Jump to content

mat8iou

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

Personal Information

  • Country
    United Kingdom

mat8iou's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

10

Reputation

  1. The 63 limit was removed in V8 - which came out in 2001. Layers / levels work in a fairly similar way in both programs nowadays. MS gives easier control than Acad when dealing with Xref layers - e.g. you can quickly turn off the layer with the same name in all xrefs etc. Compatibility is fairly good generally, although there are some problems with 3D.
  2. Working as an architect, I have deliberately had to work to get involved in the architectural side of things, rather than being allocated only visualisation / presentation tasks (because at that stagej I was the fastest in the office at producing them). It is the same story in many other practises. Architects studied architecture because they wanted to be architects - if they had wanted to only be producing visuals, then they would have done a different (& no doubt shorter course). So, while I can produce visuals for my own projects, when needed, there are many people who I work with who can't produce 3d visuals & I don't wan't my job to become one where I'm spending my time visualising other people's work (I don't have a problem with that type of work as such - its just not where my core expertise is). As technology has improved, so have client expectations. We are contracting out more visual work than ever before & even opened a sub office largejly to deal with this type of stuff. So I don't see the need for people to produce good quality visuals to dissapear any time soon.
  3. I'm glad someone else has noticed this problem too. Form what you describe, it is exactly the same thing as I'm seeing. Unfortunately, exporting to polyfaces makes life very awkward, as people are wanting to edit some of these models in AutoCAD. You are right though - prior to XM, it seemed to work far better. It seems almost as though the regions / solids are coming through as corrupted in some way - they look fine, but in reality they don't work as expected. I just don't understand how something that worked fine can then stop working anywhere near as well in a newer version.
  4. Has anyone else come across this problem? I've only noticed it since switching to Microstation XM & to AutoCAD 2007 / 2008. It may have been a problem before that, but if it was I never noticed it. The problem only seems to affect some drawings - others work fine. When the drawings are exported, everything looks fine in wireframe view. If you turn on shaded view in AutoCAD though, it displays strangely - similar to if you had "discard back faces" turned on - but more random than that - bits are missing from almost all the faces. Sometimes it displays fine at first - then you zoom in & the problem appears but remains when you zoom out. Sometimes the problem only shows in quick renders in viewports - if you do a full render it looks ok. Other times it doesn't sem to display properly at all. When the problem occurs, the exported file is pretty much unusable in AUtoCAD, as it is so hard to set up any sort of 3D view because the previews are so confusing. I've never had this problem with files created in AutoCAD - ony those that originated in Microstation. Its not a graphics card problem, as I've tried opening the same file on various different machines. For exporting, most of the options are set to create regions rater than faces or polyface meshes. Has anyone else seen this problem - or does anyone else have any solutions for it?
×
×
  • Create New...