Jump to content
  • 0

Dynamic reshaping



10 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
it is actually something like 200+ requests, for every type of object and combination of scenario that has to be accounted for.

I think this is not the right way to work on (3D) Modelling.

There is Geometry/Data, and on the other hand there are Selection,

Snapping/Cursor Navigation and Manipulation Tools.

Beside some complex parametrical Architecture Objects, as long as they are,

there are mostly "simple" Objects.

Containers that include some more or less complicated Geometry.

There is no difference between 2D and 3D, even when working strictly

in 2D. There is no real 2D.

It is just that Z value of each corner is 0.00, viewed from that special Layer.

And there are other ways to lock these to give that needed "2D" behavior

and to stay planar for plan drwawings.

A planar object can be oriented rotated in any direction in Space, it depends

on your workspace and point of view.

A planar Object has just a height of 0.00. Therefor a Volume of 0.00 but its

Surface is > 0.00.

If the Object is not planar, it still has no thickness, so no volume, so is

just a surface or mesh in Space.

Simple 3D Volumes may have a planar surface with a Z height like an

extrude. The Volume is limited by more or less complex surfaces between

corners or edges like a mesh though.

For my understanding, "Objects" ar all the same.

Editable parametrically or vertex by vertex.

There is no reason for the user that there is a 2D and a (planar) 3D Polygon

tool that work different to create and limitations to manipulate later.

It is just a (2D lock) setting for the snapping and/or workplane which

for creation or manipulation of all kind of objects.

So for me there is no reason why I should not use the Push Pull Tool

to Pull the End of a Line. Or just Pull out the edge of a Rectangle.

It is just the Manipulation Tool that adapts to the Kind of Geometry

I want to manipulate.

Is it a line, it pulls the vertex of that 2 point Polygon.

If it is a planar object, let me pull a corner or edge of that Polygon.

If it is a mesh, let me pull out that single face, or select more than one

to pull according to the choosen edge settings.

If that is a volume, pull the selected faces, edges or vertexes.

Or the Extrude Tool :

If I have a point (1 point Polygon), extruded it will get a line.

a line will get a rectangle,

an open Polygon will get a surface,

a text or closed Polygon will get an extruded volume, (still editable or not),

and a Volume or solid should better refuse to extrude again, ....

I don't care how that is done internally.

Of course it may be useful to group and separate typical 2D and 3D creation

tools in the user interface. It may even make sense to offer limited version

of a manipulation tool to 2D functions only, for working strictly 2D only

and be sure everything stays flat.

But for me it is just the same Toolset.

Just as I can use the Move/ Rotate, (Scale) Tool for 2D and 3D objects.

It is just that I need more capable snapping and workplane options to navigate

to the next creation/manipulation cursor position, from the start snapping point,

when I want to work in real 3D Space.

Selection Tool does first select the objects containers wished to work with.

The manipulation Tool gives the option for a sub selection of parts of the object,

if needed.

If a special manipulation operation needs the object to be converted to a lower kind

of object, fine, just a (deactivate-able) hint.

(Currently there is a big warning each time, converting a solid to a generic solid.

The warning says the generic solid can't be manipulated any more, which is not true.

But using the Push Pull on a solid converts to generic solid on the fly without a hint)

I am used to work with software that works that way since more than a decade.

On my former CAD system (last updated 2007 ?),

there is no difference between 2D and 3D Objects and Tools.

As it also uses the same Parasolid Modeling Core, I thought that would be state

of the Art in VW too.

F.e. I'm used to Push Pull the diameter of a Cylinder, not only top and bottom surface,

even when dumped down to a generic solid.

Also for that magic "fence" tool that manipulates all objects inside (outside or overlap)

of the marquee, I was never interested if that simply means that the software internally

has to do each step one after the other for each object.

Maybe I misunderstood things a bit here.

But I think the intelligence of a manipulation tool belongs into the manipulation tool,

not in the object. So that potential new features, like f.e. a soft selection,

will work for any objects.

An object container in my view is just a [container : .....] that has its position and orientation

in world space, maybe a own internal workspace, and contains data of any kind of objects.

Like Type, any kind of Geometrical Definition, and any kind of meta data like,

depth hierarchy in plan view, IFC, Color or texture definition, Layer and Class, Spot Angles etc.

So if I select 5 copies of a Cube, I expect to see their same f.e. Z height in OIP and being

able to edit them at once.

If I select different objects like an extruded Text, an Extrude, a Cube and a Cylinder,

which all have a Z heights in their Objects containers, even when each different,

I expect to input a value in Z, and all will change to that Z height.

And if there is an additional "2D" rectangle selected, we can argue if a current Z=0.00

may better stays locked at 0.00, or if it makes more sense to give that planar geometry

a Z height extrude, or "3D" conversion during that edit operation.


Happy New Year to everybody !

Edited by zoomer
Link to comment
  • 0

I understand that of course. But will keep my thinking simple.

I experienced manny funny things with Software where f.e. solved bugs

I submitted came back again in new releases. Strange.

Very complex things, Software Development.

And the next 10 years will come faster as I would like.

That wont make it easier if more features are coming.

And VW isn't very poor in features as it is now.

When working with VW, for me it feels always like,

there is a strong foundation of 2D thinking in the way many tools work,

and where the origin and main strength of VW are,

in plans and illustration. I don't want to miss that.

But the current work, as I often have to do,

manipulating existing 3D geometry for contradicting purposes,

using the model for rendering software AND doing all kinds of VW 3D

illustrations and 3D PDFs.

I can't and won't use VW again for that kind of work as it is now.

with the current limitations in editing multiple items, solid conversion,

manipulation selection and 3D navigation.

Would be different if started from scratch in VW would had been an option,

but not perfect.

The problem for me was that all the difficulties are woven together.

If you have f.e. about 5 types of columns per story, each different in size

per story, using Symbols will not be as useful as it seems.

Meshes are great to manipulate and export fine to my rendering software.

But Meshes don't look fine in 3D PDFs and in VWs clip cube.

So you need Solids, but extrudes etc. don't export well to rendering software.

So they have to be converted generic solids, which export as simple unwelded faces,

but at least they have the right face orientation and objects can be easily welded,

only WHEN you model the way that their corners on one class/layer never touch.

As you can't edit more than one object, you have to do each one by one.

You have only one view window, so you have to rotate it all the time.

You often can't select the faces for push pull as they are hidden by elements

so you have to move things additionally around.

You have workplane by layer and move everything in position afterwards or

you have auto plane that will seldom give you the orientation of the face under

the cursor but mostly the largest face available in wireframe view.

It really meant clicking 3 times as much as I was used to.

I think that is pity.

Maybe I'm with my work not the real target group VW addresses.

But I have told a lot of my wishes and ideas anyway.

But I still refuse to call these feature requests.

Just improvements, fine tuning and cleaning up of existing features.

And as I never expected the successful jump to 64 bit and cocoa rewrite,

I'm still very exited what will be possible in VW and which direction it goes.

Link to comment
  • 0
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee

It's an odd time in our development. It really feels like the transition between a relatively small sub-100 person company to a much larger one. Business is actually going extremely well, they are hiring as much as possible, many new faces here and more appearing all the time.

This will mean faster development most like, but there is a lot of housekeeping, both in how the company is run and how our software is designed that needs to be tended to in order for us to get bigger. Doing my best to alert management to the technical ramifications of this mainly, but rest assured there is a lot more coming in the way of raw 3D modeling.

Link to comment
  • 0

Sounds good.

Looking forward to it.

And yes, the fact that I can't give any specifics drives me crazy as well.

Something for the beta testers or the next forums select user only


tell-anybody-or-we-have-to-kill-you sub forum.

Isn't always much fun, to know about coming features that you may

desperately need, knowing you can't access these for months, anyway.

Two weeks before the release as it was for 2015 is an acceptable

time frame.

I'm (trying to be) patient.

Edited by zoomer
Link to comment

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.

Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...