Surface Mounted Tube Light Symbols

[Kbird1]

1 hour ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

Just to further demonstrate the effect.

 

Sample with sun at 1,000, lights at 500.

 

If you look out the windows the background is way overexposed. Say I want the background view to be more normal. To do this I need to reduce the suns intensity, I dropped it to 10 Lux. But now my 500 lumen lights are way too bright.

 

I then reduce the 3 interior lights to 110 lumens and things start to balance out. However, as the suns interior ambient contribution is so low my ceiling and the room corners are now too dark.

 

To fix this I added 2 area point lights with shadows turned off into the room and set them to 20 lumens.

 

I can now adjust the overall interior by changing the contribution ratio between the 3 light fixtures and the two area lights. This one has the 3 light fixtures at 30 lumens and the 2 area lights at 40 lumens.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And there be the current Issue with PBR .....only someone like you who has spent countless hours playing with the New PBR light engine can sort this stuff out....

It's almost like being back in the RT Days except with PBR it happens almost instantly (6-30secs) in front of you.

 

So what about the other 20,000 mere mortal Users of CA ? 

 

 

[Doug_N]

I am guessing, but it would seem that regardless of the shape of the fixture, the light is eminating from a  point source.  If you look at the geometry of the fixture, and do an imaginary ray trace, the long shadow makes sense in the model.  

 

To fix this, in my wild ass guess of an opinion, it would seem that CA will have to program a light source that is a line rather than a point.

[TheKitchenAbode]

1 minute ago, Kbird1 said:

 

 

And there be the current Issue with PBR .....only someone like you who has spent countless hours playing with the New PBR light engine can sort this stuff out....

It's almost like being back in the RT Days except with PBR it happens almost instantly (6-30secs) in front of you.

 

So what about the other 20,000 mere mortal Users of CA ? 

 

 

 

Understand, but I have just provided the key few steps needed. The lighting works essentially like it does in real life. The brighter it is outside then the brighter it will be inside for any given amount of glazed area. Less glazing, less light, more glazing, more light. For a given area of glazing you can force more light through that area by cranking up the sun, but that also means the exterior will get brighter. If the room is still too dark then just like the real world you will need to add additional interior lights. How bright they need to be will depend upon how bright the interior is from the sun. Just like a flash light, it works great in the dark but in daylight it's not going to show as the light level from the flash light can not over come the daylight brightness.

 

I made a few more lighting adjustments to get the room light nice and evenly lit. Now when I drop library items into the room they render up quite nicely even at their default material settings.

 

[Kbird1]

42 minutes ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

 

Understand, but I have just provided the key few steps needed. The lighting works essentially like it does in real life. The brighter it is outside then the brighter it will be inside for any given amount of glazed area. Less glazing, less light, more glazing, more light. For a given area of glazing you can force more light through that area by cranking up the sun, but that also means the exterior will get brighter. If the room is still too dark then just like the real world you will need to add additional interior lights. How bright they need to be will depend upon how bright the interior is from the sun. Just like a flash light, it works great in the dark but in daylight it's not going to show as the light level from the flash light can not over come the daylight brightness.

 

I made a few more lighting adjustments to get the room light nice and evenly lit. Now when I drop library items into the room they render up quite nicely even at their default material settings.

 

 

That is looking nice

 

It is just a Pity that HQ has not sorted out the Auto balance between the Sun and Interior Lighting better as yet, as you seemed to have done

 

PS. looks like someone ripped your seat cushions 

 

[Doug_N]

  It would seem that there is more to the missing sides than just the surface mount fixtures!

[TheKitchenAbode]

6 minutes ago, Kbird1 said:

 

PS. looks like someone ripped your seat cushions 

 

 

Those chairs are from the Wayfair catalog, some in there seem to have missing or improperly placed surfaces.

[Kbird1]

5 minutes ago, TheKitchenAbode said:

 

Those chairs are from the Wayfair catalog, some in there seem to have missing or improperly placed surfaces.

 

Ahhhh ....wasn't sure what I was seeing actually , I believe the WF Catalog is just their SketchUp Library Converted for Chief and was likely done with a Batch Converter? so not surprising....

 

[Kbird1]

10 minutes ago, Doug_N said:

  It would seem that there is more to the missing sides than just the surface mount fixtures!

 

Ooops that's not Good

 

I think this is one Adrean can look into though , along with the fixtures in the 1st Post?

 

@Adrean

[Adrean]

Thanks for tagging me, Mick!

 

I'll log the Arts & Crafts Chandelier issue and we can get it tackled in an update. I cannot reproduce missing surfaces on the Flush Mount Tube lighting. I suspect this could be related to the "Clip Surfaces Within" setting, but to be sure, please create a support ticket that includes a plan containing the offending object.

 

Regarding the Wayfair Catalog, we did import their 3D ready objects to convert them into a Chief Architect format, I can report this object quality issue to their team and work with them on an update for objects like these.

 

Best,

[Kbird1]

16 minutes ago, Adrean said:

Thanks for tagging me, Mick!

 

I'll log the Arts & Crafts Chandelier issue and we can get it tackled in an update. I cannot reproduce missing surfaces on the Flush Mount Tube lighting. I suspect this could be related to the "Clip Surfaces Within" setting, but to be sure, please create a support ticket that includes a plan containing the offending object.

 

Regarding the Wayfair Catalog, we did import their 3D ready objects to convert them into a Chief Architect format, I can report this object quality issue to their team and work with them on an update for objects like these.

 

Best,

 

Thanks Adrean !  happy to tag you if you don't mind on content or bad symbols....

 

Personally the Surface mount lights are not an Issue for me except for the weird 3 light types included on one fixed, they don't work properly till that is removed and changed to a Spot, light Source ( per this thread) but some seem to have the missing surfaces Issue .

 

I did mention the Clipping Distance early in the Thread but both Chopsaw and Graham are both Power Users so I was assuming another type of issue eg graphics card drivers

[Chopsaw]

6 hours ago, Kbird1 said:

Just noticed in your Sig. you are Using NV Driver 378.92 , is that correct?

 

Currently testing 398.36 but it does not work with Adobe Reader and may try one more new one before rolling back to 378.92 and making another Tech Support request at Nvidia. 

[Kbird1]

23 minutes ago, Chopsaw said:

 

Currently testing 398.36 but it does not work with Adobe Reader and may try one more new one before rolling back to 378.92 and making another Tech Support request at Nvidia. 

 

Oh that's right you had issues with 3D PDF's right? that's a strange one , thought this disappearing Surfaces thing my be Driver Related....

 

and you did check your Clipping distance in the camera correct ?

 

 

 

 

[Chopsaw]

1 hour ago, Kbird1 said:

and you did check your Clipping distance in the camera correct ?

 

Definitely not Clipping as you can see the missing surfaces at about 20' away if the angle is correct even with clipping set to 2".

 

However your test plan is ok on my system using all the same camera settings.  I think that eliminates the video driver......

 

I trust that Graham knows how to do a library update and Adrean would likely remember fixing that issue if it happened recently..

 

Also just tried dropping in a light from my library into your plan file and it works so I will test in another plan and see if it is my template somehow.

 

Strangest thing ever.  It works in a Metric plan template and not an Imperial plan template for me and this even dictates how the light displays in the library browser preview.  So what template did you do your test plan in Mick ?  Totally confused at this point. 

 

If it is something to do with measurement unit conversion within the library that would be quite the glitch.

 

 

[Kbird1]

36 minutes ago, Chopsaw said:

Also just tried dropping in a light from my library into your plan file and it works so I will test in another plan and see if it is my template somehow.

 

Strangest thing ever.  It works in a Metric plan template and not an Imperial plan template for me and this even dictates how the light displays in the library browser preview.  So what template did you do your test plan in Mick ?  Totally confused at this point. 

 

I think if you choose anything and check the ALDO > Linestyle you will find there are only 6 , which means it is the Special Template that Dermot Posted in the LinesStyles Topic a while back , I just found it last week and was playing with it as a New Template.....can't remember if I imported my Defaults into it ? but I now know not all Defaults are imported when you do that it seems ( does 1/2 the job ) from trying it the other day....

 

Okay found it again.....

 

https://chieftalk.chiefarchitect.com/topic/17252-ability-to-delete-line-styles-please/?do=findComment&comment=145450

 

 

*** just tried it in the OOB residential Plan template and I don't seem to have any missing surfaces...still have ugly shadows on lights though.

 

M.

 

 

[Chopsaw]

Ok will try that out as it would possibly be a newer generation of template than the stock X10 templates.

 

Wow this is getting really weird.  Gave it a test run in Dermot's no-lines template and it displays in camera view fine like yours however it is still missing the two side panel surfaces in the library browser preview.   Can you confirm that Mick ?

 

I wonder what template Adrean is using.  X11 possibly.

[Kbird1]

Which light fitting exactly?  are you talking about the gray/black sides or ends? or just the Clear Lense part? 

 

Vector view or std?

 

Your Default (Core)  Aluminium Brushed material isn't missing or messed up is it ?

 

[Chopsaw]

All four of the Surface Mounted Tube Lights in Standard View or Vector although vector is easier to see.

 

Side and end panels are missing all the same on each light except the "Long" which is the opposite side and end of the others.

[Kbird1]

13 minutes ago, Chopsaw said:

All four of the Surface Mounted Tube Lights in Standard View or Vector although vector is easier to see.

 

Side and end panels are missing all the same on each light except the "Long" which is the opposite side and end of the others.

 

Looks good here, that's why I thought it maybe your Material...the library would use it , where-as my plan would use the one in the plan already...

 

[Chopsaw]

I assume you did rotate and check the other two sides ?  They both use the same default "Aluminum Brushed"  although yours has a bump map assigned to it which I do not have in my database so that should not effect how it renders on my machine in comparison to the one I am using.   

 

This one may be for Adrean unless you have more ideas.

[Kbird1]

11 minutes ago, Chopsaw said:

I assume you did rotate and check the other two sides ?  They both use the same default "Aluminum Brushed"  although yours has a bump map assigned to it which I do not have in my database so that should not effect how it renders on my machine in comparison to the one I am using.   

 

This one may be for Adrean unless you have more ideas.

 

Yes I spun each one in the library and even copied one to my User Library and changed the Alum. to Pink and still all good.

 

I have no idea where the Bump-map came from then as it is supposed to be using a default CA Material isn't it?

 

I renamed my textures folder and reopened CA and it is now using the same File in the Referenced Zips but the File is still MetalBump_CAAB.jpg .

Removing the BMap from the Texture made no difference to me how it rendered.

 

Hopefully Adrean Checks back in.....

[Chopsaw]

Yes I do too, and it seemed to work last time.

 

@Adrean   Have we provided enough information for you to reproduce this or would you like a defective plan file ?

 

[Adrean]

Very strange behavior indeed!

 

I would not think that the behavior of the surfaces on these light fixtures would be dictated by a Template unless it is a default material issue. AFAIK the templates we distribute haven't referenced these tube lighting symbols; though a custom template that contains older copies of these objects could be a culprit. We did recently rename these items to use the word "Tube" instead of "Fluorescent" in X10 catalogs. You could open the specification of the object to see if the item has the old name. You could also use the "Replace From Library" tool on the offending objects to ensure that you are leveraging the most current version of the symbol (assuming your catalogs are up to date).

 

If you've done all of these things and are still seeing the missing surface behavior, please submit a support ticket so we can understand and track the issue in its entirety. Feel free to share this thread's link with our support team, and I will lend what I know about it to trouble-shoot so we can get to the bottom of the problem.

 

I'll make a note of the lighting properties that need to be improved for these objects and tackle those (I'm a little surprised that these objects are being used at all, TBH, I would have suspected we were specifying recessed cans much more frequently).

 

Thanks for your efforts working on identifying the problem!

 

 

[Chopsaw]

Thanks Adrean,   Mick was on the right track with the material suggestion however it must have another twist to it somehow as I have a version of "Aluminum Brushed" in my Imperial template file that does not have a bump map and fails to generate two of the 4 side panels.  However in a stock metric template it generates the panels without issue using the same material.  Also very curious where the material is referenced from for the library browser preview window, as this is also effected by which template I use.  I was able to correct the issue in my original customers plan file by painting the new version of the material with the (C:\ProgramData\Chief Architect Premier X10\Referenced Files\BonusWaterSupply.zip#zip:BrushedMetalBump_CAAB.jpg) bump map onto it from the core catalog.

 

Test Plan files on the way.....

 

Many thanks,  Chopsaw

[Kbird1]

29 minutes ago, Chopsaw said:

Thanks Adrean,   Mick was on the right track with the material suggestion however it must have another twist to it somehow as I have a version of "Aluminum Brushed" in my Imperial template file that does not have a bump map and fails to generate two of the 4 side panels.  However in a stock metric template it generates the panels without issue using the same material.  Also very curious where the material is referenced from for the library browser preview window, as this is also effected by which template I use.  I was able to correct the issue in my original customers plan file by painting the new version of the material with the (C:\ProgramData\Chief Architect Premier X10\Referenced Files\BonusWaterSupply.zip#zip:BrushedMetalBump_CAAB.jpg) bump map onto it from the core catalog.

 

Test Plan files on the way.....

 

Many thanks,  Chopsaw

 

@Adrean 

 

How old is your Imperial Template CS ? it seems from playing around a bit, that CA will always look in the CA DATA\Textures Folder 1st and then looks in the Program Files\Textures Folder Next  and uses the 1st copy of the BMap file , BrushedMetalBump_CAAB.jpg,  it finds. There is an older BrushedMetal.jpg in each folder too which perhaps an older plan is Using since I think the Metals are Predefined in CA ( ie no texture file shown normally) , I made a new material from it and applied it to the Light but , it still rendered Correctly for me.

 

\Documents\Chief Architect Premier X10 Data\Textures\BrushedMetalBump_CAAB.jpg

 

I looked in my CAX9 Textures folder and the BMap file is in there too , it is not there in the CAX7 Data Folder (i reinstalled X8 so the Data\Textures folder is empty currently)

 

I have not tried the Other Light with missing Surfaces above have you?

 

 

***Here is my Full plan and all Textures in case it helps you figure something out.....

 

Surface Light Plan and Materials.zip

 

 

[Chopsaw]

Mick,  I believe my current template was set up in X9. However I almost always retest with the latest blank CA template file when I encounter something as strange as this.   Did not test Doug's light when Adrean said it was taken care of,  hopefully she will be able to figure out what is going on when I send in the affected plan files.

 

Thanks for all your help and tutoring.