scottmoore Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 I am going to stick with 2019 for a service pack or two. I am curious as to user’s opinion on the functionality of the Schematic workflow. Ive been quite happy with the Design Layer Viewport process with the exception of the fact that it does slow down the processor for redraws. Otherwise, it’s a pretty great workflow. There is a LOT more you can do with that besides simply angling a truss or pipe structure. That said, if the Schematic process is great, I am looking forward to it. Quote Link to comment
Sebastiaan Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 I am principally against the use of DLVP’s for raked trusses. I like the workflow of displaying views of the 3D model with 3D labels and or data tags. I was looking forward to using schematic views as one way to display raked trussing. However at it’s introdiucion it does not function as it should. Seems as if it is designed to only work properly with one piece of truss. And it does not work with hanging positions. Which is cracy cause vwx had lured us into working with hanging positions especially since Braceworks. Quote Link to comment
scottmoore Posted September 13, 2019 Author Share Posted September 13, 2019 I am a little bummed about the schematic view. Oh well, I am sure it will improve. As to DLVPs, I get that a lot of people find that clunky and just a workaround, however, there are a lot of wonderful uses for that workflow, far beyond raking trusses. It’s extremely quick if you set up your template drawings correctly. One of these days I’ll make a video..... 1 Quote Link to comment
Steven Morgan Posted September 13, 2019 Share Posted September 13, 2019 I think it's got potential. But once they are generate you can rotate them around much faster than DLVP's just because it's only 2D information. My biggest problem with it is the time it takes to generate...To generate (30' truss w/ 12x fixtures = 2-4 minutes) however that may just be my machine. But it's driving me nuts. Quote Link to comment
scottmoore Posted September 13, 2019 Author Share Posted September 13, 2019 DLVPs are certainly processor hogs so that is not ideal. Having a faster process is intriguing. Can you produce multiple iterations of the same production elements from a single instance of geometry? To me that is a huge selling point of DLVPs. If one needs to see an automated structure at various trims and/or multiple angles, it is as simple as duplicating a viewport and assigning it to an appropriate class. Same thing holds true for anything that moves on stage. 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.