• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


103 Excellent


Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Mountain View, CA

Recent Profile Visitors

1133 profile views
  1. Ah - got it - thanks! I would have never guessed to use "follow stairs" for the ramp.
  2. Thanks for checking it out. I'll put in a bug report. When you say "draw your own" - I tried drawing drawing a straight railing or a deck railing, and neither would follow the slope of the ramp. Do you mean manually drawing each pole and railing, or what am I missing since it looks like yours follows the slope.
  3. Also I noticed that the landing still has a straight line showing even when you curve the landing edge. Looks fine in 3D, just not right in plan. I assume that's a bug so I'll put a report in, unless someone knows a reason for it.
  4. I'm adding a wheelchair ramp off a deck in two pieces with a landing in the middle. I couldn't use the automatic settings because the top ramp was always about 2 inches below the deck top, so I adjusted heights manually. The two sections are not at 90 degrees, which seems to create two partial newel posts. (Tried it with 90 degree angle, and no issues) I tried an auto-landing with straight edges first, and that had the same issue as when I slightly rounded the edges of the landing, so the landing shape didn't seem to be the problem, just the odd angle of the connecting ramps. I tried to find a dbx setting to eliminate the newels for the landing, or for the top or bottom of the ramps, but didn't seem to have that option available. As you can see from the image, the doubled posts look pretty bad. Any suggestions? Thanks. 2021 10 04 SchC3 for railing.plan
  5. Just saw my name mentioned... I haven't checked Chieftalk for a little while as I have had a hopefully temporary vision issue with one eye, so I'm not committing to any new work at this time. In any case, I only do preliminary design and 3D visualizations, not contract documents. Hope you are able to find someone.
  6. Chief answered the report and said they have reproduced the issue and logged it.
  7. I just tried it and can confirm there is a difference in behavior between x12 and x13 in how a sink placed into a single countertop impacts the "stretch to fit" counter material. (BTW, I tried global mapping and it didn't make any difference.) I used the "Garden of Irises" painting as it showed very clearly how the texture in x13 is being stretched oddly at each corner of the sink. I put this on a single cabinet that I enlarged to show the issue. I will submit a bug report.
  8. Oops - you're right. Got distracted. Here is a similar view (didn't save the other one) in a PBR export, again no materials or lighting changed. This took a little longer, maybe over one minute, but I had video playing in another window which might have impacted it.
  9. FYI, the cam4 view thru the glass shower door shot doesn't have reflections with a 3090 card either. This was a PBR exported image, screen size. Took less than a minute. Someone made a comment about the mirror material being odd from a top view, but the second image is a floor overview shot, PBR exported basically instantaneous, and all looks good to me. I did not change any materials or settings.
  10. One thing they are apparently still working on is the PBR tree shadows. I just took this quick view in the new X13 in PBR to check one of the issues that is a big problem for my work, and while the inside detail is great, the outside still looks quite sad. On the good side, it was basically instantaneous to get that great looking metal faucet and very realistic shadowing on the kitchen counter, etc.
  11. A quick way to do this is to make a stream in plan, which as you point out is a constant width, then draw an adjacent slab or polyline solid and use the "Union" tool to combine them so that you will get a merged object that still has the "hole" in the terrain effect of the stream, but you will then get all the adjustable handles so you can adjust the shape as you need. You can make a really small slab next to it and adjust it away later, but that will get it to show all the adjustments while still retaining the stream terrain features.
  12. I duplicated the material, adjusted the angle and put a thin layer on top of the large block to get it to look right.
  13. I just tried turning the supposedly correct looking polyline solid 45 degrees, and now that is messed up in the same way. So it seems the problem occurs when I turn the slab OR the polyline solid any non- right angle.
  14. Why does a slab material have the top face 45 degrees off from the sides? I was applying a running bond block material and was surprised that it looks incorrect. Then I noticed that when I opened the Define Material dbx, the preview showed correctly. I then tried applying it to a polyline solid and it showed correctly. Is there any reason the slab should show the material differently or is this a bug? The last image shows the slab on the left and the polyline solid on the right.
  15. That worked great - thanks! I should have thought of that. Still weird though why the one elevation "works" without having to do that.