An example http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20239/20239-h/29239-h.htm

@solo said: Do not forget Sketchy FFD, a great tool to warp shapes and create variations. How was this done? It looks amazing! Can you post the steps on how to create it? Thanks.

Shape Bender

SOunds good Gaieus. Seems there are a few goodies on the horizon.....

Yes, I get that often too on large geometry imported. Usually it turns out to be part of the geometry that makes it choke. If you select parts of the surface to drape onto you might find roughly where it breaks.

[image: 0IcV_MeadowHollowContour.jpg]Okay, I am actually modifying my approach, I got a DEM of the site and modeled using Draw Contours, so it's a more elaborate model, (see images) which I would still like to apply the Google Earth image to. I will follow your instructions here, unless there's a difference with this approach. [image: 6ljk_MeadowHollowGE.jpg]

Hi Rodin, See this tutorial/topic too for ideas: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=744 There is this 3D Warehouse model that also works this way: http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=2d8578412680a3aec4922817757c112e (place the component on the wall and explode the parent component). There is also this video but that's cheating [flash=640,505:1a1kaeka]http://www.youtube.com/v/ITO-oaowwrU&fs=1&[/flash:1a1kaeka]

Hi folks. There was a similar discussion in the SketchUp Help Group. Here is what I answered: Make sure that the videocard of your Mac is able to use the optimum resolution of the 30" display that is of 2560 x 1600 pixels as per this page on Apple Web site: http://support.apple.com/kb/SP79 Normally, the manual that comes with your Mac shall have its technical specifications and these shall give you the maximum resolution of your graphic card. Since you don't give the screen size of your Macbook Pro, it is difficult to guess what one it is but I suppose it is 17" since you can drive a 23" cinema display and you gave the video card make and model number as well as the amount of VRAM (video RAM). This page: http://support.apple.com/kb/SP546 State that the NVidia 9600M video card with 512Megs VRAM can support the resolution of the 30" cinema display combined with the 1920x1200 native resolution of the built in display. See this paragraph: ----- START OF EXCEPRT ----- "Dual display and video mirroring: Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on an external display, both at millions of colors" ----- END OF EXCERPT ----- All this info comes from the Support section of the Apple Web site. Just ideas.

Jackalvn I don't recommend using the tapemeasure tool 'trick' on the unedited escalator because the handrails etc will scale and be too low. Edit the escalator's group. The central parts of the escalator are 'modular'. You can remove perhaps the upper 7 of these. Then move the top part of the escalator down, snapping it onto the corner of the topmost remaining 'module'. At this point the total rise on the escalator is about 9mm too small for what you want [4200mm] - as it is made for use in feet-and-inches NOT mm. Now use the Tapemeasure tool and pick 2 points to match the vertical height of escalator as currently modeled [~4191mm ?] and immediately type in 4200; answer 'Yes' and the group will scale so the escalator's height is now 4200mm. The few millimeters difference on the handrail height and the steps is not significant for a SUp model.

@kman said: Thanks, but the 30 minute/speed modeling competition is a big NO. I would enter it, but I can't speed model at ALL. But other than that, thanks. It does not really matter how far you get in 30 minutes; challenge yourself instead! Save a version of your model at 30 minutes (there is a "Save a copy as..." item under the File menu) and go on modelling. Save a copy at 60 minutes, 90 minutes if you like. Just practise. That whole challenge is really just for fun. Also, why do not enter a real competition?There, according to the rules, will be winners in the "beginner" as well as the "advanced" category. And it really does not matter even if you win or not but at least it would give you some real goal and you could work for some "real project" there. Seriously!

Thanks for the enthusiasm Rocky, @xrok1 said: ... c'mon people, i'm pullin my hair out here. ... but dont' hurt yourself over it. I woundn't even be thinking about it as a possibility if all these other wonderful tools hadn't set my expectations so high. And I'm certainly not the programmer to do it myself. I have not tried "TIG's extrusion toolset" but your phrasing suggests it's another one that does not quite go this far. I'm just trying to work out a design idea. I have manual ways to try it out in rough form. If I get hooked on one that takes some tedium to execute in finer detail, I'll just put on some music and get into a "Tower of Hanoi" rhythm. It looks from the PhotoShop screen shot like Adobe calls that particular morph "Fisheye". I had thought about using that term myself, but I didn't because I thought it would unnecessarily predispose people to thinking in terms of 2D-like solutions. I like your notion of "Shape Bender on steroids". SB is still at Beta 0.55, so I might imagine this for SB 2.0. Where SB 0.55 has a single Guide line and single Target Curve, I could see SB 2.0 allowing two or four (or N?) matching Guide Lines and Target Curves. (1. Select Source Group. 2. Activate SB. 3. Select single lines or group of N lines. 4. Select Target Curve or group of N Target Curves. -- How do you specify the order of the lines and the Target Curves? Like most such development projects, if you can design a UI that lets the user intuitively and unambiguously specify their intent, you're part way there.) That would be a lot like being able to apply SB or FredoScale to the guide points of SFFD. From a programming standpoint, extending SB to multiple Guide Lines seems like a smaller conceptual jump than extending FS to be able to move SFFD's guide points, but maybe "all" it would take is getting FS to handle nested groups. Maybe extending SFFD to align guide points to a target curve, like SB, would be the easiest of all. But of course, I don't know the internals of any of these, nor how much interest any of these developers has in going out into the ionosphere here. Comparing relative "ease" of these tasks is irrelevant when there are three different volunteers involved. (I can see it now, this year's Ruby extension challenge, submissions due 12/31. ) Thanks again for jumping in, Rocky. At least I know I'm not missing the obvious (as I too often do). August

Why don't you just download and try the Demo version... You can make a search here at the SCF and see some great animations rendered with TWR... (check this example...)

Well, these projects are the ones one never finishes - maximum does not work any longer on them. There will be an exhibition opening next month where some of my older (Medieval) works will serve as "illustration" and this one is actually only the beginning of a large, Antique project.

No, I did not say anything like that. Instead, here is an example file. On Shape A the material is positioned (it does not matter how or with which pins) while on Shape B it is not. Try to move both and notice that if you once position a material (again, no matter how), the material will be fixed (UV mapped) to the face but until then it is just "floating" in model space. shapes.skp

coulteri: Yes, most likely either the dxf or the import process. I am not the expert here, but what I have learned is that the original dwg or whatever, needs to be cleared of stray z values. This happens when the original drafter unintentionally or otherwise failed to snap vectors to appropriate endpoints, midpoints etc. There is a thread or two here involving best practices for import dxf's and how to prepare them.

i figured out what might be your problem.. if i try to print a vector image, x-ray won't work... i'm not sure how to access this on windows but i'll show it on a mac.. [image: c1cJ_screen4.jpg] [image: 9laL_screen3.jpg]

@unknownuser said: There is going to be some work involved whichever method you use. This work will be far easier if the building is modelled correctly using groups, components and layers. Thinking off the top of my head, what I would do if I received a 3d model with wall thickness is, go to plan view and turn off the roof to reveal all internal walls. I would push pull them back down to floor level, which will leave the outline on the floor. You would need to make sure there is a line drawn where the internal wall meets the outer wall so you do not push everything down. You could then just draw a few lines using the pencil tool and the inference engine to quickly add back the faces of the walls. I guess what may need some thought is how accurate you need these wall positions? If you need to create a wall with thickness as a single plane, you may need to create this plane central to the said wall. DAVID Spent some time on the IES site and even thought they have discussed their plan for a SU thick wall capability I am thinking that cahange is not near term for you. They make a recommendation external walls are modeled ref to out side wall location and for internal use the center line ref per your post. Suggest you post your SU model or a portion thereof if you have some proprietary issues because how changes are made will be influenced by how the model is made. I get the idea IES wants either components or groups for their model. Assuming you have the rooms presently modeled that way changing out one model for another may not be that difficult using the SU select and replace component functionally. Good Luck

I just wanted to know if this plugin could give the drawings a bit like working with StruCad

Hi folks. The quickest way I found so far: 1 - Double click on the face that you want to keep to select it and its perimeter. 2 - Make a group with the selection. 3 - Triple click the other face to select it, its perimeter and all the other edges and faces that make the sides of the thick wall. 4 - Delete the selection. Only the group will remain. 5 - Explode the group, if needed. In step 1, if you single click the face, you will need to use the Edit Menu --> Make group to create the group since the contextual menu don't show the choices to create a group or a component when a single entity is selected. This glitch has already been reported to the developers of SU. I know it makes ne sense to consider grouping only one entity since it is, after all, alone, but, to separate it from other geometries, it makes sense. See this SU file for ideas: Removing thickness.skp

works with fredoscale!