Richard Godin Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 Hello All I am a user of Vectorworks Spotlight for many years. I have recently invested in vision. Why of why is there not a standard set of 3D figures that are not legacy that can be used to pre vis a band setup. Why is there not a basic set of guitars amps and bass amps and keyboards etc. There are a few bit and bobs but nothing acceptable. Currently being laughed at by WYSIWYG and Capture users as these are basic necessities of a 3D entertainment drawing package and visualiser. Please sort this as its a bit problem. Richard 2 Quote Link to comment
Andy Broomell Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 I would use this all the time. 2 Quote Link to comment
EAlexander Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) I feel your pain - though I must admit I do all my band setups in Cinema 4D. That said - I believe @jimw has stated in the past that a thread in General Discussion does almost nothing to sway the developers and that a WISHLIST item is much more effective. I can think of a lot of us around here that would upvote that. So maybe start a tread there? Edited August 2, 2018 by EAlexander 3 Quote Link to comment
Kevin McAllister Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 There's lot of resources like that online for C4D (here's an example). VW certainly could use more and I suspect many things are on the to-do list already. The content creators have more work than manpower I think. Ironically much of it is likely already been built by many users for their own libraries. Kevin Quote Link to comment
mjm Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 5 hours ago, Andy Broomell said: I would use this all the time. Ditto. Although I am still heavily invested in the legacy figures. Quote Link to comment
Kevin McAllister Posted August 1, 2018 Share Posted August 1, 2018 58 minutes ago, Rob Books said: We have many of the Instruments already in the libraries - the hard part has been human figures playing said instruments. Ah, that makes sense. I gave up on the legacy figures in 2009. I opt for stylized figures even if I'm doing realistic renderings. I have a whole collections of translucent NURBS figures I use. I'd rather reserve the geometry for the objects I'm designing and not slow down the model. KM 1 Quote Link to comment
mjm Posted August 1, 2018 Share Posted August 1, 2018 1 hour ago, Kevin McAllister said: Ah, that makes sense. I gave up on the legacy figures in 2009. I opt for stylized figures even if I'm doing realistic renderings. I have a whole collections of translucent NURBS figures I use. I'd rather reserve the geometry for the objects I'm designing and not slow down the model. KM Looks good Kevin 1 Quote Link to comment
scottmoore Posted August 4, 2018 Share Posted August 4, 2018 I do more or less the same thing. I use realistic instruments but non-descript silhouettes for people. It’s not necessarily ideal, but I also find that it is better to either use a silhouette or an image prop of the actual person than using a non-descript model. I tried figures years ago and the first comment I would get from clients was some joke about how different the model looked from the actual person. I’ve also messed around with mannequins. This is nice because you can see the effects of back light, side light, etc. but it does slow down the render process and often the gains are just not worth it. 1 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.