taoist Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 This is great information! Keep up the good work. Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 13, 2013 Author Share Posted July 13, 2013 (edited) This is a global setting, so there is no way to do this for a single viewport. Say i have two viewports on a sheet. One is a perspective of a site and the other is a site plan. Both views are generated from my site layer. On the perspective, i want one plant to be hidden (for clarity) but on the site plan I want that plant to remain. With this simple script I understand the plant will be hidden from both viewports. If that's the case, can the Hide/Show script be modified to restrict the object's visibility changes to the desired viewport? What would be great is the ability to show/hide objects on the design layer through the viewport and the changes only applied to that particular viewport. This ability would surely cut down on the number of classes required right? Edited July 13, 2013 by Kizza Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 13, 2013 Author Share Posted July 13, 2013 A tool/shortcut to group and assign an object to a Hide Class would get this done. Again, this would be a global change to the object though right? Quote Link to comment
Pat Stanford Posted July 13, 2013 Share Posted July 13, 2013 This is a global setting, so there is no way to do this for a single viewport. What would be great is the ability to show/hide objects on the design layer through the viewport and the changes only applied to that particular viewport. This ability would surely cut down on the number of classes required right? Doesn't work. Will never work. Don't even ask. Purist in a class. Sorry. Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share Posted July 15, 2013 Will never work. Sorry. Fair enough... Can I ask why it's not possible? Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) It is meant to only be a temporary condition. I've used this feature in another program (but can't remember which one), and when you hide anything, the next time you open the file everything that was hidden is unhidden/visible. It was either in AutoCAD or some Adobe program. It is very handy. Actually, the Hide/Show state that I'm proposing is a permanent state until it's reversed/changed. For it to be effective though, there needs to be a way of temporarily showing all hidden objects. (see my link above for what i mean) Revit has this nailed (Revit also has it's own system of layers and classes - they are in the background, requiring little user interaction. If Revit provides the Show/Hide feature, why can't we have it?) Edited July 16, 2013 by Kizza Quote Link to comment
Bob Holtzmann Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Hide in Vectorworks was first introduced in the MiniCad days, when there were no sheet layers and viewports. And it was intended, I suppose, to temporarily hide objects while modeling or drawing. I have only used Hide to see the object concealed in plan under another object. Now we can see that object by holding down the B key. And in 3D, we now have ClipCube. Otherwise, classes are the main way of permanently hiding objects. Recently, the newer features of Vw has given rise to more and more classes, so that every type of object needs its own class, just as every rendering material requires a class. So that our class list is a jumble of object and material types. I am glad that the hierarchical layout of classes has brought some sanity to this process. Without grouping prefixes under a heading in the class list to turn off that entire prefix, we might all be clicking away to hide individual classes until tomorrow. Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 17, 2013 Author Share Posted July 17, 2013 So that our class list is a jumble of object and material types. That's why we need intelligent Materials Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 What do you mean by intelligent Materials? Can you provide an example? Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 23, 2013 Author Share Posted July 23, 2013 You create a building material class. You assign this building material class a vector based surface pattern or colour. You assign this building material class a texture. You assign your pen/fill attributes for how you want this material to appear in elevations. You assign your pen/fill attributes for how you want this material to appear in sections. The material class (or software) is intelligent enough to know what attributes to display based on whether it's an elevation or section view. All done automatically. See section 1.3 Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) I need to do some testing, but I believe VW can do this already. After having something of an epiphany, I stumbled across this method. I am testing for rollout in our studios (in Australia and Asia). These classes can relate directly to our finishes schedules. For example, 'Component-Blockwork' being one of a series of materials classes to be applied within intelligent objects (like walls, slabs, stairs etc.). The overall wall object can remain in, for example 'Wall-External', then each wall component can be applied to one of the 'Components-XXX' material class series. To each of the 'Component-XXX' series of classes I have applied the local drafting standard hatches & colours as well as textures. This way they can appear correct in 3D, plan and section. To tweak lineweights, I can override the sheet layer viewports to give the correct thickness. I believe this method; -Is the best way of preventing the crazy amount of classes that tend to be created with objects like walls and the related components. -Works well with an IFC based BIM workflow, and unlocks real BIM benefits across a number of areas. -Works well with the VWArch standard in it's 'fine' and 'coarse' class settings. -Works well with both the architectural/building industry and Vectorworks terminology, meaning easier to understand and use for less experienced CAD operators. -As this means working to class settings, overriding in Viewports is simple. -Works for both BIM modelling and 2D section detailing. Obviously there will never be a perfect solution, but given years of trying to get my head around this, and trying to work out the direction that Nemetsheck VW are heading, I believe this provides considerable benefits. I look forward to hearing your feedback. Edited July 24, 2013 by Diamond Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 (edited) for example I have: Component-Brick (for my walls) Brick-Section Brick-Elevation Three classes. If we had independent building materials with vector based surface patterns, textures, section attributes etc then you would define the attributes of the material once only and VW takes care of how that material is displayed. That's a 30% 66% reduction in classes there. Not to mention less overides. Edited July 25, 2013 by Kizza Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 Yes, I can certainly see the advantages in what you are saying, provided the implementation is intuitive. Thank you Kizza for the great comments provided. Very enlightening as to what is possible. Unfortunately, I need solutions now. What I am suggesting is that you have one class for each material used on the project. Granted this does not show 2D elevation hatches, but it will show the plan, section and Renderworks elements. Also, from what I understand, this would work with a VW > Cinema 4D workflow. For elevations, I tend to use linework classes in Sheet Layer Viewport annotations, vs applying a hatch to a 3D surface. Not sure how 3D surface hatches manifest in an IFC export? Not sure that it would be that important if the object class is based on a material. Managing classes, and having a large team (at differing levels of proficiency), to understand them, is a large challenge. I keep coming back to what is simplest; and what vernacular do architects, interior designers, contractors and clients understand. No matter what solution is implemented, keeping this at the forefront is key. Often programmers beavering away in the cloud are greatly removed from the realities and language of those working on the ground. Once again, thanks for the ideas. Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 25, 2013 Author Share Posted July 25, 2013 For elevations, I tend to use linework classes in Sheet Layer Viewport annotations, vs applying a hatch to a 3D surface. Sure, but this is the thing - it's not the most efficient process is it? Imagine if Nemetschek introduces Live Sections to VW - how would the cut objects graphics be controlled? More section classes? Or intelligent building materials? Quote Link to comment
atari2600 Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 My biggest issue with class organization is the fact that we are unable to illustrate the different "states" of a given object. In our drawings, we typically want to show the proposed walls different from the existing and walls to be removed. Right now that requires three classes (ignoring the components for the moment.) I am waiting for the day that VW can give us the option to describe it's "state" (existing, demo, new, future, phase II, etc...) . When this happens the number of classes we use will be reduced by at least %25. ... assuming we can teach new tricks to old dogs.... Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 "I should have concurred!" Quote Link to comment
Kizza Posted July 26, 2013 Author Share Posted July 26, 2013 I am waiting for the day that VW can give us the option to describe it's "state" (existing, demo, new, future, phase II, etc...) . When this happens the number of classes we use will be reduced by at least %25. That day can't come soon enough. Archicad's Renovation Tool is sweet. Quote Link to comment
Dieter @ DWorks Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 I need to do some testing, but I believe VW can do this already. After having something of an epiphany, I stumbled across this method. I am testing for rollout in our studios (in Australia and Asia). These classes can relate directly to our finishes schedules. For example, 'Component-Blockwork' being one of a series of materials classes to be applied within intelligent objects (like walls, slabs, stairs etc.). The overall wall object can remain in, for example 'Wall-External', then each wall component can be applied to one of the 'Components-XXX' material class series. To each of the 'Component-XXX' series of classes I have applied the local drafting standard hatches & colours as well as textures. This way they can appear correct in 3D, plan and section. To tweak lineweights, I can override the sheet layer viewports to give the correct thickness. I believe this method; -Is the best way of preventing the crazy amount of classes that tend to be created with objects like walls and the related components. -Works well with an IFC based BIM workflow, and unlocks real BIM benefits across a number of areas. -Works well with the VWArch standard in it's 'fine' and 'coarse' class settings. -Works well with both the architectural/building industry and Vectorworks terminology, meaning easier to understand and use for less experienced CAD operators. -As this means working to class settings, overriding in Viewports is simple. -Works for both BIM modelling and 2D section detailing. Obviously there will never be a perfect solution, but given years of trying to get my head around this, and trying to work out the direction that Nemetsheck VW are heading, I believe this provides considerable benefits. I look forward to hearing your feedback. I once tried to have classes as materials, but it failed om different things: - You can't override in great extend, like only the brickwork of your interior walls. - Takeoffs becomes more complicated and impossible in different ways as VW can't differentiate 3D objects representing things like walls - ... So before you roll it our, thing it through as I had made that mistake too. Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Hi DWorks, Thank you for the insight. I haven't looked too much into take offs. Can't a take off be used a wall / floor component in a material class? Or is what you are saying; VW can't differentiate between an object that is an extrude vs a wall and therefore confuses the take off? Quote Link to comment
Dieter @ DWorks Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 Hi DWorks, Thank you for the insight. I haven't looked too much into take offs. Can't a take off be used a wall / floor component in a material class? Or is what you are saying; VW can't differentiate between an object that is an extrude vs a wall and therefore confuses the take off? VW can tell the difference, but what if you can't draw a certain wall with the wall tool? Then you draw it with something else. But then you won't be able to tell VW that it's actually a wall (something Revit can do). So therefore, a system with classes for materials combined with takeoffs isn't good, I've been there and I wished it could be done, but not. And the things we draw here, we have all sorts of things drawn not the way it is meant to be case VW can't do it yet. Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted July 31, 2013 Share Posted July 31, 2013 I am proposing you use a different class for each specific material, as opposed to a generic material. For example, if you have painted ply, vs unfinished ply in the framing, I would split these up into separate classes. If it would need a separate texture, I would give it a separate class. That way, if I had to do take offs, I could apply it to walls, extrusions, solids etc. to get a cubic volume take off. Although, as I think you we're alluding to, this would not give you a lineal takeoff. But with some clever spreadsheet work this could be calculated. Quote Link to comment
Dieter @ DWorks Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 And what with class overrides? Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 As I am going to be using these "Component-" classes for 2D detailing, I can think of a number of places I might want to override lineweights, hatches, fills etc. Especially if I am applying detailing line work into SLVP annotations layers. Also I may want to overide lineweights and colours, as well as textures for renders. Quote Link to comment
Dieter @ DWorks Posted August 3, 2013 Share Posted August 3, 2013 As I am going to be using these "Component-" classes for 2D detailing, I can think of a number of places I might want to override lineweights, hatches, fills etc. Especially if I am applying detailing line work into SLVP annotations layers. Also I may want to overide lineweights and colours, as well as textures for renders. What I meant is what if you want to override material X in walls to a yellow fill and in columns to a red fill and in .... I know this is maybe going to far, but in my practice, I have to create a lot of presentation/commercial plans and then I need to have such control over the drawings, so I can easily create then like the customer wants them, and then I have to override 'materials' to different attributes depending on where it is used. Quote Link to comment
Diamond Posted August 5, 2013 Share Posted August 5, 2013 As an aside, earlier in the thread an intelligent Materials resource was mentioned. That wouldn't solve what you are suggesting here. I guess my answer to that is have more material/finish "Component-" classes. No different to running this alongside a Materials/Finishes Schedule. In fact, it could be the schedule was run within VW. Hmmm... 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.