Socram Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 In my viewports, why is there a disconnect between my wireframe and RW renderings? When I'm on wireframe, I make the view how I want it, but when i change to a RW rendering and update the viewport, the view is different. Sometimes the object is so far out of the viewport that I'm left with a blank viewport. Seems like shaded/unshaded polygon work ok, but fast/final RW don't. Anything come to mind that I'm obviously doing wrong? I have all the proper layers/classes selected and, like I said, it looks great in wireframe but when I try to get a nice rendering it is either off center or rotated different or both. Any ideas? Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted January 28, 2007 Author Share Posted January 28, 2007 Also, while the problems I've described above happen in orthogonal view, I also have a hard time getting perspective views to work in viewports. Even if I make a new file with just one simple extrude - the ortho viewport looks great; the perspective one just seems too "close up" on normal, wide or narrow perspective, with either top being cut off or the object being pushed out of the viewport. Maybe I just have a fundamental misunderstanding of what viewports are. Or views. Or VW? Yes, yes, and yes. Thanks for the help. Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted January 31, 2007 Author Share Posted January 31, 2007 Ok...no replies. Too many words maybe? What are some common mistakes with viewports and perspective view in general? Why, when I switch from wireframe to a rendered view, does the view change slightly (and sometimes more than slightly) whether in a viewport or in the design layer? Thanks folks. Quote Link to comment
Guest Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Send the file to tech@nemetschek.net along with a detailed description of the problem. Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 2, 2007 Author Share Posted February 2, 2007 ok, i'll do that. Guess I'm not really sure the problem isn't me... Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 2, 2007 Author Share Posted February 2, 2007 actually, the file is 33Mb. I don' think gmail supports over 10mb for attchments. is there a way to shrink it down? Quote Link to comment
Ray Libby Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 VW files compress well. Look at some zip applications. Quote Link to comment
Petri Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 What projection do you use? There are situations where a certain rendering mode can't be used in conjunction with a certain projection. I think the problem projections I encountered (and were confirmed by NNA) were Cabinet & Cavalier, but there could well be others. Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share Posted February 3, 2007 I haven't used the oblique projections much. perspective is the projection that gives me trouble - i can see the perspective (wireframe only so far), but its soooo stretched out, it doesn't quite look normal. And it looks like its above me. i've tried normal, wide, narrow. Most of my elevation points are between 94' and 100' - could that have anything to do with it? Is there a place to set the elevation of the view of the viewport? i'll try zipping. thanks. Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share Posted February 3, 2007 it zipped to 25MB. Quote Link to comment
Petri Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 I was afraid of this... The RenderWorks Camera is the only even remotely sensible means known to the VectorKind for setting up non-orthogonal viewports. Perhaps you should abandon your existing viewports and create new ones? Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share Posted February 3, 2007 I'm afraid I don't understand. I have tried new viewports before, I have about 6 on my current one, all of which I've set the view up in wireframe but then it doesn't render the same view when I switch to RW. I think I messed around with the camera view only briefly - I could try that again. What is the difference between viewport and camera then? It looks like the camera view is updatable - can the view be moved to a sheet layer separate from where the camera is? Appreciate the help. Quote Link to comment
Petri Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 I'm no more sure of anything myself... The Blessed & Immaculate St. Dongle is elsewhere... The Camera is a brilliant tool! From your current view you can, I think, "create a Viewport"? In a Viewport you can, AFAK, only change the view with some Freemasonry arcane & incomprehensible methods. This used to be the case overall, before Julian Carr (of OzCAD) devised the Camera and things were no longer obscure. Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share Posted February 3, 2007 As I am unversed in the arcane, I tried the camera - I agree: brilliant! No problems with view now. Is there a way to get the camera to see things besides the layer its on? As it is, I have to copy/paste the separate layers I want onto one layer (a small price to pay). Of course new problems crop up - now I can't get my hardscapes (texture beds) to show up in the camera! I trudge on... Quote Link to comment
Petri Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 Of course new problems crop up - now I can't get my hardscapes (texture beds) to show up in the camera! I trudge on... Class visibility? Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share Posted February 3, 2007 Is there a separate place to turn class visibilities on/off only for the camera? I don't see a place for that. I can see everything, including my texture beds, in the 2d/plan view (class is set to show/modify others). hmmm. i know this is something stupid i'm forgetting. Quote Link to comment
Petri Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 If you "create viewport" you should get what you have. By "should" I refer to "how it should be". The current settings should be applied. If this is not the case, what's the point! Look, as a rule, the user never forgets anyhing stupid. In a situation like this the stupidity is in the other end. Quote Link to comment
Socram Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share Posted February 3, 2007 yup, thought so - stupid mistake this time. somewhere in the process i deleted the site model. no site model=no texture beds... fixed it and it looks like it works! Thanks so much for your help this morning - I really appreciate the quick responses. Quote Link to comment
Petri Posted February 3, 2007 Share Posted February 3, 2007 o...k... I guess there is a lesson to be learned here... Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.