cv2702

Trying to add mini blinds to basement windows. Even though the preview shows the blinds, Full camera 3D views won't show them. I've tried to change the window style, dimensions: still no go. Window treatment on other floors (1 and 2), with various window styles and dimensions, show up in Full camera 3D views. If I make that window treatment a default in Default settings / Windows / Treatments, then all windows, including the level 0 ones show the blinds. Is there a special consideration for level 0? Doesn't make sense. What am I missing here? X10_Sapinière-45.zip

Sorry Eric, involved into too many threads. (why David? I have no clue...). The point is: thank you for your persistent presence on this forum.

I SEE THE LIGHT - now! I was maneuvering to the Library materials instead of the Plan materials. Thanks David & Mark for persevering with me. Chopsaw - My understanding is that defaults settings are per plan. And I start with a fresh plan, importing/copying to new plans as needed. So no bloat for me. But we each have our own approach.

David, good point, especially since I had considered that from the start I'm speculating here, but I believe when we make use of an item in some library, that item becomes an instance in our plan, separate from the library instance. If that's the case, then we should be able to modify the material properties of our instance.

David & Mark, Let me rewind this. So I set some defaults in Default settings / Floors and rooms / Current floor, as follows There is NO properties tab when defining defaults. I need access to the material's properties tab to reduce the material's roughness, as follows The workaround is to: Copy the material to user library Open the material from the user library and, on the properties tab, modify the roughness, then save Go back to Default settings / Floors and rooms / Current floor / Materials, then replace the material with the one modified in the previous step And I need to do this for every floor. There has to be a better way. And by the way, going the route of "defaults, materials, cabinets or cabinet doors" still doesn't get you to a properties tab for those materials. As I write this, I realize the main issue is that CA and manufacturers don't not allow modifying the properties of their catalog items, until you copy them to your user library. But why not?

Before submitting this to the Suggestion forum, I thought I would check with the wise men. In an everlasting project, I had defined some default material for cabinets, before the PBR days. I just realized that those cabinets, under certain angles, display a strong reflection under PBR, almost glossy. I've seen this also on floor finishes that used to be matte but are now highly reflective. There is currently no way to alter the material definition in the Base cabinets defaults to reduce the sheen (default roughness 45% currently it seems). So the solution for me is to alter each and every cabinet piece individually. Has anyone noticed this or am I missing something (again)? Assuming I'm not alone with this issue, I wish we could alter the material properties in the defaults.

Sorry Chopsaw, not addressing your issue but could not resist at doing a +1 on "Find and replace"

Thanks David, sounds like a good 'simpler' solution. UPDATE: Actually, just a light source (spot) will do it.

I'm trying to create an above ground pool light. I started with a recessed spot,rotated it and set the correct light attributes. But it wants to be wall mounted. How can I change that setting to 'surface mount' which I assume would let me place it on the side of the core catalog rectangular pool? Or am I in the wrong direction and there's a simpler way to do this?

Thanks guys. Pretty well in line with what I meant when I said "... CA's implementation of Ambient occlusion isn't compatible with the driver's ability ..." Anything done in video hardware is (usually) faster than in software. I find PBR so much more realistic, but it comes at a price. Just opening a camera on a moderately complexe scene takes 15-20 seconds; starting a PBR path walkthrough has a preamble of more than a minute before CA tackles the frames. Maybe CA could optimize PBR rendering by pushing as much stuff as possible to the video card, thus my reference to Ambient occlusion.

I just noticed that Nvidia says on its control panel that "Ambient occlusion" is not supported by CA X10. Can someone with an Nvidia card confirm this? Puzzling, unless CA's implementation of Ambient occlusion isn't compatible with the driver's ability.

Tried it on my end. Destination printer sticks. Printer destination is AFAIK remembered at the application level, so the issue could be your particular setup. I couldn't find any print setting for CA in the Windows registry, so must be in some config file.

From my testing: Create a 4 wall room + Define a camera in there + switch to full camera 3D view = CA default light appears. Drag a recessed light to that 2D plan + switch to full camera 3D view = no CA default light, just the recessed.

That ceiling blob of light seems wide and oblong and pretty intense. The point light generated by CA when there are no lights is usually more subdued and you do have lights defined. Are sure sure it's not a reflection off the island counter? Try closing all lights but the sconce to validate?

Number of active lights is controlled here: and here:

Couldn't quite figure how to reduce in size. Can you point me to some help?

I typically use 50 to 100 lumens for sun brightness. And don't forget what Graham and others have said: PBR displayed light intensity seems to be relative. The intensity of a 100 lumens spot light is not an absolute 100 lumens in terms of what PBR displays. That spot light will dim down if you add another light with 500 lumens close to it. Having no backdrop like in your case also adds to the sun's apparent brightness through the windows.

I noticed they're no slop in the shower and no means to keep water from pouring over the wood floor. Hope this is "in progress" Also, in PBR, the glass shower walls and door are totally transparent, in both PBR and standard views, even if the definition is tempered glass. The reflection is not realistic as the walls are invisible. Is it just me? I seem to remember in previous versions that tempered showed a slight tint in standard view at least.

If you look at my signature, my main system is not a beast, but not a slush either. But I run PBR walkthroughs a lot. Just ran one and average CPU usage by CA was 85% and 80% for the GPU - and it took 45 minutes to produce a 100 second walk. What are your requirements? Just enough for CA to run, now and the near future? Have no patience waiting for things to finish? Money is no object or every penny counts? Do RT's or PBR's? My perspective: investing 1 000$ for working on projects earning me 100 000$ over time is a small cost of doing business. I've always had this strategy: I buy 80% of the maximum power (CPU or GPU) at 50% of the cost to own the the maximum power. I revisit my configuration and requirements every 3-4 years.

Thanks for sharing. This might be very useful for another project I'm looking at.

Thanks, will look into it.

Any hints on how to reduce the count (which I assume needs to be done before importing)?

I also have had a few of those errors with X10, not with X8-X9. In my case, while not sure why CA would bomb out, I do know what I was attempting to do: placing some imported high poly 3D's on a plan. I could see CA's memory go up to 9GB (!) and and excruciatingly slow response While working with the plan with those symbols were and not even manipulating them, I would get that error. Turns out for me that saving as another instance and later reloading that instance did not cause any problem. I finally gave up on those symbols and removed then from that plan: no issue since. Did I mention that I discovered that one symbol had 2 million faces? What I would like to see is an error message with a bit more detail: the program knows, why not share a bit. Enough to give me a general idea of what to watch for. Also and this might already be an option, but how about a dump feature I could share with Support? Bottom line is: most applications are developed to address the main cases of logic, hopefully to address most of the exceptions. Too often, the development cycle can't afford to do load stress testing.

I use this approach, but here's a twist. When I initially place the recessed in the soffit, with no flush mount, they end up buried somewhere in the eave, so I add an offset from ceiling (10"). All is good and I save the plan. I later open that plan only to see the recessed hanging in the air, 10" under the soffit. So I change the offset to ½" and after that all seems well. I have seen this behavior on various plans. Drives me nuts. Anyone else?

SSA only