@unknownuser said: If I make a model which I will need for further usage, I'll make it Component, to see it in Component Browser (and of course, I will save it in my Collection), but its inner components will be groups, otherwise my Component Browser will be filled up with all sort of C.Definitions that I don't need. Well, there are exceptions from this rule... But now is clear for me when to choose to use groups. There are indeed exceptions to that rule. In my work flow I only use components but I'm mainly drawing furniture to joinery level detail. All of the parts of a piece of furniture will be components even if there is only one instance in the model. i.e. a table top. In addition to the assembled model, I make exploded views and detail views. With the exploded views I will end up with an additional instance of the table top. If, as commonly happens, the client wants changes after the model is made, I don't even have to wonder if the changes got made throughout the model. Few opportunities for errors that way. As to the Component Browser being filled up with component definitions, I've never found that to be an issue. Do keep in mind that components you've had in the model, even if they've been deleted from the model space, will still be shown in the In Model library. This is handy if you inadvertently delete the component because you can get it back. On the other hand, if you know you don't want those components, you should run Purge Unused or the Purge All plugin which will does as it says.

Yes you specifically need solid object you don't have to worry. If you do need a solid once, and you can't work out why it's not a solid, you can use this plugin: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=323&t=30504

Just remember that perspective does not vary with focal length. Perspective varies as the camera to subject distance and angle changes.

@d12dozr said: ...or switch to Select tool and hit Esc... Thank you. Did not know that. It works well. Ken

oh and back on-topic; hellnbak; have you tried using the material-picker? if you've already applied the material somewhere in your scene, and you know where, you can use paintbucket+alt to pick up the material in order to apply it

@unknownuser said: I'm still not aware of any programs on the market today that do exactly what SketchUp does faster by leveraging multiprocessing or 64-bit technologies, though there are certainly other kinds of tools (specifically rendering apps) that can use those technologies to improve performance. I think you make a really important point, though. Learning how to use a tool properly and effectively is the key to using it well. And ultimately, to being able to push its boundaries. john . haha, John, you must be a masochist. If SketchUp is only competing with companies who do "exactly what SketchUp does" then I don't think you have any competition at all, depending on how you define "what SketchUp does." And I'm not sure that he was necessarily talking about "faster," there are other aspects to performance and workflow. But instead of drudging up the old argument, let me see if I've learned anything. Moving SU 64 bit would allow it to hold more polygons (presumably this is why 3ds Max has both 32 and 64 bit versions) and may help in a SU to Rendering workflow. However it takes a lot of polygons to reach the 3+ gig limit of 32 bit and long before you hit that, you'll run into other bottlenecks (am I on the right track here?). As for Multiprocessing support, it just doesn't work with OpenGL so someone will need to invent a new OpenGLmulticore before it does anything at all for SU. How's that? Just to derail things a bit, realtime rendering is all the rage right now. What if the SU viewport was seen as a VERY simply realtime rendering which used the CPU to actually render the scene as you moved around? Meh, probably a dumb idea. Maybe every time you moved around there would be a bit of lag as it had to rerender, I don't know. -Brodie

See this tut How to make a structural curvy roof (see all posts) some answers and this detailed structural curvy roof answer

Well, first I was looking for that checkbox myself. And I know others did as well so I was pretty sure that you had the same issue we did. You just came later.

Doesn't enlarge them that much but with my eyes I need all the help I can get [image: vCWY_MysticThumbs1.jpg]

Probably none of my business, but what's a "bling club"?

@Jean That is writed v6 but it is in fact v8 so the suspense is total for me @Jeff Maybe you must multiply scale by 10 000 then make the rotation for win some decimal?

Then there is always Vue trees, best used in Vue obviously. However for a low detailed SU version it's doable. (1.7MB) [image: cAb0_CoconutTreeV.png]

@unknownuser said: wow, i really screw this thread up.. i meant to make a new post that quoted some of what i wrote in my previous response but i ended up editing that post instead.. so, my last post may not make much sense in the threaded order.. sorry. regardless, maybe autosave is causing 1/2 of my crashes ?? Jeff, try it with autosave on, and autosave off, and compare the amount of crashes. see which works best for you. I did that a long time ago, and OFF works best for me. Either way, keep on sketchupping.

For some reason my posts aren't getting through, so apologies if this is repeated. That does look like a lot of work - I have quite alot of areas that need positioning. Attached is what I wanted to achieve.[image: tIVX_texture.jpg]

I use this method frequently for turned legs and such. For example, this turned post is made of eight sectors as shown on the right. The nice thing is that it saves out at about 43 Kb. [image: 5169372316_db2dce793a.jpg]

I'm sorry, Jim57, I was being a little facetious, but trying to get at your issue. I failed to notice you are using a Mac, and assumed this was a MSWindows problem. I am glad that Jeff and HDT were able to help. Best Wishes, mitcorb

@thomthom said: I'd separate the ground by itself, would i do that by drawing a large rectangle and then making that rectangle a component? then I can start building on top of it? @thomthom said: draw a rectangle on the wall-face, select the face and it's edges (doubleclick) and then "Make Component". Then in the dialog you get ensure that "Replace Selection" is checked as well as cut opening. so after I draw the window, do I cut out the opening and then make it a component? thank you all for the info. I will definitely start to use components.

Hi folks. After drawing the arc, add a line between the two end, creating a face. Pull the face as required. Delete two straight lines and you are left with a curved surface. However, this is a face without any thickness. If you need thickness, use some of the methods proposed in this thread. Just ideas.

I've now got it. Thanks TIG (and additional gratitude/ kudos for you ruby plugins and contributions). Thanks also J Bacus, Gaieus. For some reason, it's been a bit af a learning curve - I'm probably still dumb, but less ignorant thanks to you all and the forum! TIG, the process you describe was pretty much the way I went about my first attempt. The breakthrough came when I read John Bacus' comment aand realised that by zooming in close I could improve the image quality, and that the new "Add more imagery" system allows me to quilt together a terrain. I work mostly with golf holes and imagery needs to be long and thin, so with a single image in SU7, the orientation was important. In SU8 this is no longer true. BTW Gaieus, thanks for your suggestion for SU7, I had tried it but had more reliable results for the GTS method. But hopefully, its one for the history books.

Hi Andy, I think it´s possible: right click - entity info - uncheck "cast shadow" box.