Ah well, all the others above suggested the same - I just thought a model can demonstrate it easier. Be very careful however to only assign groups or components to any other layer than Layer 0 (i.e. all "primitive" geometry either loose in the model or inside groups/components should remain on this layer) otherwise you end up like in that first video you linked to. Do not even change the active layer (with the round radio buttons) but stay on Layer 0 all the time. Life will be much easier. Also, examine the Scene manager. If you turn off the camera position, you can change scenes (and with those, different layers) without the camera moving. If you watch this video, during the first quarter, Chris (who posted above) explains how he uses scenes, layers and styles for easier modelling. Not exactly what you are after but very informative! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9_F-bSGrKs#!

thanks for the help working now i hadnt installed properly

Chris, You are indeed correct there are various restrictions, setbacks, and access requirements that make the desired end-product less than perfect. However we are going for something rough here -- We have the mother polygons and the subdivision potential for each - we need to divide the polygon into even sized by the subdivision potential. Our thought is that if we have equally-sized polygons for each 'mother' parcel (original polygon), we can use a Greeble script (or other) to plop a simple 3d house structure into each parcel, export to Google Earth, and have a rough visual image of what agricultural/forest land could look like if subdivision proceeded. Right now, we have used fly-overs in Google Earth just showing highlighted polygons (exported from ArcGIS) that have the potential to subdivide. It would be better if those polygons were split and a simple house was there in its place. Any help is appreciated.

Hi badera, hi folks. @badera said: Hi Jean Lemire Thank you too for your drawing and your tipps in the drawing. I have one question: your lines looks much smoother than mines / i.e. the basic points are not shown in your drawing. This looks pretty bether than mine. How can I achieve that? If you read the text that I attached to your model in Scene 1, you will see: **Your model. I took the liberty of changing the **styleand reorienting the faces so the front of all faces is outside. Just ideas.

Ah, OK, that it is. Instead of Push/Pull to go back to the face, I can use Move and the down arrow. That is what I was looking for. Once more: thanks a lot!

Hello TIG, it was indeed the openGL settings. Thank you very much for the quick respons and for this slution. Best regards, Willem van der Woude.

not a plugin but a tutorial http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=38131&hilit=+bicycle#p336850 they can be quite easy once you get the hang of it... john

Round Corner just isn't packed as an RBZ file. No biggie, though. You can either rename the ZIP file to .rbz and load it with Install Extension of you can extract the files from the ZIP file with something like 7zip to the Plugins folder. Make sure you also get the current LibFredo files too.

I use the following plugin, Hole on Solid tool v1.6.3, to trim, miter or drill holes. It will work on groups and components. It is not perfect, but sometimes it is a lot easier to make a miter cut or a trimming cut though multiple stacked groups/components using this tool. Just draw a face representing what you wish to remove, select the face and then select one at time the groups/component you wish to modify. Ken

Thanks! I kept deleting edges instead of faces until i finally understood what you were saying.

Thanks Ill try that

Thanks for that Jeff. I have downloaded the weld plugin but I don't seem to be able to weld the segments of the lines together for some reason. I did separate the lines into parallel and horizontal sets and exported the two sets into my CAM software. I joined the vectors in both sets and will have a go at routing them and let you know the outcome. Thanks again for you help.

I doubt there is such a very specific plugin but these should be quite easy to model from scratch actually.

@mac1 said: If you want to trace over each and every face that is your call. The trace method works when I trace over any one edge of each missing face. The 'make face' plugin method requires that I first select every edge of a missing face (& of course no edges of anything else) before it will form the face. So for me it is an easy call to make because there are far fewer steps involved. Better yet, there is no need to find & select all the edges. Depending on the complexity of the model, that can require a lot of tedious orbiting & zooming to make sure just the right edges are selected.

Hi Hamlet G, hi folks. In SketchUp (SU), layers are used only to control the visibility of objects. Normally, you keep base geometry on Layer 0 and assign groups or components to other layers. This is what you seem to be doing so, everything looks fine so far. The easiest way that comes to my mind to manage various combinations of layers visibility or invisibility is to use scenes. For example, suppose that you have a component called A. This components has two sub-components called A1 and A2. Now suppose that you want to show two options, one with only subcomponent A1 showing and the other with only subcomponent A2 showing. You create 2 layers that you can call whatever you want. Lets call then A1 and A2. You assign sub-component A1 to layer A1 and, of course, sub-component A2 to layer A2. Then you create 2 scenes that you can call whatever you want. Lets call one Option 1 and the other Option 2. On layer Option 1, you show layer A1 and you hide Layer A2. On the other scene, you show layer A2 and you hide Layer A1. Don't forget to update the scenes after changing the visibility of the layers. Maybe you can uncheck the box that tells the layer manager to remember the camera position. That way, if you orbit, pan or zoom between views, you wont loose that view when you switch option. Once this is done, a click on the relevant scene tab will make visible the required layer and hide the non required one and thus, will only show one of the two sub-component, even if they are occupying the same location in space. Just ideas.

Hi All, Sorry, I completely forgot to post how it all worked. Driven helped me out by supplying the Terminal code to make the HD appear while running Lion. @unknownuser said: Terminal.app [found in the Utilities folder] > open /Library/Application\ Support/Google\ SketchUp\ 8/SketchUp/ you may have to hit return after pasting, and the folder should open. you may have to give an admin password, but if you installed SU than you are an administrator. After that showed me the HD location. I used Dave R's image to help me find the full path: [image: file.php?id=75080&t=1] From there I made an alias of the Plugins folder (right-click, make alias) and moved it to My Documents, so I could access it easily. Hope this helps future users, and thanks again for helping me figure this out!

Hi Oscar, hi folks. For your problem number 1, for a face to closes it must meet these requirements: there must be no gaps between edges; there must be no edges protruding inside the face; all endpoints must be coplanar; no edge shall be smaller than about 1/16 inch or 1 mm (approx). If you can post the model, or at least the problematic part, someone may be able to show you where is the problem or where are the problems. Just ideas.

There are a lot of settings in that window and I cannot know what you missed. Did you keep the "Fit to page" or "Use model extents" boxes on for instance? (As far as I remember, they need to be turned off)

You need to learn some basics... learn to walk before you run... The illustrated things could be images [inside a component] or faces with a textured image applied via a material. Use Entity Info to show what kind of thing it is that you currently have selected... Edit the 'container' component - by double-click. Let's deal with them in turn... Image: select it and right-click context-menu 'Export'. This lets you save the Image as an external file with the same name... Material: select a face using the material. Open the Material Browser dialog. Open its Model-tab [little house icon]. Select the material. Select the Edit-tab. That will show the material's image file near the bottom of the dialog. There's an icon to the right of it's name, to allow you to edit the texture's image file.*** Once you have opened it you can do a Save_As in another format or location if needed... ***Note you must have an Default-Image-Editor set in your Sketchup Preferences dialog's 'Applications' tab - typically this will be Gimp or Photoshop... Do that before editing the texture, so it exports and then opens for you... Edit the PNG image as described before to make the background transparent... Use that edited image-file as a replacement Image under Import... or as a replacement texture-image file under the material's Edit...

@memo333 said: hi..all my renders are 72 of resolution, they look really pixelated, how can I have the jpg files at 300 ? On the Windows system, you cannot adjust dpi settings. But that is not even necessary. Say you need a 30 cm wide image at 300 dpi. 300 dpi is 300 dots per inch which is ~118.11 dots per cm. That is 30 x 118.11 ≈ 3543 pixels. So if you do what Kris suggested and calculate your export settings as per above, you get the same image size. dpi settings are only for printers to know how "densely" they should print. On screen, it has no meaning at all. Most image editing applications can then set your dpi (which is then "embedded" as info into the image for printers) An extra tip: SU makes a bit crappy antialiasing. So if you need the above image with really nice and crisp lines (vs. jaggy ones), export at a double resolution ( ~7086 pixels) and then resize your image in an external editor (where usually at the same time you can set dpi settings in the same dialog) to half of the original export, using some better antialiasing algorithm.