#AEC Arch & Mech
3 messages in this thread
Brad,
In the March 1988 issue of CADalyst, Bob Hartman has an article entitled
"Escape From The Labryinth." I would like to hear your's and others at
Adesk's opinion of his proposal. This article may serve as a start to
stimulate something.
Thanks, Gregg
By the way I would prefer to see more powerful functions in AutoSHADE at the
expense of speed. Let the hardware people worry about writing drivers to
exploit the capabilities of new technology. The seem to be doing a pretty
good job of compensating for the inherent limitations of the program. When
AutoSHADE comes out with more powerful features such as shadows, it will
become a better design tool. Functions 1st, Speed 2nd.
I agree. Autodesk folks are sensitive to the speed question, though,
because for a while AutoCAD had the image of being powerful but
ponderously slow. Now I rarely hear that criticism, thanks to hardware
improvements and code refinements.
..
Let's encourage Autodesk programmer's to go for the feature's that add
realism to the renderings.
..
I'd also like the idea of the camera and movie analogy to be extended to
the objects in the shade rendering file. We should abandon the idea that
we need to keep going back to the AutoCAD drawing to make adjustments in
the camera path or give movement to elements of the model. Hopefully
some extension of the block concept can be added to Autoshade so we can
move objects while in Autoshade as "actors" and "props". Also, as far as
I can figure it out, maybe a "filmroll" really should be called a "set".
..
Wishfully yours,
..
Lansing "Cecil B" Pugh
Gregg —
Thanks for the comments on AutoShade. I'm sure they'll be passed
along to Product Management.
Gee, I'd love to read the article, only we don't have the March
issue of CADalyst here in the office. I'll certainly look for it as soon
as I receive a copy.
— Brad
..