#Architectual 3DS
25 messages in this thread
Hi, Robert. I am just now reading messages from a week ago due to a
tough deadline and trip out of town. I just wanted to say that I
agree that I wanted to see a "programmable" sun as part of 3DS – was
hoping for that in R3. The ray-traced shadows are great, but why
stop there? Now I see AutoVision promoted as a solution for
architectural renderings and file transfer, but I don't want to shell
out another $800 after buying 3DS, AutoCAD, and Visual Link!
While I'm at it, I'd like to get a discussion going about AutoCAD to
3DS, and I think I've seen your name associated with architectural
discussions here. I have been working on a building model which I
have mostly produced in AutoCAD, using 3DS for some tricky geometry
that is easier to loft then to try to surface in AutoCAD. Wanting to
reference the geometry created in 3DS back in AutoCAD, I used Visual
Link some, and used DXF some, and got mixed results. Maybe I am
missing something, but the AutoCAD to 3DS connection (and back) still
seems a bit unpredictable.
For example (VL indicates Visual Link):
(1) 3DS to Acad (VL), explode mesh, Acad to 3DS (VL) – some face
normals wrong that were fine in 3DS!
(2) Same procedure _without_ exploding mesh – still some face
normals wrong that were fine in 3DS – simply due to VL process!
(3) 3DS to Acad (VL), explode mesh, Acad to 3DS (DXF) – faces OK.
Has nyone else experienced problems with this? Please join in!
Bob Keefer, AIA
If you want a programmable sun, just give Greg Pyros (73027, 3632) a
buzz. Pyros Partnership produces and sells a Sun IPAS that will do
just what you need for $100, that's $700 less than Autovision and you
don't even have to wait for R4 <g>.
Regards,
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John,
We also offer Imagine Sun which even creates a spot light sun object.
Includes complete animation control and retails for $99.
Keith.
BTW. Greg P. can sell this too.
Oh yeah! I forgot about your sun. I have the Pyros one, so that's what I
thought of first.
Regards,
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
BTW, is 3D SURF compatible with R3? Is it possible to get a demo of this
software?
thanks.
John:
Yes, 3dSurf works great with R3. The demo works the same way as all
the big Schreiber programs, you can run it with a limited data set to
see how it works for you, and if you like it, just contact your
favorite dealer to get the password to unlock the entire program.
It's one of the most elegant methods of 'try before you buy' ever
devised. We can get you the demo if you want.
Yeah, I'd like to check the demo out. I've played with some other
Schreiber demo's like Interface, and have to agree: it is the best
demo system I've seen. What a tease!
I'll call Tony about cables and see about the 3D Surf demo. I don't
need it right away, but I think there may be an opportunity for it
coming up.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Thank You, couldn't have said it better myself. All of our Imagine line
of programs work with R3 short of Interface which will require an overhaul.
Keith.
Thanks, John. I had heard about Greg's routine (not in detail,
though). Guess I need to order that – can't afford to wait on R4
<g>! (Greg, are you out there? Can you specify time of day? Can
you set up more than one spot with this routine for multiple
renderings from the same file?)
In general I still think it would be useful as part of 3DS – surely
more than architects would be interested in accurate "sun" lighting –
but I am glad that Greg and others can provide a solution, and that
the software provides a "window" for such products.
The SUN path PXP will do everything you asked. You enter the object's
position (longitude/latitude), date, time, even altitude. You define
the number of frames and the time span. It will then create a path
for a spot light object. It will work for a single frame or for an
entire animation.
The routine will also plot the position of any body in the solar
system for that matter. So if you ever wonder where the Moon or
Jupiter will be (or was) in a specific time and date, just let the
thing show you! In that case, you could apply the path to a sphere
with the Moon surface mapped to it for a, not only realistic, but
very accurate solar system simulation.
Give Greg a call at (714) 833-0334.
Thanks for the details on the SUN.PXP routine, Gus. Just one
question: you mention that you enter the object's position – does
this correspond to the spotlight target location, or is that entered
separately?
That's right. When you pick the object for "center" that's where the spot light
target should be set at.
Okay. Thanks, Gus!
Bob,
Imagine Sun can do all of that. You can place multiple sun's
into the same scene but you would be responsible for turning off the
sun's you do not want for each rendering. The multiple sun option
could be used for "off world" animators for more than one sun systems
complete different motion. Greg P. can sell you this as well. Retails
for $99.
Thanks, Keith. They both sound like great add-ons for 3DS. And yeah,
I figured I would have to "manually" control the on-off status of
"multiple suns", but that's OK as long as the routine will create
more than one in a scene if needed.
Bob-
I am also using 3ds in a architectural application, and agree that
the connection between 3ds and autocad is much less than the happy
marriage I have been led to believe. I have had face problems from
day one when trying to convert a model from autocad to 3ds even
before visual link. I tried creating a panel in 3ds, taking it in to
autocad via vlink, arraying it (this was before release 3), taking it
back out to 3ds, and face problems galore.
There are some great modeling advantages to 3ds, and drawbacks, i.e.
I was hoping for some object snaps. But i have come to use autocad
as the shaper, create a dxf, bring it in to 3ds, loft it, and
assemble the model in the 3d editor. Visual link lets me bring the
model into autocad and plot out wire frame perspectives at any size
for others in the office to sketch over.
I am hoping that autovision is going to be a step in combining the
two. Hopefully it will allow more people in the office to build
models, apply materials and generally prepare the model for import
into 3ds so all I have to do is animate it. hopes, dreams, wishfull
thinking perhaps.
I would also be interested in hearing how other offices are using the
software.
I too was hoping for object snaps in 3DS with R3!! I really miss them
– it is much easier to use AutoCAD for many arch. models because of
the osnaps. Using Snap in 3DS helps, but if you ever forget to turn
it on in a viewport before moving something…. arrgh!
Like you, I have used Vlink for pulling the model back into AutoCAD
and matching my 3DS camera view for a plot. I really thought it was
going to allow easy transitions between programs, and I guess it does
if you don't mind redoing face normals all the time. There's gotta
be a better way. The other thing that annoys me is when you merge a
3DS file into AutoCAD along with some existing AutoCAD geometry, all
the 3DS meshes are placed on the VLMERGE layer. You have to select
them one by one and move them to the correct layer in order to
explode them and work on them along with your other 3d data in
AutoCAD.
I have used AutoCAD for creating polylines to load into the 2D Shaper,
but I still tend to use both products to assemble a model, and would
therefore like a more reliable way of moving 3D geometry between
them. What have you heard about AutoVision that would make you think
(or hope) it is better at this?
Bob Keefer, AIA
Bob
I haven't used AutoCAD at all so your experience with bringing meshes into 3ds
is something that I can only relate to from a different platform. I do my
modelling in GDS but I have similar spurious results in bringing my geometry
into 3ds.
I get what sort of looks like faces missing but really looks like a vertex may
be missing because I get these gradually shaded triangles on what should be a
flat plane. This seems to occur when I bring in cuboid geometry that has
coincident edges and vertices with adjacent cuboids.
I believe that I would have better luck if I saved my geometry as wavefront
.obj files and then converted to .dxf but so far nobody has been able to tell
me if such a conversion utility exists. However, I will be getting info from
John Foust at Syndesis and I am hopeful that he has what I'm after.
Some of my problem went away when I started to render two-sided but I still
have a significant problem to deal with.
Oops – I just assumed you were using AutoCAD! Interesting that you
have also suffered DXF problems from another program, though.
Rendering two-sided is the obvious "quick fix", but I hate to
sacrifice the time on every rendering, having one and two-sided
versions of each material, etc., so I usually try to fix them. I may
have to reconsider that sometimes, though. I hope you get the
transfer solution from Syndesis.
I seem to remeber Martin Foster (who's on vacation in Australia, lucky Joey)
saying that the method of creating stuff in Acad can eliminate the flipped
normals problem. I'm not sure what that method is, but I'll bet Yann knows.
Yann, you out there?
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Well, I know that if you create AutoCAD 3D faces in a clockwise direction they
are supposed to have a face normal that faces "out". This also seems to be
affected by the current UCS. However, if Martin or Yann know any other tips, I
sure would appreciate hearing them!
That was the creation litany I was thinking of. Oh, well.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Yeah, the method is not to create additional faces. <G> Seriously though, I'm
not sure what you are talking about. Are you asking me if there is a way in
AutoCAD to make sure that all the faces have their normals pointing in the same
direction? If that's the case, make sure that each face you create has it's
vertices created in the same order or I should say orientation, ie clockwise or
counter clockwise. If it's a 3dmesh then the issue is moot, since the normals
all point in the same direction. OTOH, if it's a PFACE, that is much harder to
control. The easiest thing is to assign a 2 sided material to that particular
object in 3d Studio.
Did that answer your question? If not, I'm sure you'll let me know. <G>
Yann Bertaud – VPG, Autodesk.
Yes, that's the answer I was looking for. Thanks Yann.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
I'm ashamed to say Ive just been using the brute force solution to all
these flippin' normals: render 2-sided. I've had to guage what was
worse, spending time correcting the mess thats left after you bring
in ACAD AME boolean objects or just let the machine work a little
longer overnight on the renderings. It ain't pretty, but it works.
As far as bringing 3DS files back into ACAD, I've never done it. I
build everything in AutoCAD and leave it there. Seems a shame, but I
don't trust Visual Link so I've been sticking to what works.
For non-architectuaral stuff, I do lots and lots of 3DS modeling but
for all those buildings, I stick to AutoCAD.
Yeah, I've used your "brute force" method of rendering 2-sided in
some situations, and you have a point in that it may be quicker in
some cases than flipping normals. I still prefer to use AutoCAD for
most of the building geometry, especially since I often start with
schematic drawings that have already been created with AutoCAD. I
still think there ought to be a more reliable way….