Space Syntax

Comment

Comment by yonghwan seo on December 18, 2013 at 1:04pm

Hi

I was trying to bake the justified graph.but, it can not do that.

How can i bake the graph or legend Component?

Do you have any solution?

Cheers..

Comment by jorge sainz de aja on December 10, 2013 at 6:23am

Hi:

I installed the package, it creates a folder in C: called SpaceSyntax....., I copied the grasshopper components to the special folder program. but it dosen´t appear any tab or component

also opened the gh example file and the grasshopper doesn´t recognise the sapce syntax components

I reviewed the components for if those are blocked or whatever. I use Rhino 5 (X64) and the last grasshopper 0.90064

Any solution?

Comment by Pirouz Nourian on November 26, 2013 at 5:28am

Hi Petar, Thanks for you comments. In fact we also want to do certain things in 3D and we have some preliminary ideas, however, they are not yet generic enough. In any case, we are considering a 3D graph drawing algorithm for the next release (probably as an option in the disco-graph component). In the meantime, note that you can already make a graph representation of a 3D configuration using the node-link graph component. For this component, it doesn't matter if the nodes and links are all on the same plane or not. 

Keep in touch.

Comment by Samane on November 25, 2013 at 3:57am

Dear Frano,

Thanks for your comments and sharing your ideas. Good points, We will consider them for the next release.

Cheers,

Comment by Frano Bazalo on November 21, 2013 at 4:33pm

Fantastic set of components, great job. Would it be possible to include outputs on the some of the components such as 'discograph' so the circles and the node relationships are accessible? The circles are easy enough to recreate but would be nice if the component wasn't a dead end so this data can be used further. Cheers

Comment by Petar Pejic on November 7, 2013 at 11:23am

Dear pirouz,
I didn't even think to suggest extra work and effort from your side, you have already provided a great tool. My thoughts were directed in a sense if 3d organization would be possible, as well as if there some already known method (in your pdf i have found that you already knew some methods for 2d diagrams, and than you elaborated on those.)
Further, I found your script applicable on my current design project, and my wuestions about potential 3d organization was aimed parallel with my conceptual idea of the design.
If 3D organization of space would be possible, I wanted to hear from you if you have any ideas / experiance with it. As I already said, my idea was to introduce more parameters, which would affect just 3d diagram. However, more I dwell on that idea, I see it would be just simple elevating of 2D parts. Maybe approach where each space would have 'gravity' value, or 'spring magnitude' and they all start separated in 3d space, and than with each itteration they get closer to 'ideal' organization. That is just a thought.
Thank you for your kind reply
Regards,
Petar

Comment by Pirouz Nourian on November 7, 2013 at 6:22am

Hi Petar, Thanks for the ideas. For making a 3D configuration to be implemented in the tools, I need to work on a systematic way that I can implement as a "generic method"; something like a recipe, with a guaranteed result. For giving a space a height value, as I said before, you could put the corresponding vertices on different height levels and that doesn't confuse our graph drawing algorithm (DiscoGraph). You might also find SpiderWeb tools useful in your work. 

Regarding new parameters, I should mention that we have been working on these tools for almost six months just to simplify them and reduce the number of required parameters to avoid unnecessary confusions. However, if you think in any of the components it would be better to have some control on an output with an input parameter or you need an output which is apparently available but not put out,let us know and we will consider it for the next versions.  

Comment by Petar Pejic on November 4, 2013 at 3:36am

Hi, well I am not sure realy how it should work. I was thinking maybe to introduce a value for height or volume of each space. Next, maybe the situation is that one space is behind the other, and they both have the same view parameter, hence, one will be placed above the other. It would be interestin to have a slider between 0 and 1, where 0 would be 2d organnization and 1 would be a full 3d organization, so a user can change the 'amount of 3d representation'

These are all just ideas, which i think it could be usefull to have included. However, i think more parameters should be included as well.
I hope to hear your thoughts if it would be usefull, as well as if you would add something.
Once again, thank you for sharing

Comment by Pirouz Nourian on November 2, 2013 at 6:40am

Hi Petar, Thanks for your compliments. We are also interested of course in receiving critical feedback. Regarding the 3D program diagram, I should mention that a graph doesn't necessarily have a geometric form. This means however, that there could be infinite number of ways you could draw a graph, so to say. This means that, given a set of vertices, as 3D points you could actually visualize graph links as geometric edges (lines for instance) between them. In other words, you can just provide the DiscoGraph component with a set of vertices (of course the same number of vertices as you have when you build a graph) and get a drawing however you like, and of course these points can be on different height levels. Anyhow, if you specify a bit more what you are looking for, I might consider adding a new component and make an update.

  

Comment by Petar Pejic on October 31, 2013 at 4:19pm

Excellent tool guys, it looks really promising. Do you maybe know how it would be possible to apply same logic to a 3D program diagram. Or you know some theories that deal with that issue? I suppose a set of new parameters would be needed to introduce it.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 35
• 36
• 37
• 38
• 39
• Next ›
• Page