Converting 3D objects not made in AC for use in AC

[rm]

I'm guessing this question is for a GDL pro. I find there to be a shortage of real & true furniture objects available for free or purchase to use in AC that are made specifically for AC.

Now, there are a ton of real manufacturers' 3D furniture objects out there that can be imported into AC as an object, then saved.

PROBLEM: Unless I am missing how to do this, there seems to be no parameters for materials. In otherwords, the beauty of an AC library part is the ability to change parameters of materials. That is a chair can have a material for the seat, and another material for the legs, which then can be rendered realistically. But everytime I import a dwg object or a 3DS objects, they come in with only one material for all components of the object.......bummer!

1. Am I missing an obvious setting in the translation that preserves material settings from DWG or 3Ds objects.

2. If what I am asking can't easily be done, is Graphisoft working on translators that will solve the problem.

Thanks in advance,

RM

Mac OS10.3
AC 8.0/8.1

[Anonymous]

Bill wrote:

As you can see from the thread “GDL Copyright,” we have some severe reservations about releasing unprotected objects to the public (our only recourse is the ULA). Without the support of the community and the stubbornness of our developers, our object would never have been released – and we already had the library developed. I think anyone is kidding themselves if they think lots of manufacturers will start developing objects on their own. It is going to take a whole lot more of education (GS) and demand to get there (AC users).

Who's kidding who? The reason there aren't many objects is GS's reluctance to aggressively promote this concept and support their product outside of the A&E arena ("a whole lot more of education"). There is already a huge demand for these objects and being that ArchiCAD is rarely listed in the "CAD platform selection list" (what CAD program do you use) by most companies it's highly unlikely that if bunch of users who barrage the company with phone calls or mail are going to persuade them to produce something in a format they know nothing about.

The majority of users are looking for "smart objects" (as GS has promoted them to us) many of which don't require a fraction of the complexity of your application, which has to perform many calculations etc. Your product doesn't really fit into what users need to have available as most do not model framing. As someone who doesn't use AC to design buildings it's understandable that you don't have, or comprehend, the need for such objects. Most users would like to have mantels, cabinets, doors, windows, columns etc. that represent what the manufacturer has to offer while containing the correct information for specifying and ordering these products through providing accurate schedules and lists. How, useful is your application to your company if you eliminate the "Automatic lumber take-offs"?

[Karl Ottenstein]

Jeffrey wrote:
Who's kidding who? The reason there aren't many objects is GS's reluctance to aggressively promote this concept and support their product outside of the A&E arena ("a whole lot more of education").

I agree with you Jeffrey that that is indeed one issue, but suggest that there are many issues, including the problem of lack of protection.

If I were to write public GDL objects, I would produce them with a proprietary set of macros that would make my work very efficient - and I would not want those macros to go into the hands of any competitor. Thus, until Graphisoft provides encryption, I won't be bothering.

I have never worked with a corporation that was not (insufferably) concerned about proprietary rights - not many have attorneys who buy into the benefits of 'open source' ... and so while what you say is true - GS needs to make a strong pitch - IMHO it is also true that without encryption, those companies will be hesitant to invest resources into a project that can benefit competitors.

Just my 2 cents 😉

Karl

[Anonymous]

Jeffrey wrote:
The majority of users are looking for "smart objects" (as GS has promoted them to us) many of which don't require a fraction of the complexity of your application, which has to perform many calculations etc. Your product doesn't really fit into what users need to have available as most do not model framing. As someone who doesn't use AC to design buildings it's understandable that you don't have, or comprehend, the need for such objects.

Lets not confuse TJ-PanelMate with the objects we offer on our web site. Your right that the majority of users do not require that kind of complexity. Thats what the free objects dont have it. They are simple, to the point and Trus Joist specific.

Jeffrey wrote:
Most users would like to have mantels, cabinets, doors, windows, columns etc. that represent what the manufacturer has to offer while containing the correct information for specifying and ordering these products through providing accurate schedules and lists. How, useful is your application to your company if you eliminate the "Automatic lumber take-offs"?

Actually Jeffrey the object library we offer for 8.0+ have a basic listing feature built in via interactive schedules. Certain text strings are passed so the lists show the necessary info for a take off.

TJ-PanelMate takes it to the extreme. By using components and descriptors, all lists are fully automated. The objects for TJ-PanelMate (which are completely different from the free library) are crazy complex and do a myriad of calculations specific to panelization and manufacturing.

Part of me wishes our competitors would take notice of the objects on our web site. Maybe they would investigate AC and ultimately sing it's praises the way some of us in TJ do.

[Anonymous]

Karl wrote:

I agree with you Jeffrey that that is indeed one issue, but suggest that there are many issues, including the problem of lack of protection.

If I were to write public GDL objects, I would produce them with a proprietary set of macros that would make my work very efficient - and I would not want those macros to go into the hands of any competitor. Thus, until Graphisoft provides encryption, I won't be bothering.

I have never worked with a corporation that was not (insufferably) concerned about proprietary rights - not many have attorneys who buy into the benefits of 'open source' ... and so while what you say is true - GS needs to make a strong pitch - IMHO it is also true that without encryption, those companies will be hesitant to invest resources into a project that can benefit competitors.


Karl

Hi Karl,

What I am really hearing are the concerns of the GDL developers scripts and not so much about proprietary information of the manufacturing process or products. There really isn't too much in the area of trade secrets for the majority of building products available today, the only things worthwhile infringing upon are those that are already protected one way or another. The majority of users who desperately need these objects don't care about the scripts when they have what they need to get the job done. This narrows the playing field quite a bit, now one only needs to be concerned with keeping their eyes on competitors libraries. If one were to use something like Hide-A-Script and included an EULA which covers all the common concerns including reverse engineering there really isn't much more we can do. A hack will hack. As said on the "GDL Copy-write" it's only going to keep honest people honest.

If I understand correctly what you are all saying is, GS has created a "catch 22": GS won't invest in the creation of some form of GDL encryption due to lack of demand or perceived need and no one believes any manufacturers will invest in providing GDL libraries due to lack of GDL encryption.

Personally I think all these objections can be overcome by the benefits that will be received, especially, by the companies who are the first to invest in this technology. Again, I would refer people to look at SolidWorks as an example of what ArchiCAD could/ should be for the building industry. Only 8 years old and the amount of object libraries available are incredible.

IMO the real problem is that GS doesn't really know why companies would or wouldn't invest in creating GDL libraries because they have yet to demonstrate the possibilities to but a handful, if that.

There have been a number of manufacturers who have offered objects in the past. The only reason I can see that they haven't continued to do so hasn't been due to concerns about proprietary info, it is that most of them weren't aware of what they invested in and GS kept them under tight lock and key. If they were included on the AC install CD's and available through the manufacturers normal channels of distribution GDL would be a lot further along than it is today. What can we look forward to tomorrow? What percentage of users does this list represent?

[Anonymous]

I am so not getting my work done because of this thread.

I wouldnt go so far as to say that GS keeps the companies under wraps. They're doing a press release about TJ and the objects we're giving away that should be out next month or so.

They need to do more of this kinda thing though. When other companies start getting on the band wagon, GS needs to shout it for all in the industry to hear.

Maybe it will be heard over the drivel from some other companies.

[Anonymous]

Sean wrote:

Jeffrey wrote:
The majority of users are looking for "smart objects" (as GS has promoted them to us) many of which don't require a fraction of the complexity of your application, which has to perform many calculations etc. Your product doesn't really fit into what users need to have available as most do not model framing. As someone who doesn't use AC to design buildings it's understandable that you don't have, or comprehend, the need for such objects.

Sean wrote:
Lets not confuse TJ-PanelMate with the objects we offer on our web site. Your right that the majority of users do not require that kind of complexity. Thats what the free objects dont have it. They are simple, to the point and Trus Joist specific.

No confusion here. I'm referring to objects other than TJ's altogether. Your objects are really different from the ones being sought after that began this post. The objects that are in highest demand are those that facilitate the creation of the aesthetic designs, most users don't include structural drawings until the design development phase is complete. What we lack are the elements for design, like doors, windows, millwork, columns, appliances etc.

Jeffrey wrote:
Most users would like to have mantels, cabinets, doors, windows, columns etc. that represent what the manufacturer has to offer while containing the correct information for specifying and ordering these products through providing accurate schedules and lists. How, useful is your application to your company if you eliminate the "Automatic lumber take-offs"?

Sean wrote:
Actually Jeffrey the object library we offer for 8.0+ have a basic listing feature built in via interactive schedules. Certain text strings are passed so the lists show the necessary info for a take off.

TJ-PanelMate takes it to the extreme. By using components and descriptors, all lists are fully automated. The objects for TJ-PanelMate (which are completely different from the free library) are crazy complex and do a myriad of calculations specific to panelization and manufacturing.

I'm aware of what TJ's objects have for features I was making a comparison of what's not available by other manufacturers. If you were to remove the "automatic take-offs" from PanelMate you would experience the same limitations with PanelMate as the majority of users due with AC. Most don't use the calculation features / interactive schedules as the effort is too great, by the time one's done with all the data entry required they could have done it in Word or something similar. The reason TJ included "Automatic Take-offs" in PanelMate is the same reason many of us invested in AC, it was supposed to make our lives easier by containing all the data in an easy to extract format, GS called them "smart objects". So far this has yet to be realized.

[Anonymous]

So basicly what youre saying is, users need more than just the objects, they need an automated means of listing them?

I think manufacturers should be thinking in libraries instead of objects. The drag and drop feature from the net is nice but half the time it doesnt work like it's supposed to anyway.

One library of doors with listing schemes.

One library of windows with listing schemes.

Yadda yadda.

[Anonymous]

Sean wrote:
So basicly what youre saying is, users need more than just the objects, they need an automated means of listing them?

This is (was?) the whole premise of GSs "Virtual Building". The use of "Smart Objects" you enter data, alphanumerically &/or graphically, consisting of 3 and two dimensional description of whatever the elements may be, including, but not limited to: weight, width, worth, where, whatever. GS has provided the platform and not many are able to utilize it for a fraction of what it could do for them, IMO everyone is losing out because of this. One object can contain most, if not all, information an architect, builder, engineer, would need etc. about an, individual, item a manufacturer has for sale, they can put it in a format for a group of users who would if it were convenient put their products identified by name, number etc. in front of someone who just so happens to be in the market for these items, I think they'd understand the concept.

Sean wrote:
I think manufacturers should be thinking in libraries instead of objects. The drag and drop feature from the net is nice but half the time it doesnt work like it's supposed to anyway.

One library of doors with listing schemes.

One library of windows with listing schemes.

Yadda yadda.

Call them what you will, "Libraries", "Smart Parts" (or is it "Intelligent Objects"? I forget ) GS should be getting them to think ArchiCAD when they "think".

Yes, all that is needed is the library of doors/ windows, lets just hope a lot more than "one"... in the next 20 years... ,

ArchiCAD has already given us the ability to create our own "listing schemes", as it should be, or we can have them made for us if we choose, so they need not concern themselves with this, keep it simple, this is the reason why they should provide this format in the first place, if the objects are "intelligent" and contain the necessary information that is sufficient, AC can do the rest.