Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
We have non-rectangular crop regions. Can we please have non-rectangular scope boxes so we don't have to copy/paste the non-rectangular crop region to 30 views.......
Personally if it was C shaped in elevation then the grid/level would just continue to furthest extents and then you could have option added with "grid/levels cut to scopebox" which would allow a start/stop as needed.
If it was C shaped in elevation and M shaped in plan then it wouldn't change anything in that it is pulling the grid/level reference from where the cut line is or face of elevation is. For the most part I think many were assuming that you would have the freeform shape on plan for GA's and the freeform shape in elevation for sections and elevations.
It isn't often that I have needed to cut in 3 dimensions and needed to show the grid/levels but GA's that are not rectangle would be the biggest benefit for most our work here.
To reorganize and consolidate our Revit Ideas for ease of use to both our customers and our product teams, we are no longer using the "Future Consideration" status for Revit Ideas. All Revit Ideas are always under review, and consolidating posts (and Kudos!) will give weight to topics previously spread across many posts. We are continuing to evaluate where this request falls into our roadmap and will provide an update when we have made a decision.
Hopefully the solution to 3D scope boxes in the future will simplify customisation of other 3D geometry elements. Features like following make this feature such a valuable tool: 1) automatic scope box creation based on selection to internal face would allow automatic scope division per floor without worrying about double volumes etc. 2) the ability to schedule based on having a scope box state triggered when an element is inside a scope box (optional and manual to reduce the constant state updates) will help tremendously. Having to manually select items and writing a parameter to filter is extremely tedious and prone to error. 3) Finally, the same solution will hopefully also apply to view region parameters (mechanical/plumbing discipline needs to this to accurately show services running below a parking ramp without showing services above the ramp/below the ramp). Currently the only solution AFAIA is to use an impractical amount of plan regions and manually calculate the size of each and heights to hide services below and above and only show those between the ramp (architectural/structural discipline blocks the elements as the floor hides the hidden elements above/below)
Really looking forward to this idea coming to fruition - seems like an easy and natural evolution - following the example of other editable / non-rectangular windows and boxes along the way. Pls & Thx
@crapai Agreed, this among many ideas and issues are not being adressed at near accepted paste. Seems energy is used more on figuring out how to squeze the most of users through licens models, and through complex company structure instead of just developing a porgram up to 2021 standards...tired of silly workarounds all the time.
I understand your frustration when it seems like there is no action being taken on an Idea. This enhancement is definitely on our list for consideration, but just isn't easy to implement. Our product teams do their best to balance requests like this with longer term investments. I would encourage everyone to join the Preview Release (beta) program to check out some of the recent developments around Revit Ideas and provide feedback. Also check out this Inside the Factory session for an explanation of why some Ideas can be difficult to implement. The ITF playlist has a ton of great information and insight from our product teams.
I hope this helps. Just know that we truly are listening!
Thanks for your reply. And links. Had some conversations with Cassandra with regards to some other issues i think needs to be adressed, even though we didn¨t reach an agreement, the responsiveness seems to be very improved with this new team, believe she also mentioned you.
I think its late, but better late than never, that the customers complaints are taking serious and i think revit has to undergo some fundamental changes in behaviour, not only adding of extra functionallity. But looks like bigger steps are now being taken. (https://trello.com/b/ldRXK9Gw/revit-public-roadmap) also has some promising things.
As regards to licensing; i do not understand why this system couldn't maintain flexibility - we went from owing our software versions with a discount for subscribing - to meerly renting but still with floating licens - to now only have individual licens - not nice.
Looking forward to see the future development of Revit and where this age of digitalization leads us.
@Anonymous , Thank you! I am certainly thrilled to be working with a great team of people who honestly do care about our customers. We know the frustrations and are working on new ways to address specific concerns. Please feel free to reach out to me if you have any additional questions or concerns. Again, thank you for your feedback!
@bosborne@kimberly.fuhrman Perhaps a simpler implementation of this would be to allow multiple scope boxes to be assigned to a single view. In essence, selecting more than 1 scope box would execute as a boolean of all selected scope boxes.
This would be possible if multiple project base points were permitted (user coordinate systems) and scope boxes were decoupled from view orientation.
Currently when in a 3D view and you turn on a section box and adjust to suit it shows what is on the inside of the section box. By activating a invert option it will hide everything in the section box and only show what is outside of this.
to better understand the idea please see this youtube link
@kimberly.fuhrman please combine the following 2 posts into this post. They are listing it is to separate ideas, however this idea has both contained in one
Amazing that this was brought up in 2015 and in 2020 I am looking for a solution. Is it still too complicated of a solution? If not, might be worth a revisit!
While I completely agree that this would be a nifty feature to have, I would much rather see the development team spend a year and really clean up many of the core functionality and productivity shortcomings that have been on request lists for version after version. Just my two cents...
