Another slick trick is to write-block only the autocad objects you want in SU to another (new, now pretty clean already) file...then proceed with the flatten, etc., fixit procedures there.

I have had images show up as all black in other applications if they are saved as CMYK.

Jim, That's precisely where it is BUT: always make sure that your "loose geometry" is "lying on it's back" i.e. on the red/green plane which is going to be the component's cutting plane with the blue axis "sticking out" of its front. The "future" insertion point will be the axis origin (and with face me components, this will be the axis of rotation).

Make sure you have the latest version of Select Toys. http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=180&t=14975&hilit=select+toys

Nice workaround, Chris!

@hpw said: One thing I observed on my DWG Imports, is that Sketchup does make a diffence between front and backside of 3D-faces. So are the faces missing or does they look different, because you look on the default-color of a backside? I had to optimize my 3D-Face-Blocks in autocad to look good in SU. Not sure if a revit-export write a proper face-orieatation to the DWG format. That could be a reason. As I am not a Autocad user (I was always happy to use Vectorworks previously), could you point out where I can find the 3D-Face-Blocks optimise command(s) in Autocad? Thanks. And about Revit in general,I think the trouble with it is that the learning curve is just a bit too high. In our office, this results in people being unhappy using it as they need to focus 70% of their time on the tool, instead of being able to focus on the matter at hand, i.e the design. Only a few people in the office know how to edit families properly...all the rest just paddles around with half ass'ed files. Revit is supposed to make the Cad part of the design easier, but it actually makes the whole workflow chaotic and unproductive. I think Autodesk really needs to try to implement more 'direct editing' into the Revit software. More intuitiveness, the thing what is Sketchup's major strength.

Just "intersect with model" as Gaieus says again for the other side...it worked fine for me. I had a look at your model...its looking pretty good so far. If you use more components, your modeling will speed up significantly. For example, each headlight should be a component(and would look better if it was smoothed and the circle it was constructed from had more segments). If each of the vertical bars on the grill was a component, you could copy an array to space them perfectly. Maybe you would have a hard time modeling this way, but if you split the model in half the long way, make it a component, copy/flip to the other side, then you only have to model half as much because whatever you do to one side automatically happens to the other side. Like this: [image: dQby_petehood05.jpg] [image: Ft8Y_petehood051.jpg] [image: rNJL_petehood052.jpg] There are a lot of tricks to help you to model faster - have a look at these tutorials if you haven't already: http://sketchup.google.com/training/videos/familiar_with_gsu.html An hour invested here will save you countless hours and headaches down the road! I hope this helps, cheers!

Just click the Update Preview button in the Vray Material Editor. [image: TBX4_Editor.jpg]

I have no problems using a Logitech mouse with modified buttons, but did not change any that Su uses. Haven't done it in a while and not sure if you can, but if you changed a right or left or center wheel, perhaps a macro assigned to non-SuButton that can flip the selection both ways would help.

whooo your house is amazing Boofredlay!! Keep going! And thanks for the advice! Have a nice day

Guys, I am pretty sure this is some (hopefully temporary) glitch not intended by Google. Bruce, would you mind if I moved the topic in the Bug reports?

I think, Whaat's plugin works on an individual basis (i.e. after you apply the texture on one sphere, you need to do the spherical mapping each by each). But why don't you give it a try?

hey dude, , very nice !!

Posted the LightUp version here a little later than planned. Adam

"If the cap fits wear it..." - said to M. Bonnet* I hadn't even thought of your surname* when I typed that line ! But I keep putting double meanings into everything I type/say lately - my brain must be splitting in two - that's either multi-tasking or schizophrenia ? ...

And Fredo's BezierSpline v1.21 tools can surely greatly help too.. [image: BezierSpline.jpg] [image: thpolylineDivider.jpg] simon

Its called clipping, discussed plenty of times already: http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=36261

This is an interesting thread. But the slipping effect doesn't depend on the size of the model. SketchUp "zooms" in and out by moving the camera, so as you zoom in items close the the camera are lost because both the camera and the view clipping plane are move into the model and the items are now behind the camera. You can zoom manually, my changing the field of view. What is needed here is a "Zoom to rectangle" tool which recalculates the field of view, rather than moving the camera, and, perhaps, also uses 2D perspective to move the center of the screen without moving the target point (rotation the camera). Then the new zoomed view would match the original view exactly - but everything would be larger. Consider these three view of a model. Zooomed out on the model - 35 degree field of view [image: uIp5_zoom1.jpg] Zoomed in using the "Zoom Window" feature. field of view is still 35 degrees, but the camera was moved forward so the brick wall is no longer visible. (This may be the desired effect - but we are not really seeing the same scene, since all of the stone wall in the back is now visible - even the part that was previously blocked by the brick wall.) [image: Gd9Z_zoom2-35.jpg] Zoomed in by using the field of view instead. The field of view is now 4 degrees and the brick wall is still visible. (We see the same scene and perspective as the first image - only larger.) This would be the effect of an optional "Zoom Window" tool which changed the field of view, rather than moving the camera. [image: 5KUc_zoom-3-4.jpg]

Thanks modelhead and Gaieus. That helps a lot. Kudos!

HI Gaieus Unfortunately I am not familiar with Vue. Currently, I am reasonably happy that I understand Kerkythea a little bit. I also have problems to create a good texture for the terrain. The whole scene should look more natural. Till now i'm not yet really satisfied with the results. Perhaps someone would render the model in Vue. I would be interested how the model looks perfectly rendered. I would like to make it available for it. The model can be downloaded from the following link: http://www.speedshare.org/download.php?id=92BB996813 Karlheinz