are still using Landmark 2021, so I am going to show this response with 2021...if you are doing this in 2022, it should be the same. In the Landmark Pull-down menu at the top of the screen, you will notice an option at the bottom of that menu that reads "Choose Plant Data Source". If you click on that last option, it will open a dialog box that gives you an option to turn on/off that updating action. (see image attached) This option is likely defaulted to be on so that designers who want changes they make to the plant data to go into its record in the plant catalog. If you are not using the plant catalog, then you should disable this checkbox...if you are using it and want your changes to update that catalog record, then keeping it checked would be best. Now...as far as why its triggering that response...if you have changed any of the data it would recognized from the original record for that plant, it will say it can't find that plant (record). For instance, you may have decided to pick a variety of Rosemary that is different than the record chosen in the plant catalog...if you change or add a variety/hybrid name, it won't recognize that plant record...you can add it in (recommended if you are actively using that plant regularly), or you can say 'no'. I think if you want to update the plant catalog with multiple plants at once, you can disable the check box in that dialog mentioned above...then when you are ready to do a full sweep update to the plant catalog, then use the same Landmark pull-down menu and choose "Update Plant Data". This will take all of the plants in the file and update the plant records in the catalog. Be careful...if you choose the next option, it will take the data from the catalog and update the plants in the project file with what was on the catalog records. This last option may be preferred if you think the plant information from your symbol library is not as current as changes you made to the catalog. Hope this helps....let me know if otherwise. Best regards, Eric
  7. Hi Steven. Though I very much promote the use of the Landscape Area tool for site planning workflows in Landmark, its very capable counterpart within Architect is the Space Object. Though the Space object has other functions which relate directly to interior planning, it also has the ability to function in 2D planning workflows, inside or outside of the building. This means you can certainly use it for site planning even before the building is conceptualized. You can report the Space Object's name/number/use and many other things to worksheets do conduct your proposed site use reports. Give it a try and let us know what you think. I believe you will enjoy it.
  8. Tom, I have just turned off the glow when I needed both, but perhaps you find the image prop textures to be too dim this way? If the Heliodon is casting light on them, they should look more naturally lit this way, but the ones in the shadow would be dimmer than you prefer perhaps?
  9. The closest thing to a downside of putting a grade limit around the site is only that it might be more accurate for cut and fill if the grade limit is closer to the area being affected. Note in the images below...The first image is without a grade limit, and the proposed grading is not regulated well. The second image shows a grade limit of about 30' from the modifying pad, and the third image shows a grade limit of about 15' from the modifying pad. If the resulting slopes are favorable, the tighter to the modifying work is better for the amount of cut/fill you would propose. Much like it would be on the actual site. If your placement of the grade limit did not cause more proposed grading over the area of the site than you expected, then no need to change.
  10. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected remote work practices in the profession? Some of you may know that I currently co-chair ASLA’s Digital Technology Professional Practice Network (PPN), which has developed a survey to capture the new knowledge and experience that has emerged in the profession over the course of the pandemic in order to help frame the conversation around remote work and to aid firms in developing best practices in the post-pandemic market. Please take a few minutes to fill out the survey by Friday, May 28. Your participation is greatly appreciated. Please use this hyperlinked text below, to take you to the survey. Take the Survey If you have issues or questions, you can email the ASLA staff at propractice@asla.org Thank you all. Best regards, Eric
  11. Yes, João is right...the area inside of the hardscape modification does not have anything telling it how to perform, so it is trying to go back to what it was within the confines of that small opening. Placing a pad (offset the opening shape by a few centimeters) and convert that to a site modifier (pad configuration) at the elevation you prefer that planting area surface to be, and it should do what you seek.
  12. Hi Carol. The behavior you are seeing is typical of the 3D display for cut/fill. Instead of displaying the cut/fill coloration on the proposed surface, it actually flattens the shape of the site model, but creates a depression or mound where the cut or fill is calculated, respectively. So, the more cut in an area, the deeper the depression, and the more fill in an area, the higher the mound. I too wish the site model display of cut/fill were displayed with the actual proposed site model surface, so your note reminds me to make the enhancement request to do so. Thank you for bringing this up. Best regards, Eric
  13. Hi @LisaErn. It is great to hear from you and hard to believe its been just over a year since I visited. Regarding your interest in seeing the Landscape Area perform this very common application, I would highly agree. When components were added to the Landscape Area in our most recent version (2021), we had included this requirement, and I believe it is still soon to be achievable. In the meantime, I would suggest that you try using the Slab object, as it will also give you a horizontal layer-based object. The Slab object, however will provide the ability to offset the edges of each component which may be a way of shrinking the horizontal area each layer covers as it extends deeper. This still does not give you a sloped side, so I'm going to ask my colleague @Katarina Ollikainen, who has described a way to 3D model such an application and assign materials to each volume in the 3D modeled solution, with the hopes she can offer a more intuitive solution until the Landscape Area accomplishes this condition. Thank you again, and I look forward to hearing/seeing more from you and others from AJ Landskap. Eric
  14. Hi @Joss Paine. I curious if you have tried either the Hardscape or Roadway (NURBS) tool. Those would be the tools I would suggest over using the wall for this purpose.
  15. @susanhutson You are welcome to email me at landmark@vectorworks.net , and we can schedule the demo. Thank you again. I look forward to talking with you soon. Best regards, Eric
  • Create New...