self-constructed parametric objects

[fabio.revit]

Bye to all,
I have been a revit user for about ten years, and before I am still an archicad, for another ten years... and from this you can imagine my age
I think I'm a pretty advanced user of revit, of which I'm no longer satisfied, also because of Addesk's commercial policies, so I'm trying to change, and I'm very impressed vw architect.
I watched all the videos of both the mother's house and videocom, and I had some doubts.
Let's start with the first:
the parametric objects of the localized verse ita seem to me already very complete, but I use the software also for works of design and custom furniture, so often I have to create objects ad hoc 8 for example kitchen counters, recovery doors etc.). Is it possible to create a custom parametric object in vw?
with what procedure?
Is there any tutorials/videos around? (I tried to search but I found nothing).
thank you for any reply.
fabio

 

[Tristan]

I'm sorry if I go for a moment, but what doesn't convince you of Adsk policy?

 

[fabio.revit]

I'm sorry if I go for a moment, but what doesn't convince you of Adsk policy?

They don't convince me a lot of things.
First of all, this novelty of the disappearance of property licenses is suicidal.
Moreover (for my fault, but the workload distracted me) I did not renew the sub by 1 February so, after paying almost 20 thousand euros in 10 years to the adesk, I find myself with a software no more up-to-date. crazy.
and then it is quite clear that the addesk does not interest small studies like mine (which however makes a fair number of projects in both civil and industrial sectors).
I don't understand what to do to buy ten software in suites, which then I don't use, at an exorbitant price when then in the end for the architect revit alone is more than enough as a modeler (as long as they add a decent internal rendering engine).
revit, moreover, is now too rigid and do not permeate an all-in-one workflow: the renderingl or you have to do in 3ds (which I don't want or time to implement in the workflow) or showcase (nice program but with strong limitations and not born for architecture), the 2d is ridiculous, so if you want to do something worthy you have to pass in photoshop (gimp in my case) or impression (which works badly). we do not talk about land management: you have to buy civil3d if you build on land that are not rectangular and flat, or the fact that at ten years since they purchased it handles dwg in a bad way.
It is evident that adesk has as reference the Anglo-Saxon model of the workflow, with large hyperstructured studies in which there is a bim manager, operators who use maximum a couple of software, structured workflows on different software in integration.
but I do the architect in Italy, and when a work tool no longer suits my changing needs, what I think is right to do every now and then not to become slaves of software that, in good and bad, still influences the results of the project.

 

[Tristan]

First of all, this novelty of the disappearance of property licenses is suicidal.

attention: license of property has no meaning; However I understood what you mean (perpetual license n.d.a.). by now the direction is that and I do not exclude that in the coming years also nemetschek does not adopt the same method. for years we pay for consumption...light, gas, water, telephone, even cars now to check a lower price the purchases in the formula "pay per drive". What do you mean? He is not suicidal at all, he is in line with the times; can please or not like it but more and more you will go in this direction for anything. volent or nolent.

Moreover (for my fault, but the workload distracted me) I did not renew the sub by 1 February so, after paying almost 20 thousand euros in 10 years to the adesk, I find myself with a software no more up-to-date.

Didn't your dealer warn you? autodesk didn't contact you to "recover" the sub? Strange.. .

and then it is quite clear that the addesk does not interest small studies like mine (which however makes a fair number of projects in both civil and industrial sectors).

do not think that nemetschek behaves very differently. . They are multinationals, they look at numbers. you are a drop in the ocean

I don't understand what to do to buy ten software in suites, which then I don't use, at an exorbitant price when then in the end for the architect revit alone is more than enough as a modeler (as long as they add a decent internal rendering engine).
revit, moreover, is now too rigid and do not permeate an all-in-one workflow: the renderingl or you have to do in 3ds (which I don't want or time to implement in the workflow) or showcase (nice program but with strong limitations and not born for architecture), the 2d is ridiculous, so if you want to do something worthy you have to pass in photoshop (gimp in my case) or impression (which works badly). we do not talk about land management: you have to buy civil3d if you build on land that are not rectangular and flat, or the fact that at ten years since they purchased it handles dwg in a bad way.

I don't agree, but I respect your opinion. However, the suites will disappear and a new "product" will be introduced.

It is evident that adesk has as reference the Anglo-Saxon model of the workflow, with large hyperstructured studies in which there is a bim manager, operators who use maximum a couple of software, structured workflows on different software in integration.
but I do the architect in Italy, and when a work tool no longer suits my changing needs, what I think is right to do every now and then not to become slaves of software that, in good and bad, still influences the results of the project.

...and throw away the investment made?! I'm sorry but at this point I don't know who really is the suicidal fool (no offense, eh...in friendship)

 

[fabio.revit]

attention: license of property has no meaning; However I understood what you mean (perpetual license n.d.a.). by now the direction is that and I do not exclude that in the coming years also nemetschek does not adopt the same method. for years we pay for consumption...light, gas, water, telephone, even cars now to check a lower price the purchases in the formula "pay per drive". What do you mean? He is not suicidal at all, he is in line with the times; can please or not like it but more and more you will go in this direction for anything. volent or nolent.


Didn't your dealer warn you? autodesk didn't contact you to "recover" the sub? Strange.. .


do not think that nemetschek behaves very differently. . They are multinationals, they look at numbers. you are a drop in the ocean


I don't agree, but I respect your opinion. However, the suites will disappear and a new "product" will be introduced.


...and throw away the investment made?! I'm sorry but at this point I don't know who really is the suicidal fool (no offense, eh...in friendship)

I got e-mails, webinars and other amenities, which I stupidly neglected (in fact I was convinced that there was time all February, and in fact I contacted my dealer a fifteen days ago and....surprise! )
I know I'm a drop in the ocean (not me, but all the Italian market) but this does not prevent me from exercising the only weapon that has a consumer, that is to change.
and then I don't have any other alternatives: If I want to continue using updated revit (which I think is now a product no longer suitable for a small study that has about ten major projects per year and about fifty/sixty percent of minor practices per year and which highlights technical limits if you consider the specific productivity of this workflow) I have to start from scratch, then spend several thousand euros (6200 mites)!.
At this point I let myself spend a couple of years (at least 2200 euros not spent in sub) and adding the equivalent of the third year of sub I buy a new software and more responsive to my needs.
and, as I have already said, from the point of view of the quality of the project I think will do well: I did it ten years ago with the archicad-revit passage and found that software often influences the project, changing software and having to reset automatism, my "style" changed better, I hope it happens again!

 

[paolo.c]

making in topic:http://www.vectorworks.net/training/marionette

 

[fabio.revit]

making in topic:http://www.vectorworks.net/training/marionette

I saw this, but it seems more like a visual scripting language to automate a workflow than a tool to create objects.
I try to explain it with a practical example: in a job I'm doing I had to insert zendher radiators, heights and number of different elements. in revit I have "built" one, I have parameterized it and used it in the project, saving it in the appropriate library so in the future if I decide to use the same element I already have beautiful and ready.
Is this possible in vw?
♪

 

[pla]

marionette allows you to realize reusable project design parametric objects, so you can get what you want with a obviously different approach than revit families.
Keep in mind that creating symbols through vectorworks modeling functions allows you to create objects significantly faster. with the time you lose to parameterize a radiator, you can model it, save as a symbol, insert it and change it x times.

 

[fabio.revit]

marionette allows you to realize reusable project design parametric objects, so you can get what you want with a obviously different approach than revit families.
Keep in mind that creating symbols through vectorworks modeling functions allows you to create objects significantly faster. with the time you lose to parameterize a radiator, you can model it, save as a symbol, insert it and change it x times.

Okay.
therefore beyond the of puppets, which I think is useful for more complex objects, the parameterization of small library objects is not possible.
Thank you.

 

[paolo.c]

Okay.
therefore beyond the of puppets, which I think is useful for more complex objects, the parameterization of small library objects is not possible.
Thank you.

marionette is very useful for small parametric library objects.
banally, I create a rectangle, check the parameters width and height, extrude it and check the depth parameter.
the object obtained is a reproducible parallelepiped n times and with the parameters height and depth customizable.

 

[Tristan]

You don't need puppets to do something like that. You do it in seconds with dynamo or fathopper without pulling out a lira.
but modeling a parametric radiator with these tools is anything else, trust me.. .

 

[paolo.c]

You don't need puppets to do something like that. You do it in seconds with dynamo or fathopper without pulling out a lira.

ok, but the initial question was: how to create parametric objects on vectorworks? the answer is: puppets, which has to do with revit.

 

[Tristan]

Who talked about revit? I did the example of dynamo and fathopper...the question was: "where to insert zendher radiators, heights and number of different elements is possible a similar thing in vw?" you showed him how to model a parallelepiped...I don't think a very pertinent answer

 

[fabio.revit]

marionette is very useful for small parametric library objects.
banally, I create a rectangle, check the parameters width and height, extrude it and check the depth parameter.
the object obtained is a reproducible parallelepiped n times and with the parameters height and depth customizable.

I understood the operation, and it is interesting, in the end it is a programming language with graphic objects, and personally I have always been delighted with a little programming (consider that my first computer was a vic20 in 1984...).
marionnette is definitely comfortable, but I hope that building complex objects is not too Moroccan. one of the things that have stewed me of revit is that, coming to a certain point, if you want to press a little "on the accelerator" of complexity, you find yourself doing the programmer and not the architect.

 

[fabio.revit]

Who talked about revit? I did the example of dynamo and fathopper...the question was: "where to insert zendher radiators, heights and number of different elements is possible a similar thing in vw?" you showed him how to model a parallelepiped...I don't think a very pertinent answer

But if to model 1 radiator and change it to the flight is fast, I'm fine the same.
at the end with revit drawing a well-made parametric object takes away however of time, and more and more often I find myself with excessive "mount hours" in relation to the project.

 

[paolo.c]

Who talked about revit? I did the example of dynamo and fathopper

Okay, what about dynamo and fathopper? I repeat, the question is referred to vectorworks. It seems very clear to me.

the question was: "where to insert zendher radiators, heights and number of different elements is possible a similar thing in vw?"

Yes, with puppets. that is not immediate is another speech. and that you can also do with dynamo, boldhopper etc. etc. I'm not questioning.

you showed him how to model a parallelepipedo

was an example referring to the observation that puppets serve for more complex things.
cit. fabio.revit "so beyond the puppet, which I think is useful for more complex objects, the parameterization of small library objects is not possible. "

...I don't think a very pertinent answer

it will be pertinent to speak / flag of revit, when not required, in the section of vectorworks.

 

[Tristan]

Okay, what about dynamo and fathopper? I repeat, the question is referred to vectorworks. It seems very clear to me.

I simply wanted to make you understand that the example you brought is a bit too simple, feasible even with opensource software without having to buy vw.

it will be pertinent to speak / flag of revit, when not required, in the section of vectorworks.

You keep pulling revit out. I didn't mention it. the matter also affects me and I think I understand from your straw tail that it is not feasible if not "programming" with puppets. thanks for the info.

 

[paolo.c]

I simply wanted to make you understand that the example you brought is a bit too simple, feasible even with opensource software without having to buy vw.

It is simple because, as I have already written, I refer to the statement that puppets is good for more complex things.
Do I have to repeat that again?

You keep pulling revit out. I didn't mention it. the matter also affects me and I think I understand from your straw tail that it is not feasible if not "programming" with puppets. thanks for the info.

no, you can also do modeling in the classic way. But you know, I have a straw tail.

 

[Tristan]

It is simple because, as I have already written, I refer to the statement that puppets is good for more complex things.

Can you show me an example of a slightly more complex object? I don't know... a two-door window with dark or a chaise longue.. .

no, you can also do modeling in the classic way.

That's not what you've meant some back-up post.

 

[pla]

the two-door window with dark doors is easily available through the functions of vectorworks. the chaise longue finds it in the symbol bookcase provided with the program and if you want you can freely change it through the modeling functions. Since you seem to defend the families of revit, you show me how to make a parametric chaise longue?
Of course we have finished completely and it does not seem to me that the dialectic has the purposes of understanding the product.