Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PVA - Jim

Vectorworks 2016

Recommended Posts

You can expect us to do both, improving the rendering inside Vectorworks and also improving the connection with C4D.

Thanks for the details about your preferred workflow, it is helpful when we are setting priorities for development.

Edited by Dave Donley

Share this post


Link to post
There are a lot of ways that we could go about it. Personally I'm in the "Integrate Renderworks into all Vectorworks software by default at no extra charge, and then dramatically improve export/send to C4D capability for advanced work." camp.

Ideally I would just like to see more of C4D's controls exposed directly in Vectorworks, but there are apparently a large number of licensing and legal issues completely separate from the complexity of integrating it from an engineering standpoint alone.

This is 100% exactly my feeling and wish for future development.

I also wish that C4D could be more fully integrated with Renderworks. Working with Renderworks Textures often makes me feel that the range of controls and shader options are a vestige from the old LightWorks engine and are limiting us from using all of CineRender's shader capabilities.

[Example - Try to make a realistic-looking white sanitary porcelain or SSTL appliance texture in Renderworks. The Brushed shader in Renderworks renders slowly and offers none of the controls possible in C4D].

It appears that ArchiCAD 18 completely integrated all of CineRender, including the ability to directly read Cinema4D shader files. That's the direction that I wish future Renderworks development would go. ArchiCAD 18 - Working with Shaders

Maybe the licensing and legal issues could be smoothed over by just renaming it 'Renderworks powered by CineRender', or maybe just simply 'Vectorworks CineRender'. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

I think we agree that VW should have the ability to decent Renderings

for Architecture, Landscape, and Spotlight,

but in an simple, easy and intuitive way.

And that there is a working and reliable Exchange to common Rendering

Packages for those who need more.

Yes, I paid and do so still for RW, which I don't wanted but needed for exchange.

But started loving to do some basic visualization stuff in VW again like I did

in other CAD Apps before.

If that RW functionality is needed anyway for 80% of VW users, I don't care if

I pay extra for RW or more for a complete VW package.

Just seeing that all others have similar solutions included, some even more

(Allplan), I would see RW better included for free though.

Share this post


Link to post

And I see a lot of improvement to make RW better accessible in VW for the

majority of users. The introduction of most of latest effect features I see

not very productive in that direction.

For example is it really needed to assign 6 types of Materials per Class.

Wouldn't that be better restricted to Wall/Roof Styles like it is for

Slabs, Windows and Doors ?

I mean I do all 6 tedious options each time anyway. First I can better recognize

in Class Organisation that there are already Materials assigned to that Class,

YYYYYY against NNNNNY, second I fear there could be a Roof or Wall one time

in my Class.

Those things we edit in VW/RW are called Materials everywhere else,

not Render Textures. A Material may contain one or more Texture Images,

beside it contains a lot of Material Settings.

Materials or Textures must never be edited or renamed by an App.

That naming is holy user content. I spend years to collect and name my Textures

in my Texture library, that I can recognize these and find them again.

Even in VW, when I want to re use my Texture "Concrete_Fine_Bright_Diffuse.jpg"

again, I don't want to have to search now for a "Class Wall_Interior Diffuse"

And want I use these Textures in a common Project Texture Folder from all my Apps,

under the same name. And if I edit one of these Textures in PS I want to have

that resembled in all Materials of all Apps that use that Texture Image.

If VW insists on saving these in the file, ok, I will have to refresh or exchange the

images manually, not a big deal, but don't rename these.

And when I want to assign one Material to several Objects and Classes,

that means that I want to assign that single same Material to all of these.

So that I can edit it later, like a Symbol, and all assigned Objects change.

So there mustn't be made copies for each Class when Exporting the VW Data in

any way. How should I be able to find, control and edit my Materials in C4D

again if my Material "Concrete_Fine" with Texture "Concrete_Fine_Bright_Diffuse.jpg"

Will appear with 5 copies called "Class Wall_Interior", "Class Column", "Class Wall_Exterior" ...

with each having their own renamed Image Texture.

Find these again between other over 60 Materialcopies, that were once 20 easy controllable Materials in VW.

Share this post


Link to post

Artlantis has plugins for almost all the CAD platforms and the nice thing is you can constantly update the model all the previous work done remains intact, very nice because you can continue adjusting the model in the CAD program and simply push the changes to the Artlantis model each time you're ready.

Edited by Vincent C

Share this post


Link to post

Vincent, what you described worked for VW and C4D too.

Until C4D R11, when Maxon was in charge of the Exchange Plugin.

I tried it that time, so when I bought VW 2014 I had no idea that it

could be different today.

Don't quite understand why VW does by themselves now and why

it now works different.

Share this post


Link to post

Well... if Renderworks would be part of the package so that we would not get charged for it... it still needs development which costs money. Guess what will happen, the price of Vectorworks with Renderworks as non-paid part of the package will probably increase with what we are paying now for Renderworks.

I think you missed my point. My point was to stop developing renderworks and leave all rendering decisions to c4d. Vectorworks would be fine with the current state of the rendering package for users that don't want to move to c4d. Therefore if there's no development then there's no need to increase the price.

It would be better if the C4D connector plugin would be a paid option for those who do not want Renderworks because they are using C4D almost exclusively for renderings. Then the rest of us can still have the option of buying Renderworks if they don't want to use C4D or not buy it at all if they don't need 3D rendering.

The day i have to pay extra for a connection to c4d will be the day i have to suck it up and learn 3DS Max. The reason I'm still sticking with vw is because of c4d and certainly not for any so called ifc features (Revit will be used for any BIM projects). In any case I'm already paying for the c4d connection by buying renderworks

Share this post


Link to post

I also agree with zoomer's comments and bug highlights. This is the 5th iteration of the send to cinema feature and there hasn't been any development on it? How can someone remove a perfectly working plug-in like the old c4d export command and replace it with something that doesn't work. It makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
I also agree with zoomer's comments and bug highlights. This is the 5th iteration of the send to cinema feature and there hasn't been any development on it? How can someone remove a perfectly working plug-in like the old c4d export command and replace it with something that doesn't work. It makes no sense.

A lot of the reasoning behind this was legal/corporate and not engineering related. We license the rendering engine from MAXON as a customer basically. That isn't to excuse it, it needs fixing, just to explain why it seems nonsensical from the outside.

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmh,

I could understand that Maxon may not be interested very much in other

Software making their licensed Render Engine working so good that

no one needs to buy their complete package.

But concerning the Exchange plugin, I think they will/should do all to support

that it's working properly. As they will only sell any potential additional

Software Licenses if that works.

If there are so much legal hurdles, if the relationship is not so close between the

independent Nemetschek family members, as often statet,

maybe there are also other options that may be a little more open and relaxed

in licensing and support.

My larger Project still running, which started with my classic workflow but I

integrated VW 2015 very early, things were not running so smoothly as you

would expect when reading the features and the paper.

Looking back, I see some potential for improvements by using VW more

"the VW way", but I saw many things limiting me, or just things not being

elegant enough that I like to work with.

Currently, with a new Project approaching, I'm really fighting hard to find

any way to integrate VW again. I hoped for VW 2016 but that doesn't seem

to make it any easier.

But I decided to buy VW some time ago and It would be a defeat for me if

at the end the decision should be to pull out my old Windows CAD License,

which I would run on a virtual machine in Parallels on OS X, or just doing all

in my other loved 3D package.

Being limited in CAD Tools but flexible in design changes and everything

running smooth in a cute environment is really invitingly.

It really depends on what the next SP will change.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

We have started using project sharing on one project in the office.

But have had some problems. Two times the main file vwxp have disappeared.

And it would seem to be an issue if two vwxw files are saved at the same time.

We could retrieve a backup but its a hassle to relink everything.

Any new layers and sheets that was made in the workingfile after the backup was made can not be sent back to the retrieved projectfile....

Is this a bug?

Anybody with the same issue?

Ida

Share this post


Link to post
Hi,

We have started using project sharing on one project in the office.

But have had some problems. Two times the main file vwxp have disappeared.

And it would seem to be an issue if two vwxw files are saved at the same time.

We could retrieve a backup but its a hassle to relink everything.

Any new layers and sheets that was made in the workingfile after the backup was made can not be sent back to the retrieved projectfile....

Is this a bug?

Anybody with the same issue?

Ida

I have not seen any reports of this so far, I will check with some of the other Techs to see if anyone has experienced this.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Jim,

A similar issue has happened again.

Not the project file disappearing but the working file crashing.

I had a working file where I had added several new sheets for layout.

(I did a stupid thing with copying and changing a linked hatch, did not realise it was a link.) Then when I commited the file crashed and I lost what I had done, (I guess because of the issue with the hatch). I had a backup, but the problem with the backup file is that if I give it the same name as the old working file, xxxx_ida.vwxw and try to save and commit, it does not allow me. I get the picture attached. If its not possible to do this the backup, it becomes useless, because you cant use it. And because the change is 10 sheets or so i cant copy. If it had been changes done to layers copy paste would work. Is there a better way to do this or a way to override.

Ida

Share this post


Link to post
(..)find any way to integrate VW again.

i wouldn't do it. it's stacking up old (possible) misbehaviours. i'd model it a-new instead...

rob

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×