#Visual Link Tree
12 messages in this thread
Joe,
PMJI, but I have also been evaluating Visual Link. I don't have the
manual in front of me right now, but it _does_ say that blocks are treated
differently in VL. Blocks turn into individual objects, regardless of layers.
It's a big pain, and a BIG drawback.
John Schmidt
John,
Thanks for the quick input. I haven't read the manual entirely myself. I
had hoped that being familiar with 3D Studio would allow me to fake it with
VL for awhile, but that may prove to not be the case.
I read on page 22 of the manual that what you say is true. (It says right
there on page 22: "Anything John Schmidt says is true" <g>). The language
used implies that VL thinks this is a bonus to have blocks treated this
way. For me, this feature renders the entire product useless. It
will cause my 3DS usage to be immeasurably more complex than it had been.
Any comments from any listening (reading) ADESK people would be welcome.
Can anyone supply a contact name at ADESK who is connected with Visual
Link (or at least familiar with it)?
Joe
We bought Visual Link thinking that it would be the answer to our prayers and
came up with another piece of shelfware and a $500 certificate on our next copy
of 3DS…
What good is it if it can't weld verticies?
Why can't someone write a translator that treats ELEMENTS as ENTITIES and
OBJECTS as LAYERS? Pretty strange request huh?
Slow, slow, slow, slow…
A great idea and a big dissapointment…
But, if you are looking for a great deal on a slightly used copy of Visual
Link, call 503-223-9674! g
gggrrr…
Donald Newlands
Donald,
Slightly used is all the use Visual Link would ever get on my software
shelf.
I agree with your speed comments. Dog slow on anything of real-world size.
I wonder what happened at Autodesk that they agreed to market something this
obviously flawed in design.
You're right, "a great idea but a big dissapointment".
Joe
Joe:
Just explode the blocks for the time that you use VL. There are a number of
LISP routines that will do this…
Better yet, make your use of AutoCAD match the way that your model will be
exported to 3DS… not fun, I know, but necessary if you want to use the two
together. After all, your use of AutoCAD probably dates back long before 3DS
(as does the software… at least it does for me <grin>).
There will be a class on the 'wedding' of 3DS and ACAD at Autodesk U.
C#
Craig,
Being one of the most adaptable people on earth (at least in my opinion), I
already _have_ adapted my use of ACAD to 3D Studio <g>. At least it works
well for me.
To give you an example, in constructing the model for a building in ACAD, I
have grouped repetitive window elements into blocks. Within the blocks, on
separate layers, are the window mullions, the window sills, and the glazing
itself. The window sills are on the same layer as the rest of the exterior
building finish.
When I transfer the DXF into 3D Studio creating 3DS objects by ACAD layer,
the window sills and the exterior finish are part of the same 3DS object, as
I want them to be, because they were on the same ACAD layer. All the window
mullions are part of the same 3DS object, also as I want them to be. 3DS
ignores the internal block structure of the ACAD DXF file, as I want it to.
Visual Link does not improve on this process in any way and in fact
tremendously complicates the process. In light of what I've described
above, I think you'll agree that your idea of exploding the ACAD blocks when
using VL will not work in my case.
VL in my opinion is supposed to simplify the task of importing ACAD geometry
into 3D Studio, not complicate it. I have no problem adapting my usage of
ACAD to 3D Studio realities, but I have a _major_ problem adapting my usage
of ACAD to Visual Link when I see no payback whatsoever in doing so.
I'd be more than interested in a class on the wedding of ACAD and 3DS. I
don't claim to have all the answers, but I do know when something works and
when it doesn't. What is Autodesk U? I can't recall hearing about it on
this forum, but then again, after that lobotomy, I can't recall much of
anything <g>.
Joe
Try Imagine interface, from Shriber Instruments in Colorado. It works. I
don't have their number, but they also market the Yost group IPAS routines, so
somebody'll post the number, I'm sure.
Thanks, John
I've heard of Imagine. I'll look into it.
Joe
Joe:
First, I wouldn't be too concerned about Imagine Interface from Schrieber… I
think they have stopped marketing the product.
Second, I don't think you are looking at VL with the proper perspective… but
I must first admit that I don't have my copy yet even though I have >some<
understanding of what the product does. I haven't been able to play with it yet
to see what can and can't be done reasonably. The idea for me is that a
draftsman or modeler or architect or engineer or whatever the case may be can
make his 3D models that are completed in AutoCAD FOR OTHER PURPOSES translate
better to 3DS. It is not to make AutoCAD the modeler for 3DS. All calculation
intensive ADS routines are slow in AutoCAD… AME is REALLY slow, for example.
To me, using VL should be looked upon as a post processor and much of what is
done should be completed on computer time, not user time. I would imagine that
alot of VL can be driven by AutoLISP macros so that the process can be
automated considerably… (just as can AME).
As far as how you create your AutoCAD models, I can say that the method that
you use will make your work more difficult in 3DS if you are mapping modular
materials… you will either need to detach faces for proper orientation or you
will need to create each side of your AutoCAD solids on different layers. That
is why exploding the blocks shouldn't make any difference. Let me give you an
example…
If I am completing a brick building and I have a reference point for all of the
brick modules on every same facing wall of the building (something that I do
usually do as an architect) then I can put ALL of the same facing walls on the
same layer, set the map to the proper size and location (at the reference
point) and map all of the walls facing north, for example, at the same time.
The bricks align just like they would in the real building in this way.
Adesk U is in october and will be in Cadence magazine.
C#
Craig:
<< First, I wouldn't be too concerned about Imagine Interface from
Schrieber… I think they have stopped marketing the product.>>
Where did you get this information from…. I just signed up as a dealer and
have talked with Scott at Schreiber Instruments about this product. To my
knowledge:
1: They have NOT Stopped marketing the product.
2: It _does_ work!
3: Call Schreiber at 1-800-252-1024 and confirm it.
end of line.
James M. Murphy
James:
I didn't say it didn't work…
They don't feel that the market is there… although they certainly may have
changed their minds. I use Quicksurf and it is one of the best pieces of
software add-ons that I have ever encountered for AutoCAD. The documentation is
really weak, but if you take the time to learn all of the nuances, the product
blows away anything that I have ever seen. I say this because I think that they
are a great company and don't want anyone to misread my comments.
I'm not sure that a shop that has someone who use both 3DS and AutoCAD needs
either of the products. If, OTOH, you have a 3DS animator and an AutoCAD 3D
guru, then something like VL or Imagine make alot of sense. I can say for one
that it seems humanly impossible to me to be expert at both at the same time.
The question still arises as to how many situations actually exist that match
these scenarios…
C#
Craig:
Didn't mean to jump on this so hard.. but as a dealer I get excited when I hear
that a software package I "Just Got Authorized For" may no longer be promoted
by the Vendor. You can understand my consternation.
Regarding the AutoCAD and 3D Studio Etc. Expertise thing…. I agree with you
100%…..thats why I no longer have an AutoCAD License and went for the
Multimedia Dealership Authorization instead.. I was an AutoCAD Dealer for five
years in a partnership with an AEC slant on things….when I saw what was
happening with the industry and 3D Studio in particular I knew that I could not
divide my time up equally between the two. Hence I sold my shares and formed
another Company that focuses on 3D Studio and Animator Pro/Multimedia products.
I happen to have the experience of the CAD Background to draw on when
consulting with clients who are using AutoCAD product and related third party
products so I feel that I can bring that to the table as well as provide the
additional expertise in 3D Studio and its related third party products. The
focus is on 3D Studio though.
NOW if I can just get up to speed on the Video side of things….reads….
"Post Production Live W/Voice-Overs, Etc".
Did someone mention "Cyberspace Delveloper Kits"….Yikes!
LaTER.
James M. Murphy