@ChrisMitchell01 wrote:
Hi Max,
A few comments:
always appreciated
You should be able to migrate both of these .xml files in to a single adsklib file - you can keep them separate but I don't know that you'll see any benefit from doing that.
I forgot to mention: that was my original approach, just to keep continuity with the previous release.
The I of course tried to store both materials and appearances in the same .adsklib file... no difference again 
Once you have migrated the xml files, you can add the same adsklib file for both Materials & Appearances in your project definition. If you get a message about No materials found" when editing your project just restart Inventor & retry it. the adsklib file can be either on the network (UNC or mapped drive) or local.
...of course I will send you the xml files: I could never get a migrated version of my colors.xml and materials.xml, and I don't know the reason. They both work perfectly in the 2012, but I don't succeed in migrating them. that is why I created my libraries from scratch.
Warning - you should not copy the as-shipped Inventor adsklib file since each adsklib file contains GUID information that mean the same library cannot be loaded twice. If you copied the shipped adsklib file to a custom one & then try to use that as well as original you will see issues, (usually shown on the Material or Appearance browser as a warning). When you migrate or create a new library through the Ui the GUID info is updated accordingly.
Absolutely: I always created a new one from the material browser, then copied materials FROM the autodesk as-shipped TO the document. Edited, renamed and then copied DOWN TO my library. That is the procedure I followed.
If your colors also reference texture files then you need to ensure that they can still be found in the same location.
If you don't resolve this through your local contacts then please send your colors & materials.xml files so that we can take a look at what's going wrong.
I have about 105 colors. About 10 of them are referenced to local textures and bumps. I tried all my procedures also excluding those 10, but again no difference 
Please let me know where to send my materials/colors.xml files (my local contacts are quite behind in the search for the problem: we are much more ahead, and Cecy Chen has already all debug, adsklib and dump files from this crash under the "Crash Report 73736422")
@Anonymous wrote:
The same location as what? As the adsklib files? As they were in the .xml files? How do we specify a location for texture files?
in the 2012, if you try to read the colors.xml file you will find per each color (which is called "Style" in the xml database) the following:
<Style InternalName="1:concrete_RoughWall" EditFlag="0" Ambient="0.33 0.33 0.33 1" Diffuse="0.63 0.63 0.63 1" Specular="0.75 0.75 0.75 1" Emissive="0.5 0.5 0.5 1" Shininess="40" IsMasked="0" Mask="0 0 0 1" Opacity="100" Scale="2" Rotation="90" TextureFile="relative path_to_textures\texture.jpg" TexturePath="2" ShowBackFaces="0" ReflectionImageFile="" ReflectionImagePath="0" Refraction="1" BumpMapImageFile="relative path_to_bumps\bump.jpg" BumpMapImagePath="2" BumpMapAmount="1" BumpMapScale="2" BumpMapRotation="90" ProteinMaterialId="" ProteinMaterialScale="1" ProteinMaterialRotation="0">
The xml attribute TexturePath is normally set to "0". If you set it to "2", then your relative path will begin from the currently set "Content Center Files" path, wherever it is set. In my specific case it was absolutly easy and fast to handle this folder centralized (as normally also the ccFiles are) regarding textures and bumps, and I could get immediately deployed any textured color that we needed.
In the 2013 I still couldn't get to a point to run extensive tests on this, but as far as I could understand it there is NO WAY (again congratulations to Autodesk) to define the path of the textures/bumps/reflection maps. That means that in a real network environment you can only save this folder into a network path, and give the full path of your maps in the editor. A workaround to this limitation could be to mount a network drive... slim consolation anyway (why should we keep easy things easy when we can make them mor complicated??

)
But as I said don't take me as granted: I couldn't run extensive experiments on the new wonderful material library architecture...
Now it's a nightmare in comparison (but don't be surprised: I could edit xml files as I wanted because I have quite much experience in xml language, even thou that is absolutely not complicated). Evidently something went wrong, because the 2013 does not accept our perfectly working 2012 xml files!!
Hope it helps...
MaX
Massimo Frison
CAD R&D // PDM Admin · Hekuma GmbH