Visualization
About built-in and 3rd party, classic and real-time rendering solutions, settings, workflows, etc.

simple QT movies with AC 14?

Anonymous
Not applicable
I've just upgraded to AC14 but am having trouble with making a QTVR movie. Is it possible to make a simple movie with AC14 anymore?
17 REPLIES 17
KeesW
Advocate
David
I would be able to try this if I had an old one - but I don't.
Sorry!
Cornelis (Kees) Wegman

cornelis wegman architects
AC 5 - 26 Dell XPS 8940 Win 10 16GB 1TB SSD 2TB HD RTX 3070 GPU
Laptop: AC 24 - 26 Win 10 16GB 1TB SSD RTX 3070 GPU
Anonymous
Not applicable
I just checked and one of my old QTVRs opens just fine in QuickTime 7 but will not open in version 10 (the latest - I don't think there ever was a version 8 or 9). This was on my Mac. I haven't tried it on my Windows side. I assume it would be the same.

So if you want your clients to be able to open the file you may need to provide them with the older QT version. I don't think there are any legal issues since it has always been freely distributed by Apple, but it can be a problem having to ask a client to install special viewers software.
KeesW
Advocate
I've just remembered that QTVR never worked with 64 bit windows. It did work with 32 bit windows.
Cornelis (Kees) Wegman

cornelis wegman architects
AC 5 - 26 Dell XPS 8940 Win 10 16GB 1TB SSD 2TB HD RTX 3070 GPU
Laptop: AC 24 - 26 Win 10 16GB 1TB SSD RTX 3070 GPU
Anonymous
Not applicable
I do have a potential solution, but first wanted to chime in and moan that the loss of QTVR is tragic; it was just so easy and quick to make, and it controlled what the client was allowed to see. I have not yet moved to version 14 because of it.

As to the solution, I have an idea for it but would need some help/answers in certain areas. At a previous job, I used to work on 3D spins for products, but through photography rather than rendering. Products were placed on a table that spun 360 degrees, and a photograph was taken a intervals in one plane, then re-adjusted to another plane/viewing angle and spun again. The end result was a folder full of images taken incrementally, and then filenaming reflected this. Then, all these sequentially named files were dumped in a Flash file, which was programmed to spit out a shockwave file that is more or less the same as the QTVR which we all love. You can spin the product/model, and zoom.

I may be able to create a Flash file which is automated to create a spin as long as the user pays attention to filenaming. The problem is getting ArchiCAD to spit out all the images. As far as I can tell in version 14, we are no longer able to use the "Dome" like before. Am I correct in assuming that it no longer exists? If so, then the only choice is to create a Fly-Thru... But it seems that it would be cumbersome to try to set up a fly-thru to act like the Dome used to... The Dome was quick and easy with all necessary settings in one dialog box, rather than adjusting a bunch on cameras individually.

So what I essentially need, is to somehow get the Dome re-activated in ArchiCAD, but for the output, I would need it to just spit out individual png images in a sequential order. I imagine that is what QTVR did, except that Quicktime packaged them all into one final Quicktime file.

Reading what I just wrote, it's sounding impossible. Any thoughts on if Graphisoft or one of you other wizards out there can revive the Dome to ouput images? If so, I would be able to provide a Flash template which can create Spins.

Foster
Anonymous
Not applicable
Foster wrote:
I do have a potential solution, but first wanted to chime in and moan that the loss of QTVR is tragic; it was just so easy and quick to make, and it controlled what the client was allowed to see. I have not yet moved to version 14 because of it.

As to the solution, I have an idea for it but would need some help/answers in certain areas. At a previous job, I used to work on 3D spins for products, but through photography rather than rendering. Products were placed on a table that spun 360 degrees, and a photograph was taken a intervals in one plane, then re-adjusted to another plane/viewing angle and spun again. The end result was a folder full of images taken incrementally, and then filenaming reflected this. Then, all these sequentially named files were dumped in a Flash file, which was programmed to spit out a shockwave file that is more or less the same as the QTVR which we all love. You can spin the product/model, and zoom.

I may be able to create a Flash file which is automated to create a spin as long as the user pays attention to filenaming. The problem is getting ArchiCAD to spit out all the images. As far as I can tell in version 14, we are no longer able to use the "Dome" like before. Am I correct in assuming that it no longer exists? If so, then the only choice is to create a Fly-Thru... But it seems that it would be cumbersome to try to set up a fly-thru to act like the Dome used to... The Dome was quick and easy with all necessary settings in one dialog box, rather than adjusting a bunch on cameras individually.

So what I essentially need, is to somehow get the Dome re-activated in ArchiCAD, but for the output, I would need it to just spit out individual png images in a sequential order. I imagine that is what QTVR did, except that Quicktime packaged them all into one final Quicktime file.

Reading what I just wrote, it's sounding impossible. Any thoughts on if Graphisoft or one of you other wizards out there can revive the Dome to ouput images? If so, I would be able to provide a Flash template which can create Spins.

Foster
You could make the dome by careful arrangement of a camera path. Of course you would have to make several for different diameters and numbers of lateral paths. The frequency of the images could be controlled by the number of shot between keyframes.

EDIT: On closer reading I see you considered this possibility, and the more I think about it the more it seems like it might be too much trouble. A single transit is simple with two to four cameras with the total number of frames controlled by the in between frames settings but each transit would have to be run as a separate flythrough or you would be stuck with all the in between frames from one elevation to the next. It would be petty easy to do a spiral but I don't think that would have the desired effect. /EDIT

One thing that might be nice about this approach is that the dome doesn't have to be strictly spherical.

For use in multiple projects I don't know if the cameras can be saved as a module but they can be copy/pasted between files.
Anonymous
Not applicable
Hi Matthew,

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I do realize it is possible as you suggest, but in a rather roundabout, cumbersome way. And so, I don't feel it can be a practical "solution" unless we can get the Dome back and set its output to an image format (jpeg, png, etc..) rather than the QTVR file format...

What I am trying to determine is if the Dome's "QTVR 2.0 Engine's" functions can somehow be replicated within ArchiCAD by someone much more brilliant than myself. If so, then I have an automated method to create Flash files which spin and zoom like the old QTVR files, but since they are Flash files they would be able to be viewed on any computer system and without clients having to have special software, as well as through the internet...

Thoughts, anyone?

Thanks,
Foster
Anonymous
Not applicable
Maybe we could get GS to put the tool back in but inactive in the standard work environment so those who know the trick could enable it. I don't know how hard it would be using the API but I it seems a bit painful to recreate something already exists.
Anonymous
Not applicable
You know, though I don't yet use AC 14, I do have it. So I opened a test file and discovered that the "Dome" still exists there, and its dialog box is intact. When I tried to create a fly-thru, it asked me to install a VR engine in the add-ons folder. Does anyone know if a VR gaming engine could be used in the add-ons folder? Such as Panda3D? There are certainly a lot of them out there, and a few are free. I'm just not aware of how much work it would take to get it to play nice with ArchiCAD...

Foster