France
Joined: Nov 7, 2005
Post Count: 9388
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
okh, thanks for reporting the issue in furniture table, it should be fixed in Beta 6.
YGYL, thank you for taking the time to describe your issue. But keep in mind that good ergonomics = predictable result. I don't think your idea is good because original elevation and level (you forget that one) would be hidden information, i.e. something you can't guess. Imagine you give your .sh3d file to someone else, how can he predict that the table will belong to level 2B if he ungroups the group?
remib, I fixed the typo on "visble" checkbox. Levels are organized by elevation and then the order you set in their modification dialog box, so just modify a level to change that order. I don't think grouping layers will happen anytime soon.
----------------------------------------
Emmanuel Puybaret, Sweet Home 3D developer
Joined: May 12, 2013
Post Count: 1545
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
okh, thanks for reporting the issue in furniture table, it should be fixed in Beta 6.
Thanks, but I am still struggling. Now, in the file I sent you, if I CUT the garden hedge into the GROUP, the Vegetation GROUP closes and cannot be opened with the plus sign. And I cannot find a way of opening it to paste the garden hedge (Paste to group is greyed out for Vegetation). But I do manage to paste the Garden hedge to the Roof GROOP. After careful consideration, though, I think having the Garden hedge on the roof is a sub-optimal solution
But maybe my file is messed up, I will try again tomorrow. ok
Joined: May 12, 2013
Post Count: 1545
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
.. cannot find a way of opening it to paste the garden hedge (Paste to group is greyed But maybe my file is messed up, I will try again
Most strange, cannot recreate this today (after having restarted everything). Will let you know if it happens again.
Would it be a good idea to include an invisible texture in the collection while you are at it? Don't know what happened in 5951#25821, but transparent textures is a good way of hiding furniture elements until transparency can be implemented in the colour dialogue.
Joined: Feb 5, 2013
Post Count: 136
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
You may not understand what I mean To solve the problem, the need to increase the data structure
You may originally have 14 parameters.(width\depth\height\elevation\) You can increase the number of multi-parameter(Original level\Original elevation\Additional parameters1\Additional parameters2\Additional parameters3)
Each furniture has these parameters.and These parameters are stored in the .sh3d file. When the group will record the parameters,When the ungroup will load the parameters.So will not go wrong!
Additional parameters1/2/3 It is reserved for the secondary development For example, show price, show brand, or IN GAME:HP, MP, falling equipment
Joined: May 12, 2013
Post Count: 1545
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
Tonight, the Beta 3 brings a very long awaited feature: layers! Actually, layers are levels at the same elevation,
With two levels same elevation - which both have textured/coloured floors, it seems the 'lower' texture shines through in the 2D plan and takes precedence in the 3D plan (if added later). Is that intended? ok
USA
Joined: Mar 25, 2015
Post Count: 153
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
It only just now dawned on me the web launcher always loads the most recent beta, so my careful attempts to isolate, say, Beta2 from Beta6 were pointless. Explains a few things, though...
I'm sorry to see the 'visible and invisible objects in group' feature I was so happy to find in Beta2 disappear in more recent versions. I like being able to group together a large batch of light sources and fine tune them without having to ungroup them first -- and risk having them sprinkled across the plan. It was also nice to be able to make the entire group invisible, even if later making it visible made all the objects in the group visible, as well.
I've been fighting a perplexing problem regarding wall heights, but finally stumbled across what I think is a workaround, at least. [I take that back: it's *partially* a workaround.] And, of course, I can't duplicate it in a test plan -- only in my production file. Basically, a split wall sloping upwards from 4' to 10' across one segment and downwards from 10' to 4' on the second actually slopes from 4' to (10' + floor thickness) on segment one and from 10' to (4' + floor thickness) on segment two; that is, whenever a wall slopes, the 'height at end' is equal to the requested height plus the current floor thickness. This problem seemingly first appeared with Beta6 (possibly Beta5) and now affects all sloping walls in my plan. Again, though, I can't duplicate this in a file created under Beta6.
France
Joined: Nov 7, 2005
Post Count: 9388
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
With two levels same elevation - which both have textured/coloured floors, it seems the 'lower' texture shines through in the 2D plan and takes precedence in the 3D plan (if added later). Is that intended? ok
In the layer logic, it's not intented and should be fixed in Beta 7. I also changed the JNLP file to avoid some "delayed" updates that I experienced and that could explain why you thought that the Beta 6 didn't fix the bug in the furniture table.
mazoola, sorry, I don't want to spend too much time on managing Beta differences. Java Web Start is surely not perfect on this point, but it's much easier for me to manage.
I'm sorry to see the 'visible and invisible objects in group' feature I was so happy to find in Beta2 disappear in more recent versions. I like being able to group together a large batch of light sources and fine tune them without having to ungroup them first [...]
I removed this feature, because I didn't want to wonder whether the size and position of a group should be updated when one of its item is made invisible, moreover because it's possible to resize the group itself. Imagine the following scenario: you group 3 pieces of furniture and make one invisible in the group. Then, should the size and position of the group should be the size of the visible pieces only? What should happen to the invisible piece if the user resize the group? Not easy to answer, if you want a consistent behavior... But your case is interesting and I wonder if I should go back or not. To prevent the problem I explained, I could for example forbid to resize a group with partially visible pieces. But how the beginners could guess when the group is resizable or not?
About your wall heights issue, I don't think there was some recent changes on this subject recently. The height of wall at a given level is actually the height given in its dialog box + the thickness of the level, if that level is not the lowest one.
----------------------------------------
Emmanuel Puybaret, Sweet Home 3D developer
USA
Joined: Mar 25, 2015
Post Count: 153
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
Not complaining about the web start, just commenting on my remarkable cluelessness for so long.
With Beta7, whatever you didn't do to wall heights in Beta6 got undone: They behave as anticipated. I suspect I'm doing things to sh3d I shouldn't -- including models with far too many triangles, perhaps -- because I keep running into such weirdness as misbehaving sloping walls or doorway-spanning baseboards. (I haven't been able to generate any sort of render for a while, now, presumably for lack of memory; I assume I'll have to chop the plan into individual floors and render in pieces, again. I'd hoped moving to 64-bit OS would fix the problem, but to no avail. BTW, under Windows 10, sh3d never seems to identify the architecture correctly and always sets up for a 640 Mb heap. I finally edited the jnlp file to force a 2Gb heap, but I'm not sure if the appropriate 3D library is loading.)
At this point, I don't remember how you treated invisible members of a partially visible group in earlier versions of the beta; however you did didn't seem all that confusing to me. I think you ignored them -- that is, you sized the group box to fit only the visible members. Actually, I'm pretty sure you did; typically, I was disabling members in the center of the group, but I seem to recall having the group box expand and contract as I activated/deactivated items on its periphery. As I said, it didn't seem all that confusing to me -- but I was using it for a narrowly defined application. And, frankly, it's never occurred to me to resize a group, so I never stumbled across that potentially confusing situation....
Joined: May 12, 2013
Post Count: 1545
Status:
Offline
Re: Sweet Home 3D 5.0
two levels same elevation - which both have textured/coloured floors, it seems the 'lower' texture shines through in the 2D plan and takes precedence in the 3D plan (if added later).
In the layer logic, it's not intented and should be fixed in Beta 7
In the 3D pane, the 'upper' texture now covers the lower. In the 2D pane, there is still a bleed-through of textures from two rooms on different levels, same elevation, which I don't mind. But what could be slightly confusing, is that when the 'upper' level is active, it is still possible to edit the geometry of the rooms on both same-elevation levels. Probably not a big problem in practice. But if a separate 'layer' is kept for dimensions, including a 'room' for the entire building, there may confusion if someone thinks they are editing the rooms on the 'layer' above (but manage to move points for the room for the entire building).
I have been cutting and pasting like crazy, styles, groups. Everything works perfectly as far as I can tell. I see that if an object from one level is copied to a group on another level, the level is kept. I.e. the object is not moved. This is probably the way it should be. However, it also means that it is possible to have the group on one level, and all the group elements on another level. So the group could be on a hidden level, disappear from the 2D pane and the furniture list, but the elements still be visible in the 3D view. Not sure it matters, but cross-level groups is a bit dangerous (but then, I learnt early to avoid that in order not to confuse myself).
As usual, your attention to detail is greatly appreciated. Will keep trying to find stuff (probably increasing confusion instead of helping, professional problem I guess). So bottom line is that, honestly, there is nothing in Beta 7 so far that I cannot live with. In fact, I edit my serious projects in the beta versions without worry. All in all - v 5.0 is really looking good, very nice improvements.