Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/18/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,252
Location: Paris & Frankfurt
Thanks: 217 times Was thanked: 164 time(s) in 101 post(s)
Once again, I complain about bad resolution, even with maximum settings...
(I use screenshots a lot)
jlm attached the following image(s):
Image 9.png
(83kb) downloaded 5 time(s). You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/2/2007(UTC) Posts: 245
Hello JL Have you tried using a custom resolutions.ini file? What size are your components? All the best Nick
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/18/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,252
Location: Paris & Frankfurt
Thanks: 217 times Was thanked: 164 time(s) in 101 post(s)
Hi Nick, My components are small : 20mm for largest parts, 0.1mm for details. The problem comes with large radius (80mm) arcs used for triming parts. I use several Macs, at home + offices, some shared with other people, and I don't like the idea of adding .ini files everywhere. I keep thinking the resolution settings should be improved in the soft. "Super-fine" isn't fine enough !
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/2/2007(UTC) Posts: 245
Hello JL I'm thinking more along the lines of you trying some different settings in resolutions.ini so that we can use that information to improve defaults. All the best Nick
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/20/2007(UTC)
Posts: 302
Thanks: 6 times Was thanked: 28 time(s) in 15 post(s)
nick wrote: I'm thinking more along the lines of you trying some different settings in resolutions.ini so that we can use that information to improve defaults.
I think the right way would be to adjust the settings with every new version of the software according to the power of actual computer systems. Maybe the type of machine can be questioned in the installation process and adjusted accordingly?
I allready had the issue of different resolution.ini files with a customer using CU demo to view my geometry. I saw everything smooth and he was talking about f117stealthfighters :-)
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/2/2007(UTC) Posts: 245
Hello Albano
Not sure that would be such a good plan, if either you or your client don't have a similar performance machine then you'll never see the same resolution on screen.
Perhaps instead of having only 5 settings which can only be modified by using a custom resolutions.ini file and a text editor we should just have a slider bar in Preferences which can be used to define default resolutions for curves, surfaces and solids? Then everyone can define their settings as they feel fit and colleagues / support can duplicate those settings if required.
I knocked up a quick example dialog box, of course all of the controls should line up (Tim can we fix this dialog anyway as custom edge colour and button are totally out of alignment).
All the best
Nick
nick attached the following image(s):
resolution.jpg
(61kb) downloaded 5 time(s). You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/20/2007(UTC)
Posts: 302
Thanks: 6 times Was thanked: 28 time(s) in 15 post(s)
I think this would be ok too! But a question: Is it not possible to adjust the resolution in a dynamic way? zooming, panning, rotating etc. with the same setting but when you stop changeing your view the program rebuilds the view with the maximum number of elements... If framerate drops too much it redraws as well (maybe with minimum settings?). With multiple core computers taking over that could be the way into the future! or not? :) ALBAN
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/18/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,252
Location: Paris & Frankfurt
Thanks: 217 times Was thanked: 164 time(s) in 101 post(s)
ALBANO wrote: Is it not possible to adjust the resolution in a dynamic way?
YES !
I'm with Alban.
We want a fine resolution displayed on the screen, but we don't need to save everything in the file (except on exports sometimes)...
JL
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/19/2007(UTC) Posts: 128
I think the dynamic resolution is a useful solution, too, until this software becomes more fluid overall. It would be interesting if the resolution became lower the more you zoomed out, as well, so that if you were looking at the assembly as a whole it was less resolved than if you zoomed in to a small part. Then, the small part would have a higher resolution which would help with selecting it.
Rank: Senior Member
Joined: 2/2/2007(UTC) Posts: 245
Hello All Agreed, I think a dynamic frame rate based display resolution when panning, zooming or rotating the view would be great with a user defined final resolution when static. Any thoughts Tim? All the best Nick
Forum Jump
Punch! CAD
ViaCAD & Shark
- News and Announcements
- General
- 2D Drafting
- Surface Modeling
- Solid Modeling
- Subdivision Modeling
- Rendering & Display
- Import/Export
- Tips and Tutorials
- Suggestions
- Gallery
- PowerPack
- Punch Lounge
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.