VincentCuclair Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) ... but still best to model accurately, yeah? ...... Well how accurate is accurate? We have all read that VWs has a limited thinest line thickness, so what is the nearest 2 edges can be etc. there is always a bottom limit. Frankly who cares and at what size do they start caring? I don't care about a few mm if 4 walls aren't joined properly (even a few cms off is ok) when creating a space rounded to the nearest sq m. as long as I don't get the error message slowing me down. Perhaps the error message should include the option for degree of accuracy? Edited February 20, 2014 by Vincent C Quote Link to comment
VincentCuclair Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I'm not sure if just adding some sort of visual feedback of what Fit Walls was fitting to would help, but its a problem in a number of different ways. That would certainly be helpful, also in many other situations too.... Quote Link to comment
bc Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 "Well how accurate is accurate?" As accurate as the program indicates with it's cues, I suppose. Quote Link to comment
JoshW Posted February 21, 2014 Author Share Posted February 21, 2014 Some form of feedback would have definitely been helpful. I see your point about the gap at the ridges, but when they were created, they were "put together" using VWs snaps. I can't be more accurate than the program will allow. And the second time I created the geometry, I followed the same steps as before, which should have yielded the same result, but was somehow more accurate. Quote Link to comment
bc Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 JoshW, No offense meant. As noted, I have on occasion inadvertently moved an object by tiny amounts and not noticed until later. Whatever the case, the way your roof planes were juxtaposed, FWTO should have worked in my opinion and it's good JimW is submitting. Quote Link to comment
JoshW Posted February 24, 2014 Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 Oh, no offense taken at all. They very well could have moved slightly, but FWTO should still have worked. The entire vectorworks workflow for complex roof shapes is cumbersome and fluky in my opinion. 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.