Jump to content
AutoDesSys Forums


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


jldaureil last won the day on August 15

jldaureil had the most liked content!

About jldaureil

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 03/07/1969

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

46 profile views
  1. jldaureil


    🙂 Thank you very much !
  2. jldaureil


    Hi Hans That's exactly what I look these tow last days. Fortunately the partner who works with TEKLA structure (Trimble) can export in .skp a very clean geometry when I get it back in FormZ By cons formz does not give the impression of wanting to take the turn of the BIM ... It becomes penalizing in my case In my activity I delayed the adoption of a BIM platform but I will have to make a decision So I looked very closely at the RHINO + VisualARQ + Grasshopper solution This is particularly interesting.
  3. jldaureil


    Hello I would have liked to know if there is a way to import a .ifc file into FZ For example, does anyone know of a solution to convert an .ifc to another format (IE .sat) and then enter it in FZ? jl
  4. jldaureil


    Simple question what are the latest version imported in FZ6.7.3 and in FZ 8 Tnks JL manual online doen't indicate versions http://www.formz.com/manuals/formZ85/formZ_Pro/!SSL!/WebHelp/formzpro.php
  5. jldaureil

    Display resolution

    Hi I've created a simple file to isolate that question as you can see faceted objects converted from the smooth nubz loft presents irregularities (pink circles) (to be compared to the clean faceted version constructed with c-mesh (under Z673)) I do not understand exactly why this occurs... Ztech, can we have an technical explanation ? TEST smooth.fmz
  6. jldaureil

    Display resolution

    good This is the way I followed .. I derived all the faces and then I started to rebuild progressively by rotating the "non-aligned" faces BUT for a reason that I do not understand happened to the face on the following image, firstly the derivative face do not produce facets (with 22.5° angle for max normal angle I get 48 segments than 24) like the others and secondly when I want to rebuild it (nurbz degree 1 in V) facets ares in slight rotation. If I want to be clearer: I use two sources that are perfectly aligned (circles 24 segments at 22.5° for Max Normal Angle) When I perform the tight loft the facets are lightly turned on the resulting nurbz I still have 24 segments (the first segment perfectly at 90 °on the word grid) but each angle that I can verify by converting the object varies slightly (around 15 °but not exactly 15°) (always with 22.5° for Max normal angle in my exemple) This curious phenomenon explains why while these geometries are very regular one obtains faces not aligned in direction V (longitude) and thus these series of triangles between the stitched surfaces ... it's recurrent with parametric geometry in FZ but that's also why converted faceted objects are never as clean as if they were built directly faceted. Finally, in Z8 if we convert without triangle on fringe scheme, we obtain shifted grids (which will probably have to be triangulated) I have the impression that I am confronted here with a fundamental limit of the facet creation algorithm. (Which explains why the scheme with triangle one fringe is selected by default)
  7. jldaureil

    Display resolution

    I derive 3 versions faceted (3 resolutions) from a complex smooth object (initial modeling in solidworks) (Import in formz gives solid smooth) The main object is a circular dome. I wanted to do that in Z8 to get a mesh without a triangle. But I do not understand exactly how the mesh algorithm works Here is a synoptic of the parameters used Z6.7.3 = Max Normal deviation (point density and facets) When I open the file in Z8 The software creates as many faceting schemes as I have variants perfect ! It converts the parameter Max Normal deviation to normal angle tolerance Z6.7.3 = Max Normal deviation (point density and facets) Z8 = Normal angle tolerance (Surface tolerance and Edge tolerance) Under Z6 Max Normal deviation is perfectly predictable for example 15 ° exactly produces a circle of 24 faces (logic 360/15 = 24) By cons Z8 for Normal angle tolerance at 15 ° I get 36 segments For 10 ° I have 54 segment instead of 36 under Z6 Do you know why ? Thanks JL File Lien du téléchargement https://we.tl/t-uEtul5a4bi
  8. jldaureil

    IGES difficult to open

    Hello vva MAGNIFICENT ! (your work...) because actually the file is not clean ... I'm going to clean all that. THANK YOU !
  9. Hello everyone I am confronted to an IGES file which saturates my memory of my machine at the opening at the time of the construction of surfaces. The file is 143 MB uncompressed heavy ... I'm not sure why until I open it ... Would there be a charitable soul who would find time to open it with a powerful machine? (in any case more than mine) ... I can only offer my eternal gratitude in exchange and entrust the model to Anton later ... JL Lien du téléchargement https://we.tl/t-ULwslvPYNq 1 fichier SKYLOOP.zip
  10. jldaureil

    8.6 bugs

    hi Brian What do you design to use software as different as VectorWork and Shark Pro / Ansys Spaceclaim? I have not made a decision but I will look closely VectorWorks in the coming weeks. Your offer could appeal to me ... On the other hand no chance that I go towards Shark ...
  11. jldaureil

    8.6 bugs

    thank you R2D2 I pursue different goals. Regarding the retopologie, I look at the tools at my disposal when I work on complex objects that I use as symbols. Typically these are cars. I made a Nissan that I use on current projects. Currently I am in the process of cleaning a Ferrari 812 superfast file as part of the construction of a garage for a customer who owns (among other things) the car. (for the time being, really a super car) I recovered a file skp (3d wharehouse) not badly drawn but as often with a topology not terrible. It is certain that it is not vectorworks that can be useful in this field ... On the other hand, it is the layout of Formz 8 that does not correspond to my current workflow and the disappearance of the draft and its layout (if I summarize: layout only in hidden line, no rendering hybrid raster / vector, disappearance of the scale view + difficult to draw in 2d before / after modeling with possibilities equivalent to draft Z673 a kind of autocad light ... I will begin a dedicated discussion) All my problem is to know if Formz 8 will evolve to find the possibilities I have in Z673 in this area (without necessarily put in place the Z673 draft ...) (it can go through an evolved version of the layout 8 but the work seems huge to compete with solutions like VectorWorks and others) I'm looking either to replace the draft FZ673 by an alternative draft such as Drafsight (Dassault System) that I have already used and which corresponds to Autocad Lt (There is no question that I use Autodesk software, I spend here on the reasons but I can explain if necessary). It will replace the draft FZ673 without providing a real evolution. Either I turn to a solution BIM Archicad (or rather Vectorworks more economical.) The investment is not the same and it is a bit complicated for me because I mainly make new houses or renovation projects (small sizes though) but several simultaneously at different stages and different nature. I do not necessarily need a software capable of managing very big projects and therefore complex to learn and use .. I do not intend to change the 3D modeler a priori. So if I summarize, either the Z9 layout becomes a real production tool (that of sketchup is a good example of the way forward?) or Autodessys finds an organization with a third-party publisher, or we must each find (tinker) the solution that suits him best (a bit like you with vectorWorks ... Today it is clear that among all the polarities that exist in the world of 3D Autodessys seems to have been strongly influenced by the sketchup star ... One might even think that if Formz could once be perceived as Rhino's eldest one (newbie) could now almost say that he represents a kind of Sketchup clone. When we know his history, we can regret that he did not find a way to keep his unique originality. Yet other lights shine in the sky, big 3D platforms like Maya and others (RIP Softimage), the software for sculptures (Zbrush, 3dcoat ...) and all the software of industrial CAD (solidworks, catia ...) What attracted me at the very beginning (3.5 for me) was precisely that Formz was a little at the border that these galaxies: draw precisely with ease, manage many geometries and very varied, combining almost all geometric classes available (primitive, mesh, curves and math surfaces: nurbs patch (today named sub-d) metaballs etc etc .. capable of mastering situations as different as architecture design organic modeling ... and even a little autocad in bonus ... The strength of Formz has always been its variety, perhaps it was also a little weakness: difficult to deepen each area and at the same time modernize the code to evolve. I do not dispute the quality of work done for simplicity and ergonomics but I regret that this was done at the expense of the depth of options of tools and software in general ... To integrate Vray is undoubtedly also an excellent proposition that some have asked here a decent ... I'm sure many of you find this great, and you're right but it remains that Formz already had a very high level rendering engine. For my part I can not thank Ben Dean enough for giving us the Maxwell Gateway which remains a fabulous rendering engine whose results compete without shame with those of Vray. What reassures me is that the code Formz is modern today and that I suppose all our grievances are technically feasible. To conclude, let's think about what happened at Newtek. A break was created between the leaders of NewTek, creators of LightWave, and the main programmers of LightWave 3D about a complete rewrite of Workflow and code LightWave 3D. A break that led NewTek Vice President of 3D Development, Brad Peebler, to leave NewTek and form a new company called Luxology. He was joined by Allan Hastings and Stuart Ferguson, main developers of LightWave, then by most of the LightWave programming team. They created Modo. Evolving in the continuity is the challenge for Autodessys
  12. jldaureil

    8.6 bugs

    Hi Allan So these are the first preferences and maybe the second windows platform. It is necessary that the people who have problems of stability do first the test without preference (and personally in phase test on Z6 I do not have an active preference) Then it would be interesting to know if all windows versions are impacted in the same way ... Not easy because you do not run multiple WIndows on one machine. This assumes to have a heterogeneous park ...
  13. jldaureil

    8.6 bugs

    hi r2D2 In relation to your answer, can you explain to me how you manage the parameters of the lines in VectorWorks (thickness, style, color) when they are linked to the reference file? Can you preserve the settings if you update the reference? How do you manage the cuts? Do you use clipping planes or sections? This whole discussion is exciting. (as would be a conference between the participants) The idea of ​​linking FormZ bilaterally to another software like vectorworks (or archicad) whose drawing and BIM functions are probably inaccessible to formz is perhaps the true "holy grail" I really do not see how Autodessys could afford to catch up so big. Is it desirable? There are already a lot of products available. This is why in such a situation it is better to enter into a partnership with another complementary publisher under conditions, without doubt, to preserve its independence. (It would not have occurred to Autodessys to build an in-house rendering engine to complement (or replace) Lightworks Render Zone!) This is why we should be better informed of future directions in order to better organize our software solutions and the training that accompanies them. On the other hand, Autodessys could focus on modeling. In this area there is still more to do. For example I am currently studying the solutions of retopology (topogun for example, but especially the tools present in Blender) It is very interesting when I have to retype a model imported from a manufacturer or 3D wharhouse and has defects in topology (object doctor in 673 is not bad but sometimes you have to go further) See this video (in french) You will find others in English on the web You will see for example the skinwrap modifier (genial), the tools of symmetry and more generally the topological selection on mesh in particular by a kind of brush. The drawing of quadpoly uses tools which unless I'm wrong are not available at all. Formz does not have the exclusivity of efficiency ... Another chapter for which Formz seems to be autistic is that of physical constraint modeling. For example, try to model a curtain in the wind; ok you can reconstruct the shape with nurbz curves for example (that's what I'll probably do) but another approach is to draw the object and place it in the wind (direction and force become the decisive parameters) Nature is a great modeler, think of the erosion for example that shaped our landscapes. Modeling clouds of smoke or simply snow is another challenge for the user of formz .. (I would like to be able to cover an architectural model of snow in a few clicks ...) And these are the same devices that can be used for clothes ... (This is not my subject, but I'm sure there will be some of you interested) A few years ago the morphing appeared in formz, even I did not find exactly one application in my work, I found it very exciting. In the history of Formz the most striking was in my opinion the originality of some of its tool (unfold for example not to be confused with UV unfolding which remains oddly absent) That's why it seems to me essential that Autodessys finds the solutions to solve the fundamental questions (stability, automatic 2D drawings, rich presentation and impression) to concentrate on modeling tools able to continue to write the legend. I know that art is difficult and criticism easy, and I do not want to be a lecon donor, but there are passionate global users here. This is a great wealth. A tool is only what one makes of it. Listening to your community is important if you want to enlarge it and attract young talent.
  14. jldaureil

    8.6 bugs

    Hello Brian and all As you know (or not) I try to convert to FZ 8 ... It's like a horror movie here! From 3.5 to 6.7.3 there have been stability issues. 673 is by far the most stable version (agree with you Brian) (I do not have a problem here with the stairs, and I almost never use the screws) Without going into details, I now have the feeling of many interface improvements but not much at the bottom. I discover a little horrified these question of stability! Sometimes some crash on special geometrical cases or with the incremental autosave when I work very quickly in draft. But it is rare. At the same time I am a cool guy (yes it's true) I pay for my update even without using them, even if I do not buy them at the exit. I consider Formz as a very economical software and I think it is necessary to support the developers. (here I have an emotional thought for my fellow French architect reduced to petition against the giant Autodesk who exploit them to the bone) ... On the other hand it's been a hell of a while now (10 years) since the presentation of Bonzai at the 2008 siggraph which perfectly introduced the basics of what we know today. (see link: https://we.tl/Rml3qhB01X I liked bonzai from the beginning, but I always considered it the "little brother" and not the complete software (complex ..) that I used. So yes Brian, the disappearance of many tools or options is a lack that requires me to work probably less fluid but very stable. I do not understand that there is not a more open communication of Autodessys to inform us of the things we can expect and the one for which we must find solutions elsewhere I take advantage of the presence in this discussion of Paul Hunnicutt to send a message as an aside: It was by examining Vectorworks as an alternative solution for BIM and drafting that I came across this old discussion: http://www.formz.com/forum/old/messages/16/61239.html Paul Do you continue to work with the system you described (vectorworks + fz)? Have you solved the questions that you then asked? Because frankly form 7 layout is it the "holy grail" we were talking about then? Jean-Luc
  15. jldaureil

    Nurbs Nurbz Sub-D

    Hello do you know exactly what is the difference between patch (especially bezier patch) and surface subdivisions as they are currently implemented in formZ? Looking closely, the two look very close. It seems that sub-ds have something to do with nurbs. The sharpeness parameter seems to work like the weight of a real nurbs (see C-curve in 673)