#Auto-Arch / 3DS3
20 messages in this thread
Has anyone had any problems with the conversion process from
Auto-Architect to 3D Studio via dxf? Does it work well? How do you suggest to
handle the layering names?
Any comments or suggestions are appreciated.
R.C.
/*
Has anyone had any problems with the conversion process from
Auto-Architect to 3D Studio via dxf? Does it work well? How do you suggest to
handle the layering names? */
It does not work well. At all. A lot of extrusions (instead of real surfaces)
are used (ex: LINEs with thickness instead of 3DFACEs) which do not translate
to 3DS. Layer names is a mess since objects in 3DS can be created from layer
names. I don't do it. I use my AA stuff as templates for true surfaces using
AME equivalents and explode AME's stuff down to polymesh/surface entities,
convert all these to a completely different layering scheme for object naming,
and then transfer to 3DS. It's nasty. -dave
<<I don't do it. I use my AA stuff as templates for true surfaces using AME
equivalents and explode AME's stuff down to polymesh/surface entities, convert
all these to a completely different layering scheme for object naming, and then
transfer to 3DS.>>
Dave, could you expand on your last three sentences, excepting "It's
nasty." ?
I've been waiting for this conversation to come up so I could jump on
it and leech some info!
/* Dave, could you expand on your last three sentences, excepting "It's
nasty."? I've been waiting for this conversation to come up so I could jump on
it and leech some info! */
Well, if you're asking if I'll do some training here, no. But I don't mind
discussing process. I use AME to construct the interiors. I use the original AA
drawings as OSNAP guides for my AME primitives. AME creates BLOCKs which can be
exploded into Polymeshes which can again be exploded into 3DFACE entities which
translate well into 3DS. Most of the AA entities are useless to 3DS as true
surfaces are not used… instead AA created extrusions (of LINEs, etc) and
BLOCKs (many of which are made up of extrusions also).
Extrusions are not true surfaces. 3DS needs surfaces. Ceste la vie. -dave
Dave,
You are obviously using an outdated version of Auto-Architect – over two years
old…? A-A, and a couple of other AutoCAD third-party architectural
applications, like Ketiv and Facade, will draw all or most of a building
structure with polymeshes, not just extruded lines. You could save yourself
quite a bit of AME work with an update or some new ACAD software… <g>
Also, Auto-Architect has an especially flexible layer system that ought to let
you draw and keep your 3DS objects together very nicely. You aren't very
current in this subject area – how about an AdeskU course? No, sorry, no
third-party applications allowed at AdeskU this year…Too bad – the way to get
real work done with AutoCAD is with third-party apps. <g>
Michael
/* structure with polymeshes, not just extruded lines. You could save yourself
quite a bit of AME work with an update or some new ACAD software… <g> */
I know about Ketiv and Facade… but R12 AA still extrudes… K & F work great
for walls and such, but they don't help with organics and furnishings much.
Boolean carving goes much quicker.
/* Also, Auto-Architect has an especially flexible layer system that ought to
let you draw and keep your 3DS objects together very nicely. You aren't very
current in this subject area – how about an AdeskU course? No, sorry, no
third-party applications allowed at AdeskU this year…Too bad – the way to get
real work done with AutoCAD is with third-party apps. <g> */
When you have to work with architectural standards AND visualization needs, it
gets to be a mess regardless of the scheme used. Most of our work included
exchanges with other offices. We've written scripts and programs to convert
layer schemes for various uses, but BLOCKing strategies make internal surfaces
a bear to work with. Most ofthe libraries in AA depend on BLOCK usage and
extrusion… latest versions…. still. Just curious, Michael, what release are
you using?
Regarding 3rd-party apps at AU, it would be great, but NAAUG can only make
suggestions as to which courses AU should offer, we'renot the final word on the
final roster. I've been pushing for 3rd-party courses since 92. -dave
Dave,
I'm working with AA Version 12.12. (12.14 is the current shipping version) AA
draws walls directly with 3D polyfaces, in addition to extruded lines, and in
addition to the ability to convert extruded lines to faces.
What I usually do is draw a Wall Style that consists of lines at the
stud-line/dimension-line/work point, whatever's appropriate for documentation,
and 3Dfaces a half-inch or whatever outside that on a different layer, for
visualization. Wall Styles, especially after you figure out they are good for a
_lot_ of stuff besides walls, can make you forget about AME real quick. <g>
Architectural DD and CD standards and visualization needs all in one model:
that's what AutoCAD's all about.
But, hey, you're happy with your methods, go for it. <g> No question, there are
certain things you can do with AME and booleans that nothing else will do, but
I find that to be a minor part of _most_ architectural work, and comparatively
very tedious and slow when you need to do it. I'm not selling anything – I
just thought you came on a little strong, and a little ill-informed, to the
person who asked about rendering models created with ACAD/AA…
I know NAAUG isn't the final word on Adesk U – that's up to Autodesk and
Miller-Freeman. I just think they made a mistake this year in saying absolutely
no third-party apps. That's a step backwards, and it's just flat wrong if
people get the idea that that's how to work with AutoCAD.
Michael
/* I'm working with AA Version 12.12. (12.14 is the current shipping version)
AA draws walls directly with 3D polyfaces, in addition to extruded lines, and
in addition to the ability to convert extruded lines to faces. */
I can see how basics like walls would translate, but have you had troubles with
doors and windows?
/* visualization. Wall Styles, especially after you figure out they are good
for a _lot_ of stuff besides walls, can make you forget about AME real quick.
<g> */
For rectilinear stuff, I see the implications, but so much of our stuff gets
round-filleted. I haven't found a good alternative for curvilinear surfacing.
Are there features in AA which construct round-filleted surfaces?
/* But, hey, you're happy with your methods, go for it. <g> No question, there
are certain things you can do with AME and booleans that nothing else will do,
but I find that to be a minor part of _most_ architectural work, and
comparatively very tedious and slow when you need to do it. I'm not selling
anything – I just thought you came on a little strong, and a little
ill-informed, to the person who asked about rendering models created with
ACAD/AA… */
Michael, I don't want you to get the wrong idea about me either here. I really
appreciate your feedback, and I'm the last guy who will ever subscribe to the
"there's one way to do things right" philosophy. I am exploring AA's
surface-generating capabilities, but the greatest obstacles I run into are
organics and smooth geometries. I don't want my visualizations to look
"rectangular", like something out of the 50's-modern era. I like fluffy
cushions on my sofas, rounded jamb-framing, and rounded walls to look rounded.
I like shiny bathroom fixtures and mountings which really show off metallic
materials in 3DS. Most of the bathroom libraries just don't seem to translate
well, at least within a short period of time I get far superior results with
generating them by scratch (or by using AA as guide templates) to draw them
from. Does this make any sense? I'm one of those guys who probably overkills
the presentation with attempted realism, but for light to play its magic off
any bathroom surface, I haven't been able to use AA's stuff much.
/* I know NAAUG isn't the final word on Adesk U – that's up to Autodesk and
Miller-Freeman. I just think they made a mistake this year in saying absolutely
no third-party apps. That's a step backwards, and it's just flat wrong if
people get the idea that that's how to work with AutoCAD. */
Or any other Adesk software package. Look at 3DS… can you imagine saying "no
IPAS"? 🙂 Education is a mutual situation here… personally I think all
courses should be dictated from a wishlist by users.That would optimize
attendance. -dave
Dave,
AA Doors render fine; windows are less successful – not enough detail if the
window is in the foreground. I've recently been using the Marvin Windows
software to generate 3D windows that are pretty nice. Nice software, and the
best of the window manufacterer's free stuff, for sure.
AA will fillet walls in plan very nicely, but a filleted 3D-face wall element
turns into a block that you might want to explode before bringing over.
Filleted wall lines are true arcs that render fine. You can also do things
like, say, curve the top of a wall in a tight radius by simulating the curve
with straight 3D-face elements. Another nice feature is the ability to draw a
polyline to define a wall shape in plan and convert it to a wall style of your
choice. This allows you to do free-form, curved walls. You need to smooth some
of this stuff in the rendering software…
AA 3D blocks are a mixed bag for rendering. Some of them are pretty good, like
appliances, but most of the furniture is not quite suitable for a rendering, if
it features the furniture. Some of the couches and chairs are okay if they are
just to provide some context and scale in space, and you can soften them some
with the material you assign… The 3D beds are a joke… <g> As you suggest,
rendering really needs some specially purchased or constructed meshes or
blocks, and I don't expect to find a lot of that kind of thing in an AutoCAD
architectural application, yet. You want fluffy, or highly detailed fittings
and plumbing fixtures, you're gonna have to do it yourself… <g>
Michael
/* window is in the foreground. I've recently been using the Marvin Windows
software to generate 3D windows that are pretty nice. Nice software, and the
best of the window manufacterer's free stuff, for sure. */
I'll have to check that out. Anything from Anderson working? <g>
/* choice. This allows you to do free-form, curved walls. You need to smooth
some of this stuff in the rendering software… */
So I've noticed.
/* appliances, but most of the furniture is not quite suitable for a rendering,
if it features the furniture. Some of the couches and chairs are okay if they
are just to provide some context and scale in space, and you can soften them
some with the material you assign… The 3D beds are a joke… <g> */
I'm sure 3rd party developers will eventually address this stuff, and I
understand AA is a CADD-focused product. But in the interim (our interim), it's
been a challenge using this stuff for the type of visualization we want.
/*
As you suggest, rendering really needs some specially purchased or constructed
meshes or */
That's where AME has really been helpful. Thanks for feedback, Michael. I do
appreciate it. -dave
Dave, i've used AA and 3DS on several projects and the doors and walls come out
pretty good. The windows usually require drawing an extra PFACE around them in
ACAD before bringing into 3DS.
The symbol libraries do not translate well at all. In my latest conversation
with a SoftDesk rep, he said that they do not plan on reworking their symbol
library to accomadate 3DS. They will make a way of specifying a 3rd-party 3D
symbol replace their 2D symbols. So now we have 3rd party add-ins for 3rd
party add-ins. Does that make it 4th party or 6th party – i get confused
pretty easily now a days 🙂
/* The symbol libraries do not translate well at all. In my latest
conversation with a SoftDesk rep, he said that they do not plan on reworking
their symbol library to accomadate 3DS. */
That's what I heard too. AA is CAD-focused, so they'll either add a utility to
convert existing library symbols or create a seperate package altogether.
/*
They will make a way of specifying a 3rd-party 3D symbol replace their 2D
symbols. So now we have 3rd party add-ins for 3rd party add-ins. Does that
make it 4th party or 6th party – i get confused pretty easily now a days 🙂 */
3rd-party 3rd-party apps. Party scary. -dave
Hey guys, I've been follwing this thread for a while, and wanted pass along an
alternativ (I also use Auto Architect).
There's a program out ther by called facade, by eclipse software. It converts
your 2d drawings into 3 d faces usable in 3d studio or acad itself. And it
sells for $189.
I haven't bought it yet, but if i get back into architectural rendering, i'll
probably give them a chance.
From the info ive gathered here on the forum, its supposed to be a pretty good
program; it's also been highly rated in cadalyst.
Their phone no. is 206-676-6175
good luck, mark c.
Mark,
Yep, I like Facade a lot. It's probably something you'd mostly use _instead_ of
Auto-Architect, though, unless you want to just occasionally do a model, and
don't want to be bothered with Auto-Architect's 3D capabilities otherwise. If
you're looking for inexpensive, Facade and AccuRender are a potent, amazingly
inexpensive combination for AutoCAD architectural rendering.
If you read something in CADalyst about Facade… hey, I think I probably wrote
that… <g>
Michael
Dave
AutoArchitect also has an option to convert walls from extrusions to 3D Faces.
It's the only good way I've found to get windows into gable end walls. There
are still problems with face normals, however.
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHGB1337F
/*
AutoArchitect also has an option to convert walls from extrusions to 3D Faces.
It's the only good way I've found to get windows into gable end walls. There
are still problems with face normals, however. */
Yep, I tried this too and had the same difficulties. I don't want folks to get
the wrong impression here. I just have far more of an easy time working with
AME since normals construct properly for 3DS. I hate spending time reversing
normals face by face. I can't wait till our OPTIMIZE IPAS arrives. -dave
Dave
I tend to work with AME a lot as well. You can't beat it for complex roof
lines. You're going to love Optimize! Have Fun.
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHG6A8975
/*
I tend to work with AME a lot as well. You can't beat it for complex roof
lines. You're going to love Optimize! Have Fun. */
Michael's right about a lot of AA's capabilities. I've just been spoiled by the
ease of 3DS to generate curvilinear geometry. I also get frustrated with AA's
occasional surfacing capabilities. Wall-generation isn't so bad, but doorways,
windows… fixtures (ug)… not so easy to work with, and very choppy. Even
highest degrees of smoothness on AA stuff doesn't equate to simple
3DS-generated meshes. And I use a tremednous amount of curved filleting. AA
doesn't have too much in the way of rounded-corner stuff. I'm not exclusive
about tools, I'll use the best of all worlds. 🙂
But I'm still convinced at this point that (like your roof example) AME has
tremendous power to do what no other 3rd party discipline-specific app does
yet. Roofs are good, for me the focus is fixtures… bathroom, ceiling,
furnishings, etc. A few cross sections and Boolean extrusions and intersections
and I (and you!) can whip out furniture which beats the heckout of most
3rd-party supplied libraries.
I gave Gary's demo OPTIMIZE a hard look… and I can't wait. 🙂 -dave
Dave,
Just a point of clarification, extruded entities such as lines, arcs, circle,
and polylines import quite well into 3DS. Block really aren't much of a
problem either. It is quite possible that your version of AA was violating
some other rules of 3DS import with its extrusions, but don't blame the
entities themselves.
AutoCAD modeling with extruded entities and polylines is a very powerful tool
and works quite well with 3DS. Phillip Miller is an expert on this technique
and he wrote chapter 11 of Inside 3D Studio which deals in depth with
AutoCAD import into 3D Studio. You might want to check that out.
Steven
/* Just a point of clarification, extruded entities such as lines, arcs,
circle, and polylines import quite well into 3DS. Block really aren't much of a
problem either. */
Even when using XREFs?
/*
It is quite possible that your version of AA was violating some other rules of
3DS import with its extrusions, but don't blame the entities themselves. */
No blame at all, Steven. But considering that 99% of our work is with
construction documents in ACAD, we have to optimize our layering/blocking/ etc
schemes for ACAD first. Trying to manipulate this info for visualization in 3DS
is a bear, and we have had very little success using AA's CAD-tailored schemes
for 3DS importation.
/* AutoCAD modeling with extruded entities and polylines is a very powerful
tool and works quite well with 3DS. Phillip Miller is an expert on this
technique and he wrote chapter 11 of Inside 3D Studio which deals in depth with
AutoCAD import into 3D Studio. You might want to check that out. */
Definitely. Thanks for the advice. -dave