Camera Controls !!! - AccuRender nXt2024-03-28T10:41:26Zhttp://accurender.ning.com/forum/topics/camera-controls?commentId=6293855%3AComment%3A9826&xg_raw_resources=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noRon that technique was the s…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-28:6293855:Comment:102062010-12-28T17:19:24.000ZEric Bhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/EricB
<span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;"><br />
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">Ron that technique was the suggested workaround about a year ago when AR5 lacked the ability to adopt or impose the Walkabout view into or out or AutoCAD. It helps to…</span></span></p>
<span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;"><br />
</span><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">Ron that technique was the suggested workaround about a year ago when AR5 lacked the ability to adopt or impose the Walkabout view into or out or AutoCAD. It helps to get the window to look about right but lacks consistency. After the ‘set autocad view to current walkabout’ was added the need to eyeball an approximate widow to retain a similar (but not exact) depiction of the current vantage point was no longer needed.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">Also- the above method is still only an approximation of the two apparent depictions of the space, that of the AutoCAD and that of the rendered AR5 vantage point. Any slight change in the AutoCAD environment will shift the implied AutoCAD camera. Not the best environment to be working in when you have to do things like;</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">Photograph Matching, Multiple Finish or Phase studies, jumping between two or more vantage points, rendering the same model at different images sizes, revisiting an older model with saved VIEWS that need to be rendered the same.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">Because AR5 still understands VIEWS like AR3, AR4 and can talk to AutoCAD using saved view names is why I stick with VIEWs and not CAMERAs. I know that a VIEW in AR5 will always remain and can specifically be set to a known point in space within the model while not being warped by any changes in the window or image ratios or even screen resolution.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">The bottom line is that AutoCAD appears to have forever lost the ability to retain a consistent depiction of a vantage point when defined by a camera as it appears to be now tied to the size of the dialog box and the screen resolution to name a few. The older DVIEW command appears to have lost its understanding of the zoom control but retained all the other elements.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 4.8pt;"><span style="font-family: "Lucida Sans Unicode"; color: black; font-size: 8pt;">So for exactness and consistency I will continue to use VIEWS and render in Walkabout AR5 using AutoCAD or REVIT for the model building and set-up.</span></p>
<p> </p> What I've been doing seems to…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-22:6293855:Comment:99542010-12-22T04:04:45.000ZRon Eddyhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RonEddy
What I've been doing seems to work fairly well. First decide what ratio the rendering will be (3:4, 1024:768, etc). Then draw a rectangle in AutoCAD having the same ratio. Zoom in till either the height or width of the rectangle barely shows in the AutoCAD window. Then stretch the window in the other direction till it just encloses the rectangle. From that point on, unless you dock and undock toolbars frequently, the AutoCAD window will always show VERY close to what you would see in a…
What I've been doing seems to work fairly well. First decide what ratio the rendering will be (3:4, 1024:768, etc). Then draw a rectangle in AutoCAD having the same ratio. Zoom in till either the height or width of the rectangle barely shows in the AutoCAD window. Then stretch the window in the other direction till it just encloses the rectangle. From that point on, unless you dock and undock toolbars frequently, the AutoCAD window will always show VERY close to what you would see in a rendering and the size is retained from session to session. If you set up an AutoCAD camera and stretch the camera window to the same size as your AutoCAD window, the camera will also always show you what you'll see in the walkabout window when it's set to that camera. the only irritation here is that the camera window only endures for the current session, but the camera settings themselves are retained Please start another discussi…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-20:6293855:Comment:98262010-12-20T16:47:10.000ZRoy Hirshkowitzhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/RoyHirshkowitz
<p>Please start another discussion to talk about this topic! This does not belong in a thread related to the camera tool.</p>
<p>Please start another discussion to talk about this topic! This does not belong in a thread related to the camera tool.</p> In the material, tab you shou…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-20:6293855:Comment:98202010-12-20T16:15:21.000Zakinlolu olugbojihttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/akinloluolugboji
<p>In the material, tab you should see the materials, it is either you edit those or you you try exploring the model and assigning it to different layers as it is ok for you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If the second method works then the first should, you just happen to have missing some steps or try with another downloaded model.</p>
<p>In the material, tab you should see the materials, it is either you edit those or you you try exploring the model and assigning it to different layers as it is ok for you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If the second method works then the first should, you just happen to have missing some steps or try with another downloaded model.</p> thanks, when i tried the firs…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-20:6293855:Comment:98172010-12-20T13:01:09.000Zbanjokohttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/banjoko
<p>thanks, when i tried the first method,some parts are missing, and cant find the camera yu said i shold remove. but the second method from nxt, imports its well but all with the same layer blocks in which i can not assign materials to it.</p>
<p>thanks, when i tried the first method,some parts are missing, and cant find the camera yu said i shold remove. but the second method from nxt, imports its well but all with the same layer blocks in which i can not assign materials to it.</p> Another way is to use Nxt wid…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-16:6293855:Comment:96642010-12-16T13:55:05.000Zakinlolu olugbojihttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/akinloluolugboji
<p>Another way is to use Nxt widget.</p>
<p>See image.</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55256383?profile=original" target="_self"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55256383?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="721"></img></a></p>
<p>Browse for the and you are home free.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Either way be sure to do it in a blank drawing and not your model in case of a crash and also where the scale is wrong you can correct it, save and the file is always there to use another…</p>
<p>Another way is to use Nxt widget.</p>
<p>See image.</p>
<p><a target="_self" href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55256383?profile=original"><img width="721" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/55256383?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="721"/></a></p>
<p>Browse for the and you are home free.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Either way be sure to do it in a blank drawing and not your model in case of a crash and also where the scale is wrong you can correct it, save and the file is always there to use another day.</p> Type 3dsin in autocad command…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-16:6293855:Comment:96632010-12-16T13:49:04.000Zakinlolu olugbojihttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/akinloluolugboji
<p>Type 3dsin in autocad command prompt.</p>
<p>Add all</p>
<p>Then remove global settings and camera</p>
<p>Choose BY MATERIAL and SSPLIT BY MATERIAL</p>
<p>Then OK.</p>
<p>Type 3dsin in autocad command prompt.</p>
<p>Add all</p>
<p>Then remove global settings and camera</p>
<p>Choose BY MATERIAL and SSPLIT BY MATERIAL</p>
<p>Then OK.</p> pls how do yu import the cars…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-12-16:6293855:Comment:96582010-12-16T09:48:53.000Zbanjokohttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/banjoko
<p>pls how do yu import the cars into acad from where you use to download the cars(<a href="http://archive3d.net/">http://archive3d.net</a>). bcos i tried it but splits the models</p>
<p>pls how do yu import the cars into acad from where you use to download the cars(<a href="http://archive3d.net/">http://archive3d.net</a>). bcos i tried it but splits the models</p> Alejandro, Yinka and Eric - t…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-10-14:6293855:Comment:46292010-10-14T14:09:15.000ZEric Bhttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/EricB
Alejandro, Yinka and Eric - three AR users missing the good old days. Well, at least as far as camera & view controls go.
Alejandro, Yinka and Eric - three AR users missing the good old days. Well, at least as far as camera & view controls go. That is exactly what I am say…tag:accurender.ning.com,2010-10-12:6293855:Comment:44862010-10-12T23:41:45.000ZYinka Gbotoshohttp://accurender.ning.com/profile/YinkaGbotosho
That is exactly what I am saying. We have had better times in the past with cameras. I wish Roy could somehow revisit the camera issue by looking back at ar3 and ar4. I think ar3 had best camera and then ar4. NXT however has an amazing rendering engine. Well done Roy.
That is exactly what I am saying. We have had better times in the past with cameras. I wish Roy could somehow revisit the camera issue by looking back at ar3 and ar4. I think ar3 had best camera and then ar4. NXT however has an amazing rendering engine. Well done Roy.