Draping or adding an OS Map to surface of site model

[Michael Siggers]

Hi

 

Hoping someone can help with some suggestions.

 

I'm currently producing a set of drawings required for a planning application. I have created the site model from contours purchased from Ordnance Survey and also have the OS map, again from Ordnance Survey.

 

The site model is at the same scale as the Map and when viewed from above, line up perfectly.

 

The query I have is what is the best way to transfer the OS Map to the surface of the site model? Within the site model is an area where the design proposal will be, which I can create with Site Modifiers, but I would like the remaining area to show the OS Map, which shows houses, roads and green areas etc.

 

The OS Map also includes the building in 3D which I would like to sit on the Site model.

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

[Jeff Prince]

Wow, 2 weeks and no help yet!

The easiest way is to make a texture out of your map that can be applied to the site model.  I do this all the time when I am rich in site data (easy to build a site model), but thin on 3D content (too early in the design process, still sketching).

 

You can "print" a pdf of your map and convert that to a texture for the site model.

 

Here's an example of a Procreate sketch placed on a site model.   Note, the contours of the site model can still be seen.

Edited February 16 by Jeff Prince

[Tom W.]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Prince said:

Wow, 2 weeks and no help yet!

 

This was actually discussed in a duplicate thread at the same time + your solution of creating a texture is the one we were looking for (but you weren't around to consult at that point 🙂). I remember you posting about the same thing another time. Looks really great 

[Jeff Prince]

1 minute ago, Tom W. said:

 

This was actually discussed in a duplicate thread at the same time + your solution of creating a texture is the one we were looking for (but you weren't around to consult at that point 🙂). I remember you posting about the same thing another time. Looks really great 

 

Yeah, I was banned for a few months...

[Tom W.]

10 minutes ago, Jeff Prince said:

I do this all the time when I am rich in site data (easy to build a site model), but thin on 3D content (too early in the design process, still sketching).

 

I would love to see more of this kind of stuff: bridging the gap between 2D sketching + 3D modelling, between Procreate/Trace + VW. I keep meaning to do more myself but never seem to have the right projects. It's very easy to get bogged down in the nuts + bolts of a project (because VW deals with the nuts + bolts exceptionally well) at a stage when often you'd be better keeping things freer + looser.

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, Tom W. said:

 

I would love to see more of this kind of stuff: bridging the gap between 2D sketching + 3D modelling, between Procreate/Trace + VW. I keep meaning to do more myself but never seem to have the right projects. It's very easy to get bogged down in the nuts + bolts of a project (because VW deals with the nuts + bolts exceptionally well) at a stage when often you'd be better keeping things freer + looser.

 

I use traditional sketching as a starting point in my design process because I like it, it's faster, and more creative than getting sucked into the BIM workflow too early.  A sketch is an elevator speech whereas BIM is a dissertation.  I don't think that is going to change anytime soon since every software vendor wants to control the user, screws up the interfaces all the time, and increasingly moves to proprietary SAS that locks up your content.

 

The convenience and economics of Procreate has largely eliminated my use of traditional markers... mostly because my go to colors are all dried up and I have a few Copic style Procreate brushes that are nearly indistinguishable from the real thing.  My iPad is always with me and thus a virtual bag of every art tool I could ever need.  Plus, when you start with a digital sketch, you don't have to worry about scanning or photographing it to get it into a digital workflow.  My real paper sketching is almost entirely felt tip or roller ball on whatever is handy... sketchpad, notebook paper, Post it notes, etc.

 

When it's time to start developing the ideas in Vectorworks, my sketching is handy for making interesting boards to explain how we got to where we are.  You save a little time using Vectorworks for layout instead of Adobe Indesign/Affinity Publisher, mostly because you can refine design in Vectorworks.  Publishing is just hanging it on the fridge, so wasted time in Adobe/Affinity.

 

I worked with a guy a few years ago who would sketch on real paper, scan, color in Procreate, label in InDesign, and then layout in AutoCAD.  It was painful to witness.  He didn't know how to use layers and transparancy in Procreate or Photoshop...  Tool are only good if you know how to use them efficiently.

[Tom W.]

I have been using Trace but there often isn't an enormous amount of 'design' work in my projects to justify much in the way of sketch work. Most of what I do is 'in house' + we know what we want so it's straight onto the nitty gritty most of the time: how we are going to build this thing rather than exploring multiple design/aesthetic options.

 

I have never used Procreate but my daughter (12yo!) is a whizz on it. And pretty hot on Blender too for that matter... But there is a lot more I would like to be doing with Trace given the opportunity.

 

I was working with another architect on a project a year or so back + we were going to do it together because he was 2D-only + was keen to move into 3D/BIM... This was the refurbishment + extension of a pub + bed + breakfast. I had the existing buildings laser scanned but then the architect got cold feet + decided he'd work on it in 2D in the way he was familiar with. So rather than converting the point cloud into a 3D model I had to trace over it in 2D to produce a series of design layer plans, elevations + sections. The time it took to do that I could have created a 3D model instead + it would have been a lot less boring. He then took my flat geometry, printed it out + sketched over it by hand to produce the drawings for the planning application. They were very nice drawings + served their purpose but I wish we'd instead modelled the architecture in 3D then imported it into Trace + done the sketching there. Instead of being limited to my perfunctory survey drawings he could have generated any view he wanted + benefitted from the enhanced functionality that drawing in Trace offers over pen on paper. Then when it moved onto the next stages we would have had a 3D model to work with rather than 4 or 5 2D survey drawings.

 

Next time...