Elevations

[Kevin]

Travis;

Your method is interesting. However I find that a rendered elevation is too dark for working drawings.

For example: A shingle roof will render quite dark as opposed to a hatch which is black lines on white paper.

How do you address this?

[Travis]

Two points:

1) On the "composite" 3D mod layer (where all the mod layers are linked together), we place 4 lights representing the sun from different quadrants. Each is assigned to a different class (Light-L-Frnt, Light-L-Rear, etc.). From the Elevation Viewport that references the composite layer, the class for the light that provides the best shadowing is turned on.

2) Layer ambient lighting is adjusted on the composite layer to lighten/darken the overall effect.

We generally produce full-color drawing sets for the client and let the copy-machine generate the b/w version. A little experimentation with textures/"suns"/ambient lighting will produce useable results for both end "products".

Please note, these methods have largely come by combining suggestions from others here on this board. If my memory was good enough, I'd give appropriate credit (I'm pretty sure the idea to place one Viewport behind the other came from Robert @ NNA). I'm a much better plagiarist than original creator. Just trying to get the ideas in my head accurately communicated to the guy buying them and the other guy building them. . . like everybody else!

Good luck,

[ 02-21-2005, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Travis ]

[Kevin]

Thanks Travis. I will give it a try.

[Jonathan Pickup]

the method travis suggested is a good one, we used to use a similar technique with render bitmap before we had viewports. I find that this method works for me really well up to concept stage (or developed design).

But for working drawings I create static elevations of my building using the 3D model to create them. (front View, select all, convert copy to lines). them I line them all up on a design layer with the sections and work on them as 2D drawings...

If you have a copy of my manual look in the completed exercises folder, there is a file called Setting Up Projects.mcd. this will show you a typical setting up of a project.

[Mat Caird]

To add to what Travis has said.

I have found that the 1 viewport on top of another method takes too long to render, so instead I just add the odd extra line on the viewport annotation, eg downpipes, spouting, and a big black ground line. Then dimensions, notes, titles etc.

Printed in color for the client, who loves it, and photocopied in black and white for the builder.

It initially seemed like a lot of extra work compared to the "convert copy to lines" method, but now that I have done it once I see it is vastly quicker if there are any changes, eg moving a window trying different roof pitches, etc.

[Jonathan Pickup]

that's why I use the render method for concept drawings, but not working drawings...

[Ken]

So how do you eliminate the line between floors? Or do you?

[Kevin]

Archken: You can draw a white line, (or whatever color will make it dissappear), over the offending line.

[Travis]

Kevin's idea works if you can match the rendered color behind closely enough.

I combine the two (or more) walls into one, which gets classed as a Wall-FullHt-xx wall and only turned on from the appropriate viewport. At least for me, I can do that faster than I can draw all the stuff I seem to want in the elevation. The convert copy to lines option doesn't create shapes that can take fills, I have to draw them "again". Since I've already taken the time to make sure everything is textured (we've got many textures that are jpgs of hatches drawn in VW) the way I want it, all I need is to get rid of the floor lines, as you point out.

To combine walls efficiently. . .well maybe that's another discussion.

Hope that helps,

[ 02-21-2005, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Travis ]

[michael john williams]

After some VW training I have come back afresh, but can viewport elevations be ever as good as sepeatly drawn elevations? My trainer said they can't and so everyone he knows does not use viewport elevations. Which is a great shmae because I got VW because of its ? D capabilities. Do you agree?

[Travis]

MW,

Depends a great deal on how much information you're trying to convey with your elevations.

We draw very little, if any, in our elevation Viewports. We place one Viewport set to render behind another Viewport set to Hidden Line. You might want to play with the line weight setting on the "front" Viewport, and you'll probably end up "cleaning up" some lines (hiding stray ones behind white-filled/no-line blocks and completing a few others to their logical end point). This approach relies on having an appropriate collection of textures that you apply to the model for various exterior finishes and elements. (A collection that's taken us a few years to develop.)

Elevation markers and a few reference notes, together with appropriate labels makes up our elevations. To further this point, we use Classes to turn off and on the necessary walls and roof components so our Sections also require virtually no additional work in the Viewport. If dimensions just happened to be (someday?) truly associative, our Elevations and Sections would be as close to "live" as I can imagine wanting them.

I can't tell you how much power Viewports has brought to the table for us. Our goal is to spend no more time preparing construction drawings than it took to get the model developed and approved. With the help of Viewports, we're very close to this goal on a regular basis.

Good luck,

[Ken]

I'm also curious how you take care of lineweight ? for example, walls. Assuming that you use a contrastingly heavy line for walls on your floor plan, the composite elevations would show them equally heavy. The "advanced viewport properties" seem to give it a nice preview change, but the design layer's settings return after an update. It also seems global to the entire viewport, not specific as to allow each design layer element its own lineweight change. Perhaps I'm missing something.

Then again, it's a tough choice between creating nice lineweights on floor plans and nice lineweights on elevations. I tend to ultimately favor the floor plan, so simple elevation wall openings, for example, end up having the same heavy lines as the walls in a viewport or LL model for hidden line render.

Too bad the 3D part of simple wall symbols can't hold their own lineweights in a layer-linked composite model. Ideally, even for plug-in objects, I think the actual opening should be a controllably heavier line and every other part of it lighter.

As for presenting elevation drawings, either design or construction drawings, I like to add a heavy outline to the building facade to "pop it out," especially if there are objects in the distant background. It's an artistic carryover from hand sketching, but makes the drawings read so much better. I don't suppose an orthogonal view can have some sort of automatic "increasing line weight" for objects closer to the viewer (wish item). So it's still a bit of manual drafting.

I'll be curious how others handle this.

[michael john williams]

Thanks for all your advice and different options. Sounds so easy until you try it! Maybe I need architect and / or render works?