What is the deal with the 'Screen Aligned' mode?

[Kaare Baekgaard]

From time immemorial, I have started drawing all new geometry using the 'Screen Plane' mode.

 

And it is a continuous source of frustration when the program automatically jumps into the 'Screen Aligned' mode, where nothing works reliably, as far as I can tell.

 

Now, apparently, I have become a legacy. My way of drawing outdated.

 

Do anyone actually feel comfortable creating geometry in the 'Screen Aligned' mode – and should I make an effort to change my ways?

 

Or is the 'Screen Aligned' mode in fact an abortion, as I suspect? 

 

 

[zoomer]

All geometry screen plane !?

 

Are you working 2D only and Top Plan mode in YX plane (= Layer Plane) only ?

 

 

Screen aligned Plane allowed you to draw 2D objects in e.g. a Front or Side View.

(But AFAIK there was no control of the depth or 3rd dimension, at least for 3D objects)

Now in VW 2022 where screen plane is deprecated (and hidden by default) there

are 2 new Plane Icons in the Top Bar. The right one in pink, when activated works

like screen plane did in the past for drawing.

Although the result is that objects will be defined as using a 3D plane.

 

That is how I understood.

Maybe someone knows better.

[C. Andrew Dunning]

3 uses (that I use regularly) come to-mind:

1. Creating crops of 3D views to be used in Sheet Layer ViewPorts.
2. Creating geometry to be used for extrusions that I may not want perpendicular to the Ground Plane.
3. Adding notes/labels/call-outs (that I want on the Screen Plane) on 3D views while working in the Design Layer space.

[Andy Broomell]

"Screen Aligned" is literally just the Working Plane when in orthographic views. I wish they'd rename it Working Plane to get rid of the confusing "Screen Aligned" nomenclature.

[zoomer]

16 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

"Screen Aligned" is literally just the Working Plane when in orthographic views. I wish they'd rename it Working Plane to get rid of the confusing "Screen Aligned" nomenclature.

 

Wasn't there a little difference between different planes for when you can accidentally

drift in the 3rd Dimension, or not ?

Top Plane View + Layer Plane was AFAIK locked safely to just draw on that plane only

without any Z shift danger.

 

Screen aligned plane, in a Side View, AFAIK, would still allow that a 3rd Dimension drift

when snapping with the 2D line tool - without using "T" lock.

Like jumping in Y when you work in XZ of a Front View.

 

I think this was not possible in Screen Plane (?) and I hope (or expect) that to happen

with the new temporary pink Plane Icon (?)

 

BTW,

this is why I asked @Kaare Baekgaard how he is working, drawing or modeling.

Edited February 1, 2022 by zoomer

[Andy Broomell]

3 minutes ago, zoomer said:

Screen aligned plane, in a Side View, AFAIK, would still allow that a 3rd Dimension drift

when snapping with the 2D line tool - without using "T" lock.

Like jumping in Y when you work in XZ of a Front View.

 

They made adjustments to this in 2022 to address some of these long-standing issues with orthographic views. It's mostly better now, with occasional hiccups.

[zoomer]

3 hours ago, C. Andrew Dunning said:

3 uses (that I use regularly) come to-mind:

1. Creating crops of 3D views to be used in Sheet Layer ViewPorts.
2. Creating geometry to be used for extrusions that I may not want perpendicular to the Ground Plane.
3. Adding notes/labels/call-outs (that I want on the Screen Plane) on 3D views while working in the Design Layer space.

 

 

Fair enough.

 

But I do not accept problem 1. and 2.

In this case you just want to draw a Crop or 2D Plane on a Screen Aligned Plane.

Usually even only in XZ or YZ plane. This is a one time action and the resulting part

can be easily defined on a 3D Plane, maybe with rotational information if needed.

 

3. is the only (rare) case I can imagine where Screen Plane is really wanted.

As it is the only requirement where the the objects will be defined to ALWAYS

align with Monitor/Screen Plane, no matter how the rest of geometry is oriented

in 3D.

Edited February 1, 2022 by zoomer

[zoomer]

9 minutes ago, Andy Broomell said:

 

They made adjustments to this in 2022 to address some of these long-standing issues with orthographic views. It's mostly better now, with occasional hiccups.

 

 

Honestly I had not really tested. Just tried the Pink Plane a single time.

And it seemed to work at that time.

 

But I think what most typical VW users would like - Top Plan View

Look AND Behavior - not only in Top but also all Side Views.

No more need to wait to calculate Sections 🙂

[zoomer]

6 hours ago, Kaare Baekgaard said:

Now, apparently, I have become a legacy. My way of drawing outdated.

 

 

I am not sure.

But any of your previous Files, which contain "2D legacy" definitions, when opened

in VW 20222 - will activate 2D legacy setting and Screen Plane as well as Unified View

Setting OFF will be available.

For any new VW 2022 File or Templates, you can switch into 2D legacy mode in

Document Settings.

[P Retondo]

The whole “everything 3d” idea tosses aside centuries of experience working with 2d representation of 3d objects.  As someone who was trained in this architectural tradition, where designing “in section” meant relating plan representation simultaneously with section, I find a lot to be desired in continuing to work this way.

 

Sure, with Sketchup and Rhino it is now possible to manipulate 3d blobs ad infinitum.  What we lose is precision, and, as importantly, the link between design process and construction process.  Even CNC, when you get down to the nuts and bolts of motor control and G code, is a 2d process.  Fever dreams of freeform fabrication notwithstanding.

[Andy Broomell]

10 minutes ago, P Retondo said:

The whole “everything 3d” idea tosses aside centuries of experience working with 2d representation of 3d objects.

 

Hybrid Symbols and 2D components have not gone away.

 

 

[zoomer]

56 minutes ago, P Retondo said:

The whole “everything 3d” idea tosses aside centuries of experience working with 2d representation of 3d objects.

 

 

Does that mean "working with 2d representation of 3d objects" - without the use of 3D Objects ?

(= 2D only, no 2D generated from 3D)

 

No problem with this from my side,

VW is one of the best CAD solution to work in 2D and create beautiful 2D plans.

(Just me personally and my work prefer 3D (only))

 

My point is just :

1.

that VW does not always allow to "stay" reliably in 2D - beside in only top plan view,

to make it as as easy as it could be, to draw 2D.

2.

That drawing 2D only, in reality, would not need a "Screen Plane" at all. It is just XY plane

 

Screen Plane is mainly a base for 3D drawing (!)

It was invented (as kind of a workaround) to grow VW from 2D to 3D and drawing 3D in

3D coordinates and rotations, in lack of other usual tools, needing to orient the View

Window before drawing 2D Objects in 3D Space, to extrude them to finally get a

3D Element oriented in 3D space.

 

Meanwhile, even VW, like many other CADs is mainly 2.5D oriented, like most other CADs

still and Architecture mostly in general, now offers reasonably Tools to work in 3D.

(Automatic Plane, SHIFT Lock (at least for Walls), T Lock (As long as you find a free space

in your drawing to lock an axis), Rotate Tool if you use dumy geometry to align it in space, ....)

 

 

 

But If I got all wrong and it is about drawing 2D AND 3D,

it may get a bit more extensive ....

But I still doubt it needs a "Screen Plane" and would like to offer alternative functionality

for specific tasks.

 

 

Edited February 1, 2022 by zoomer

[P Retondo]

Zoomer, you are a great resource on VW!  But I think the history of 2d/3d in VW is slightly different from what you are saying.  There was a guy named Richard Diehl.  Some people at Nemetschek North America may know his name, but apparently few respect his legacy.

 

Richard Diehl invented MiniCAD, later renamed VW.  His genius idea was hybrid 2d/3d objects, at the heart of the software from the very beginning.  For example, a wall contained both a 2d object (now called a screen plane object) and a 3d wall.  The 2d object presented in Top/Plan view like a normal architectural plan drawing, and the 3d object presented in all other views.

 

At some point after Mr. Diehl sold the company, a new generation of engineers decided it was too much trouble to maintain true 2d objects, so they decided to transition to false 2d objects (layer plane) that are actually 3d with zero thickness.  In other words, they lost sight of the original vision.

[zoomer]

I think it is hard for me to follow you.

(English is not my native language)

 

I remember Richard Diehl and Minicad (although never seen both of them)

 

46 minutes ago, P Retondo said:

His genius idea was hybrid 2d/3d objects.

a wall contained both a 2d object (now called a screen plane object) and a 3d wall.

The 2d object presented in Top/Plan view like a normal architectural plan drawing, and the 3d object presented in all other views.

 

Why a Screen Plane Object ?

It appears in "fake" Top Plan View in (a 3D) on XY or Layer Plane with Z = 0.00 or Layer height.

Screen Plane would mean that the 2D Wall representation would face directly to you also when

you switch to an e.g. isometric View, which would not make much sense.

 

 

46 minutes ago, P Retondo said:

At some point after Mr. Diehl sold the company, a new generation of engineers decided it was too much trouble to maintain true 2d objects, so they decided to transition to false 2d objects (layer plane) that are actually 3d with zero thickness.  In other words, they lost sight of the original vision.

 

I do not really get that there is a difference between Diehl's times and now (pre VW 2022)

(BTW I think "faked" 2D Top Plan View in VW is great ! vs a standard real horizontal Section

which most others only have. At least in majority of cases)

((Why not have the same for "faked" but pretty Sections))

 

AFAIK Screen Plane was a way, or the only option, to create and position Objects freely in 3D Space (!?)

at that time - If I am not completely off.

(You can still see by missing or limited Tools for 3D manipulation/orientation vs legacy Tools Commands

like 2D/3D Rotation.

 

VW has exceptional 2D creation, manipulation and design/layout capabilities with 2D elements or PIO's

2D appearance in Top Plan View. I thought their appearance is still based on VW's 2D capabilities.

Not so for true 3D only elements like e.g. Generic Solids in 2D View appearance.

 

I think the original of Diehl's vision is still alive in VW 2022 (?)

 

Edited February 1, 2022 by zoomer

[Pat Stanford]

Actual @zoomer @P RetondoMy version of the story is actually different than both of yours. MiniCAD started out as a 3D only program by Rich Diehl. It them had Screen Plan added on to allow proper 2D documentation and labelling of the 3D objects. This '2D ification' was done mostly by a high school kid neighbor or Rich's. A guy by the name of Sean Flaherty. Sean went on to take on many management responsibilities in the Nemetschek group including CEO of Vectorworks for many years after Rich stepped aside.

 

And the main reason for the 2D/3D split originally was the capabilities of the hardware. 2D objects take less memory and less processing power. The hardware at the time was not nearly as capable as we have today.

 

And the idea of hybrid objects is not going away, just being  implemented slightly differently.

[zoomer]

I don't really know the Minicad/VW time frame.

But I started first teaching me CAD seriously by myself with Microstation in 1996.

At that time, and still today, it was totally 3D and all Solids without any limits.

At least at that time that worked flawlessly on current standard hardware

affordable for students.

(Just Raytracing made me need to upgrade RAM soon)

Could do 2D at about the Autodesk standard and better plus generate Sections

too but I was not really interested in at that time.

 

VW, Allplan, Archicad, Autocad Architecture, even Bricscad .... are still somehow

2.5D oriented, preferring XY plane vs Z, as does Architecture in general (gravity!),

so this is OK.

 

Still for me Microstation is the 3D reference and showing me what is possible

for comfortable modeling and controlling 3D. Or especially controlled drawing

of 2D objects - in 3D space.

 

Hybrid Object approach is great.

(just missing in XZ and YZ)

Edited February 1, 2022 by zoomer

[P Retondo]

7 hours ago, Pat Stanford said:

MiniCAD started out as a 3D only program by Rich Diehl.

I know better than to disagree with Pat Stanford!  Maybe it was too long ago to remember, or maybe it’s because I started out on MiniCAD 2.0. But I remember walls being truly hybrid objects in that version.  2d only in Top/Plan, and if you ungrouped a wall in Top/Plan all the 3d went away and you had just 2d objects.

 

My main point is that the “screen plane” terminology only came in when “layer plane” objects came in - to distinguish between objects consisting of a set of (x,y) coordinates, and flat objects consisting of a set of (x,y,z) coordinates where z=k, a constant (and the rotational transformations of such objects).  Before that, 2d objects had only one form, straight on 2d.

 

For some reason, some people are confused by a screen that shows 3d and 2d objects at the same time.  Software engineers who are not building or machine designers see 3d CAD as matrix transformation operations on sets of triplets, and think 2d is a subset consisting of flat 3d objects.

 

But 2d is actually an important way of thinking.  Or at least it has been going back to Vitruvius.

Edited February 2, 2022 by P Retondo

[zoomer]

No problem with 2D only here.

 

 

For me 2D is everything aligned to XY plane.

And usually at the same height.

But I look at it from a 3D perspective.

I like to look at 2D on a screen from Top Plan View but not necessary.

No problem to look or work at 2D drawings from Iso or Perspective.

Just like we do on a sheet of paper on our desks.

 

But Screen Plane for me is like editing a video and placing titles or

even moving annotations following the 3D content of the Video.

So nice to have but no must have.

Those who don't need screen plane objects in DL while drawing and

working, could achieve the same by adding text and info in annotation

space of their perspective Viewports on SLs.

 

[joerg]

it is funny to follow this thread...i started with minicad back in the 80s and it was a very advanced drawing board, which i loved because it enabled me to print proper plans on multible pages when i couldn't afford a plotter...with a bonus 3D ability for presentation. I had many dicussions with other minicad users and they used it a total different way as me and still see it with Vectorworks. This was the other beloved beauty..i could find my own way, as anybody else does. A lot of flexibility. But when things changed most for the better, some not. Allways iritating.  My partner doesn't get the 3D thinking and still uses the drawingboard in only floorplans and sections or elevations and his projects work as well. I work in 3D so we just use the same tool in different ways. For me personal i had no problem with screen plane and layer plane except it sometimes get rendered the wrong way if you didn't setup your viewport proper (display screen objects  etc) and yes i use screen objects for croping (creating) viewports a lot and i would miss that! but it would be still workable... it is just a tool for many different purposes. And back to this thread i have the imagination that zoomer and  P Retondo have just different perspectives.. i like that and try to learn;)

Edited February 2, 2022 by joerg

[P Retondo]

What I like about this thread is I have the utmost respect for Pat and Zoomer, and although I sometimes think they don’t quite get why I care about this, I trust they will.  

2d is not just for plan view design, it is for design in any view.  It is for translating 2d relationships from one view to another in order to precisely form a design in 3 dimensions through time-honored processes.  I am concerned that VW engineers completely don’t get it.

[Pat Stanford]

@P RetondoYou are correct. I definitely want to understand what you think you are missing.

 

The only thing I have realized you can't do without screen plane is draw objects that don't move when you change the view.

 

You can still draw 2D objects, but they can now be on any working plane, not just the screen plane. If you want them to be parallel to the screen it is a single click to set the     working plane parallel to the screen.

 

So if you want to put text on the screen and then rotate the model behind the text and not have it move, you have to have screen plane. But  otherwise, I don't think anything has been taken away.

 

What am I missing?

[zoomer]

6 hours ago, P Retondo said:

2d is not just for plan view design, it is for design in any view.

 

I think that I got you well.

 

And I am fine with both,

working 2D only because it may be still more efficient for many AND

designing in 2D only with Plans and Sections.

 

That's what Architects are talented in and used to deal with that abstraction.

Many clients don't really understand that transition and don't get the design well.

That's why I may build 3D models and do Renderings.

 

So I am just more passionate of the 3D part in CAD.

 

 

I do not much 2D and Plans,

but I have difficulties to understand why one can not just draw his 2D Plans 1:1

in Top Plan View and finally send them to Sheet Layers by Viewports, to represent

Plans in different scales.

In short, I do not get the need of Screen Plane and/or Unified View OFF.

 

[P Retondo]

Pat, what I think is missing is the ability to copy a 2d shape from Top/Plan view and be able to paste it on the “screen plane” in a different view.  Or, would be missing if the ability to do this is not understood by engineers developing future versions.  A 3d “simulation” of a 2d object has a unique place and orientation in 3d space, so pasting it would seem to mean retaining the original object’s orientation.

 

BTW, working plane and screen plane are completely different in reality and concept.  You can be working in a (x’,y’,z’) coordinate system and have a view of the (x’,y’) plane that looks at it from various angles.  Every view has a “screen plane”, and only one such view is normal to the working plane.  (I know you realize this, but another poster seems not to.)

Edited February 5, 2022 by P Retondo

[P Retondo]

Zoomer, for the most part I create 3d models for every project.  The piece that you may not be understanding completely is that I use 2d screen plane shapes to transfer relationships and form from the Top view to other views, usually side views, in order to create or manipulate the 3d geometry through a variety of means based on the information thus derived from the top view.

[zoomer]

1 hour ago, P Retondo said:

The piece that you may not be understanding completely is that I use 2d screen plane shapes to transfer relationships and form from the Top view to other views, usually side views, in order to create or manipulate the 3d geometry through a variety of means based on the information thus derived from the top view.

 

 

Indeed, I don't really get or can't imagine what you are exactly doing.