Free Viewer

[Donald Wardlaw]

Interesting ideas here since I last paid a visit. This whole notion of intellectual property did not crop up in the initial round of comment on the viewer.

I think architects who use viewer should check and perhaps adjust their contracts to stipulate who has rights to what when viewer is used. I agree that developer housing is the area of greatest concern, but there is a body of case law which supports the rights of designers to their designs, at least my readings lead me to think that.

Outside of developer housing, I agree with those (like Caleb I think) that do not feel greatly threatened by the idea of others falsely reproducing our work. It's not easy to do, much of the information is project specific---or the really valuable stuff is, just how valuable is a concrete curb detail that any drafter can make--, construction pracitice continually evolves making our old details not so useful without updating.

I once attended a seminar presented by a couple architects from a large national firm who discussed this issue. They just don't worry about it. They noted how details they have created sometimes come back to them on submittals, but after a couple years they are not really doing things that way anymore.

To me it all comes back to the idea of whether the architect is providing a product or a service. The AIA in its contracts, and most (I think) state practice acts consider the archtitect to be providing a service and not a product. That is where I see the main value of my work falling and I spend time with new clients to make sure they understand that, usually before we are contractually related. I retain copyrights and stipulate that my drawings are my instruments of the service I provide.

All things considered though, despite the fact that Acrobat files take some time to create (about 2 minutes per sheet), I like its advantages: it does not involve editable drawings; it has built in security options; it faithfully displays the file as I create it without font complicatations; most clients already have the software needed to view it; if they do not have it the download is not real big; and, the file size is small, usually smaller than the vectorworks file.

On the other hand, I'm not saying my way is better for anyone else. I share in the joy of others who do things there own way, in ways I would not.

Best,

Donald

[Ken]

quote:

---

All things considered though, despite the fact that Acrobat files take some time to create (about 2 minutes per sheet), I like its advantages: it does not involve editable drawings; it has built in security options; it faithfully displays the file as I create it without font complicatations; most clients already have the software needed to view it; if they do not have it the download is not real big; and, the file size is small, usually smaller than the vectorworks file.

---

How about improving Viewer according to the above:

1) "Don't make it editable." Eliminate the Edit, Organize and Palettes menus. Why not?

2) "Build in security options." Introduce lockable VW files in VW9.5.

3) "Faithfully display the file." Keep the only clue of Saved Sheets as a pop-up (lower left of scroll bar) but eliminate the edit Saved Sheets option. 3D model-links and stacked printable sheets can still be faithfully viewed and printed.

4) In general, strip Viewer down to a more rudimentary little app that does not suggest anything with those greyed-out menus.

[Jonathan Pickup]

I was surprised by a client the other day that started to stretch walls using the Viewer. Then we opened the layer dialog, and deleted all the layers. Now I know that we can't save the file, but surely stretching walls and stuff shouldn't be allowed in a viewer?

[Ken]

1) Why not just put Undo in another menu like the File menu? Besides, Undo is NOT required for navigation. I navigate all the time with pan, zoom, scroll bar, mousing beyond, etc while NEVER needing the Undo or Redo command.

2) You say layers and classes also needed for navigation? Are you referring to the same software that I'm using? I'm using Vectorworks. Layers and classes are not needed for navigation. Creating saved sheets help the viewer navigate. Leaving the pop-up menu for saved sheets help the viewer navigate. Allowing the viewer to edit saved sheets does not allow the viewer person to navigate. I do not understand your point.

3) I'm not looking for a presentation mode. I use saved sheets. One of my saved sheets is to a linked 3D model with all other layers invisible. Other saved sheets are combinations of layers and classes for printing or viewing. These modes are the only benefits of Viewer9 versus Acrobat PDF. Why show layers and classes in Viewer?

It's very disappointing when tech support offers such replies.

[Ken]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matthew Giampapa:

They were included because it is a Viewing program as well as a Printing solution for print shops with out the need for the rest of VectorWorks. The edit menu must at least contain the Undo command simply to navigation purposes. Other wise changing zooms and moving the page would require they revert to the saved copy or re-open the document.

The layer and class features are also included for just this reason, They are tied to the sheets which are not always defined by all out users. Rather than have to save separate copies for each printed sheet, you can send the actual file with minimal instructions. To learn how to use the viewer to print takes all of a few minutes, where

The functionality you are looking for is closer to a presentation mode. Personally, I think the ability to save a document as a self executing presentation would be a great feature, but as I understand it that is not the main goal of the Viewer.

I will however enter a feature request for just such a thing.

Matthew Giampapa

Technical Support

---

Regarding layers and classes, I must clarify that I'm suggesting the removal of those pop-up menus and the Organize menu. I'm not suggesting eliminating layers and classes! My saved sheets already include preset combinations of layers, classes, layer/class options, and views, so seeing the entire list of layers and classes should not be necessary in Viewer. Any navigation should not require seeing the list of layers or classes. Any good tech support person should know this.

And forget that stupid idea of "presentation mode!" What kind of logic is that? I already save animations of color models as Quicktime movies and other stuff as PowerPoint slide shows.

[This message has been edited by Archken (edited 09-21-2001).]

[Ken]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Manus:

Archken I dont think stripping the viewer down is the right direction...

---

Chris, are you trying to provoke my reply? I truly think stripping Viewer down is the correct direction. How does keeping the Edit menu help? It needs to show fewer commands, menus and editing tools. Not more of them! It needs to be smaller as a free app, not larger. It needs to function merely as a viewer and not being suggestive as a potential CAD tool. The other direction would be expanding it with more features and more power and more size, which is absolutely the wrong direction.

Stripping Viewer down so that it does not suggest great things to come (once the full application is purchased) may seem, at first, anti-marketing for NNA. However, in the longer term and for its singular purpose, it will absolutely benefit NNA. As a professional VW user, I do not want to distribute Viewer or tell anybody how to download it -- in its current form (now that I've carefully thought about it). There are too many "lack of control" issues. Instead of the current version, I think a smaller, simpler Viewer would be more widely used and welcomed, which will help registered VW users advance in their profession, thus solidifying the VW market share as well as expanding it at the grass roots level. A half-powerful, suggestive Viewer weakens the VW market share by eroding the registered VW user's control, thus alienating its usage by the very people who may otherwise want to globally broadcast it, in a sense shouting to the world, "look at my wonderful drawings!"

VRML seems very promising. It's different.

The more immediate solution, in my opinion, would simply be to allow a registered VW user to create his/her own version of Viewer. Workspace Editor is a good example. I suggest making it possible for the distributing professional to strip down (or change) Viewer's menus according to his/her audience. For textured interactive models, I would strip off everything relating to layers, classes, symbol palettes, worksheets, etc. For building contractors, I would strip off layers, classes, leaving just the Saved Sheets pop-up menu. For engineering consultants, I would strip off the entire Edit menu, layers, classes, leaving only the Saved Sheets and zooming tools.

In fact, for everybody I would strip off the Edit and Organize menus and layers and classes. And the Palettes menu, too. Why show them?

[Matthew Giampapa]

They were included because it is a Viewing program as well as a Printing solution for print shops with out the need for the rest of VectorWorks. The edit menu must at least contain the Undo command simply to navigation purposes. Other wise changing zooms and moving the page would require they revert to the saved copy or re-open the document.

The layer and class features are also included for just this reason, They are tied to the sheets which are not always defined by all out users. Rather than have to save separate copies for each printed sheet, you can send the actual file with minimal instructions. To learn how to use the viewer to print takes all of a few minutes, where

The functionality you are looking for is closer to a presentation mode. Personally, I think the ability to save a document as a self executing presentation would be a great feature, but as I understand it that is not the main goal of the Viewer.

I will however enter a feature request for just such a thing.

Matthew Giampapa

Technical Support

quote:

---

Originally posted by Archken:

Chris, are you trying to provoke my reply? I truly think stripping Viewer down is the

correct

direction. How does keeping the

Edit

menu help? It needs to show

fewer

commands, menus and editing tools. Not more of them! It needs to be smaller as a free app, not larger. It needs to function merely as a viewer and not being suggestive as a potential CAD tool. The other direction would be expanding it with more features and more power and more size, which is absolutely the

wrong

direction.

Stripping Viewer down so that it does not suggest great things to come (once the full application is purchased) may seem, at first, anti-marketing for NNA. However, in the longer term and for its singular purpose, it will absolutely benefit NNA. As a professional VW user, I do not want to distribute Viewer or tell anybody how to download it -- in its current form (now that I've carefully thought about it). There are too many "lack of control" issues. Instead of the current version, I think a smaller, simpler Viewer would be more widely used and welcomed, which will help registered VW users advance in their profession, thus

solidifying

the VW market share as well as expanding it at the grass roots level. A half-powerful, suggestive Viewer

weakens

the VW market share by eroding the registered VW user's control, thus alienating its usage by the very people who may otherwise want to globally broadcast it, in a sense shouting to the world, "look at my wonderful drawings!"

VRML seems very promising. It's different.

The more immediate solution, in my opinion, would simply be to allow a registered VW user to create his/her own version of Viewer.

Workspace Editor

is a good example. I suggest making it possible for the distributing professional to strip down (or change) Viewer's menus according to his/her audience. For textured interactive models, I would strip off everything relating to layers, classes, symbol palettes, worksheets, etc. For building contractors, I would strip off layers, classes, leaving just the Saved Sheets pop-up menu. For engineering consultants, I would strip off the entire Edit menu, layers, classes, leaving only the Saved Sheets and zooming tools.

In fact, for everybody I would strip off the Edit and Organize menus and layers and classes. And the Palettes menu, too. Why show them?

---

[Ken]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Manus:

Well I certainly did provoke a response Archken I guess we'll agree to disagree on some issues...

---

Chris, we can certainly disagree, but we both (you and I) still do not know your reasoning. Are you suggesting that you would distribute to your clients a free Viewer that has more power, more features, more editing control -- something like a free version of Vectorworks so that they can simply do their own work in the future?

[MikeB]

quote-"NO! my clients aren?t interested in designing nor buying or using VW

But they will use the free viewer to view the models"

You nailed my sentiment Chris. Our client have no desire to become draftsmen or architects. Thats why they hire us.

Even though VW is a fairly easy program to use, it still has a steep learning curve. Every time we hire a new employee it's weeks before they are compitent with the system. They can "draw" within a couple days but real understand of the nuances of the program take time. Typically our clients (usually the state)have more important things to do. And if it were legal and the viewer didn't exist, I would send them a free version of VW just to simplify my life. I just don't share Archkens concern that our client will become users and we will lose work. ( I think this is the point?)

Also I get a little uneasy when people start to take thing personally on discussion boards. The written word can often be misunderstood. And ultimately we are taking about cad software, right?

Peace. ;^)

[Ken]

Aside from the larger issue of how everybody, including architects themselves, is letting the "value of design services" erode (also see AIA's lack of involvement), which I think is the general problem here, I must urge for the focus on specific features, or lack thereof, in Viewer.

The concepts I do not understand (and may never understand) are:

1) Why keep the Edit menu and show the list of layers and classes? How do they provide "more power and control" for interactive 3D models in Viewer? How would eliminating them reduce the interactiveness of Viewer? Forgive me if I'm presuming every VW user knows about saved sheets. A saved sheet can selectively set layers and classes visible or invisible, such as making only the layer containing the linked 3D model visible. It can also be set with specific view options and attached scripts, so the viewing person only needs to go to it in the pop-up menu at the lower left of the scroll bar. This can be accomplished without fiddling with or seeing the layers and classes. Want to keep the Undo command? Just stick it in the File menu. Interactiveness and navigation are not affected. By the way, VW tech support should indeed understand these features.

2) Isn't fast rendering an issue with your hardware, and better with smaller simpler software than with larger, more complex, more feature-packed software? But, I'm not a software programmer.

3) What "additional features" could possibly complement the model presentation only? What features short of saving a Quicktime animation, either directly from VW or from a render app like Art?lantis or RW, can Viewer offer? And how about creating a Powerpoint slide show? Why must a free app like Viewer be bloated into a fully-packed powerhouse with advanced features and controls? And how can a fully bloated software be fast?

Okay, add textures. I agree. Stop.

4) What does "changing textures and presentation but not edit the drawings" mean? Why can't different design schemes be saved as different classes or layers, then preset and presented again as saved sheets for viewing? For example, savedsheet schemeA= concrete, savedsheet schemeB= terrazzo, savedsheet schemeC= tile. Here's a professional design tip: present only two options and recommend one. Three may be okay. More gets unwieldy, may be confusing and reveals something about your service.

Finally, I must suggest we need to be more broad-minded when it comes to types and capabilities of clients. Same for project types. Some clients have more resources than others. Some shop around more, distributing your previous projects and software more than others. I've had employees go solo (with my blessing, but ultimately becoming my competitor), and I've been personally offered full-time position by some of my clients. There is a lot more fluidity between professionals and clients than some of you may think. A binding contract for one project is irrelevant.

While I have no idea what kind of impact Viewer will have, I think the general direction of giving away tools of the trade is a bad idea. Certainly you may disagree, but disagreeing without reasoning is rather *happy* (for lack of a politically correct term).

I suppose Matthew, the tech support expert, can totally dump the points I'm trying to make again. Oh well. Perhaps it's the "speed reading" technique where only the first sentence of each paragraph is read. Who knows.

<archken@pacbell.net>

[Matthew Giampapa]

This entire thread has certainly generated some ideas both good and bad. Along with a lot of subjective opinions about how things should be. I will make a note of this and bring it to the attention of higher ups here at NNA to make use of your comments to the fullest.

Matthew Giampapa

Technical Support

[Matthew Giampapa]

Our VRML support is limited to the VRML 1.0 spec at this time. Our VRML support is tied into LightWorks, so while we would like to support latter iterations of the VRML standard, at this point it is unlikely to happen in the near future unless LightWorks plans to do so.

It is my understanding that for all intensive purposes VRML is a dead system. While it was very cool in 1995, It never reached the critical mass of support needed for it to catch on.

Archken, Chris Manus, and MikeB. Not everyone uses our product in the same way. Sometime it just comes down to differing opinions as to what is the best direction to move in.

NNA maintains this forum to gain your feedback and assist customers. We consider it a valuable resource. When I feel that I am not fully grasping the nuances of issue at hand I do everything in my power to do so, and bring them to the attention of others here at NNA who are in a position to act.

My role is to provide technical assistance and information about the capabilities of our software, not to make policy decisions.

Matthew Giampapa

Technical Support

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Manus:

ArchKen I suggest you buy VW9 try the viewer and VRML I?m talking about one applet That allows printing and allows 3D interactive presentations. The fact that you can edit E.g. move walls in the viewer I agree is ridiculous also drawing security is an issue (But for now I can Re-edit and combine and lock layers on my drawing before I distribute it) Saving Predefined Presentations only on sheets (Eg textures) has one major limitation for me. WHAT ABOUT COMBINATIONS? AND VARIATIONS? for eg brick Text.types, roof tile Text.types ,trim Text. etc. How many Sheets?(Hang on, you don't want your clients to be able to do any of that-OK

WELL I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM HERE,YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT,I'LL DO WHAT MY CLIENTS WANT! NNA-Class textures are a very powerful feature Why not let the client select them in the viewer on static views,3D rotate and Viewer user defined Walk through, to make changes to textures or presentations. I now see Manufacturers giving clients interactive Selections on Bricks and Roof tile textures why can?t I do this for my clients with the viewer using (client as opposed to predefined) class selection with veiws in sheets. As more VW users explore the use of the viewer and client presentations I?m sure this topic will heat up. Matthew can you please advise me On VRML why support it, if it doesn?t work in VWA? The viewer which allows my clients to interact 3D with The model doesn?t support textures but it does work (albeit, very slow when rendering walk through, a software issue?) , Then on the other hand we have VRML which supports textures? but doesn?t work, on large Models in VWA, using 3rdParty VRML Viewer,Where are NNA going, see if you can get an answer for me.

[This message has been edited by Chris Manus (edited 09-25-2001).]

---

[Sean Flaherty]

The viewer includes classes and layers because many people do not take advantage of the sheets capability. Although I wish that we could get everyone to use the product in all its glory as we designed, many people still use classes and layers manually to set up views.

RenderWorks was not included in the viewer because we didn't feel that we could properly protect its functionality. Since there is nothing to keep a user from copying a rendered image out of the package using a screen capture utility. I suggest that you use the Render Bitmap tool to embed rendered images that you want to print or view.

Regards,

Sean

------------------

Sean Flaherty

CTO

Nemetschek North America

flaherty@nemetschek.net

[Ken]

I think using saved sheets is so basic or such a small step for half-proficient VW users that it can just be mentioned in the instructions for distributing Viewer! If Viewer does not show the lists of layers/classes (pop-up menus, edit sheets dialogue, Organize menu, command-arrows) the sender can essentially "lock" access to the drawings.

Other benefits include:

1) Reduce work for the veteran VW user. My saved sheets are relatively simple. My layers and classes are complex. Sometimes the list go beyond the screen. I would otherwise have to spend time combining layers, re-editing and include lengthy written instructions to clients on how to "navigate manually" through layers and classes. If they already have saved sheets, I would just want to eliminate the view of layers and classes.

2) Reduce confusion for viewers.

3) Hopefully get a smaller, lighter, quicker Viewer that's easier to distribute, with nonessential features stripped off. Make it easier to understand and use. The only bonus for me in using Viewer instead of Acrobat would be the interactive flyover and walkthrough for the 3D model.

4) Imply that CAD knowledge is not necessary! With fewer controls, Viewer would not suggest to clients that they should do their editing and get back to you. I know this issue is debatable, but I think it's the wrong direction for Viewer. Viewer should not be ambitious. For some clients, I understand, you may just have to give them their own registered copy of Vectorworks-Architect-Renderworks. But we're talking about Viewer.

[Jonathan Pickup]

I was a bit surprised that no-one picked up on my comments that the 2D selection tool in the viewer allows you to move and reshape objects. Should a viewer allow you to move information.

The layer dialog box allows you to delete layers. Should this be allowed as well?

[Ken]

quote:

---

...Should a viewer allow you to move information... The layer dialog box allows you to delete layers. Should this be allowed as well?

---

To clarify the positive point of all this:

Vectorworks is such a superior, lovable CAD package and the people behind it so supportive that it deserves the proper finishing touches. Like most VW users, I want to distribute my work to as many clients as I can. VW and Viewer are understandably not perfect -- no app ever is -- but to be so impressive yet crooked in some key areas is almost a crime. Viewer, like VW, needs to be polished off and set straight for the mass market. It should not be ambitious. It should not give hints of being editable. I think if it can perform like a viewer only and not like a half-baked, half-performing CAD, it will get more support from all VW users, boosting readership and getting distributed more widely.

At least, that is my goal.

I don't want to extend the issue. I just want to clarify the positive side of all this.

[B-A-R]

To go back to the top of this thread,..

Is there a viewer available that can read VW 8 files ?? Or are we expected to upgrade VW 8 to VW 9 or even 10 ?

[CipesDesign]

B-A-R

Have you tried to open a VW 8xx file with the 9xx viewer? I suspect (but am not certain) that it might open the file "with a new name" (eg. v9 will be appended to name), just like the actual program does.

Try it. let us know.

Peter

[Guest]

There is not a viewer for VW 8 files. There is not one shceudled to be released.

THere are so many file type changes internally between VW 8 and VW 9, it's difficult to use the viewer to convert and only view files wihtout changing the files.

THere is alot of changing of the files that goes on when opening an 8 file in VW 9 or VW 10.

Having the ability to only read the files without changing or manipulating the files is the sole purpose of the Viewer. There would be some file changing and manipulation to get these files to open. That kind of defeats the purpose of only reading the files with the viewer.