Jump to content

Eric Gilbey, PLA

Vectorworks, Inc Employee
  • Posts

    214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Eric Gilbey, PLA

  1. Hi Åge. in the Landmark pull down menu is a command called Grade Limit from Pad. This allows you to set the batter slope. The reverse option, Pad from Grade Limit allows you to also set the slopes and it attempts to balance your cut and fill. You may want to refine the shape of the pad once it has been created.
  2. @Michal Zarzecki I have not considered that, but you may be right. Every time I have done this, I was in a 3D view to make sure the site model object (3D lines) was what was selected. I'm glad it is working for you now, and I appreciate you letting me know.
  3. Hi Michael, First, I made sure just the site model was the only design layer visible... Then Exporting Vectorworks classes as DWG layers... Then under objects...only selected objects (make sure the site model is selected). Then click ok...this seems to work for my export...if it is not working for your export, perhaps check in with tech support to see what may be triggering your error. Let me know what becomes of your attempt, Michael. Eric
  4. Hi Marcus. If you want the fastest route to find the Hardscape styles from the Resource Manager, in the search field, in the top of the resource manager, type in hardscape, and hit enter. You should see these pop up immediately. You can click through the folders on the left where the Vectorworks libraries are held…you’ll find them lower in the list where there are site objects. One feature I love is found when you activate the hardscape tool…once you click on the hardscape tool from site planning tool set, in the mode bar at the top, you will see what we call the resource selector pull down menu which may say “hardscape style:”. Once you click into that pull down, you will see what looks like the resource manager, but it is only revealing hardscape styles. At the beginning, you will find the ones Vectorworks has provided…once you have added your custom made hardscape styles, you will see them there too…just in your favorite or user folder. Hope this helps. Eric
  5. Hi Tom. I cannot say there is a change in this as of yet, other than the fact we have new 3D content with Laubwerk plant representations. I will also tag @Katarina Ollikainen and @Scott Lebsackin this post as they are both involved with the styled objects' development and can speak to the ability to generate day/night appropriate image propped plant styles. Stay tuned... Eric
  6. João, I will make note of this, but hopefully you will see that starting with our version which released in September (v2023), a terrain model exported from Revit is treated as a site model in Vectorworks. There is no longer a need to convert their mesh to 3D polygons and create a site model, it is automatic. Similar to how their smart objects like walls, slabs, doors, windows, etc are treated as Vectorworks walls, slabs, doors, windows, etc.. Though Autodesk is not seeking to treat our smart objects as true BIM objects in Revit (we can't control their software development to better manage our geometry and data), Vectorworks is doing just that with the objects imported into Vectorworks from Revit. As you can imagine, Autodesk would not really allow other CAD/BIM solutions to create objects which are treated as native Revit objects. Thanks again, Eric
  7. João, First...what are you experiencing in exporting your site model to RVT for use in Revit? Second...there should not be a need to explode (ungroup) the site model to get 3D contours out of it. You can change the 3D configuration to be 3D polygons, then export to DWG. Last...you can copy the source data, paste in place outside of the site model, then Choose Landmark Pull-down menu; Select Survey Input; Select 3D Polygons to 3D Loci. This will create the 3D Loci which you could also export. If you need the proposed contours instead, you can right click, and choose edit Proposed Site Model Contours. Copy the contours and then paste in place. (It may give you labels as separate objects, you can use select similar to remove them) then run the same process as above to get the 3D loci. Now, if you still need to generate a CSV report to export for the Revit user, you could do the report on 3D locus, and you will have to "Select from: Functions" in the Columns section of custom report dialog...and choose Xcenter, Ycenter and Zcenter for the report....then export that report to CSV. As you can see its a bunch of steps but possible...this is why I would suggest the 1st or 2nd options. Hope this helps. Eric
  8. 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
  9. 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.
  10. @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.
  11. @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.
  12. 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
  13. @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
  14. 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.
  15. 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?
  16. 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.
  17. 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
  18. 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.
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21. 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.
  22. @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
  23. Good morning @susanhutson. Your observation of being able to combine the work you are doing in DynaSCAPE, and other software in Vectorworks Landmark is correct. There have been a number of landscape designers who have moved from DynaSCAPE, Sketch3D/SketchUp, Photoshop, etc. into Vectorworks Landmark for that very same reason. Another benefit you will appreciate is that unlike using DS Design and DS Color to form line drawings and renders, Vectorworks Landmark consolidates this too, as there is no need to move between modules to conduct line drawings and renderings. For animated walkthroughs and flyovers, this is already built into to the Landmark software, as well. For creating movie files (MOV format) of these walkthroughs and flyovers, it is simply accomplished by choosing that output in the same dialog where you set up the walkthrough path. If you are interested in a demo to see more about the features you are seeking (and others you may not have mentioned above), please let me know. We can coordinate a time that works for you. We can also see if we can align you with other designers who have made the move to Vectorworks for the same purpose to hear from them about their experiences and recommendations. Thanks again, Susan. Best regards, Eric
  24. Hello @susanhutson. I was about to ask the same question as Jeff. Can you elaborate? I'm envisioning 3D interactive design, which has been possible in Vectorworks Landmark for some time. Designers typically have been used to designing in plan view, but many have been designing in 3D in recent years. With the Mutliview feature, the ability to work with both 2D and 3D views simultaneously is also possible...so as you place objects in 2D or 3D, you see the result immediately in the other view. More information about what you are seeking is needed to share a better response.
  25. Hi Max, Great question, and I hope I can address all the questions you have presented here. Related to our recent GIS integrations and harvesting vector geometry to do so. Right now, you can bring in such geometry from shapefile formats, which usually contain open and closed polygons and points...these would usually carry data which informs the use of the lines...for instance, contour lines would contain the elevation...building footprints would likely carry the elevation of the building base, and maybe the top of building elevation, and also the building height. This all depends on the source of the GIS information. DXF files can also carry such data, and they can also be georeferenced, so may be a source if SHP files are not available. Lidar files, could be imported as point clouds and meshes, and this can also help to inform a site's terrain, but the geometry needs to be pulled out of the object and converted to elevated 3D points or 3D polygons. We can get more into that directly if that becomes the case. As for vector contour lines from image/map services in our current GeoImage process, harvesting the geometry is not yet there, but something our development team is working on. You will be able to do this, but to get the vector data, I recommend the initial steps I mentioned earlier. Regarding the other methods you mention, they are possible (DXF/DWG and tabular survey input (eastings, northings and elevations). This video describes/shows this process. Please feel free to message me if you need more information on this. Best regards, Eric
×
×
  • Create New...