Google Sketchup Pro 7 is out
-
Yes Su is very cheap, brilliant value but I am self employed so purchasing a Pro 6 license was a significant cost to me. A hell of a lot of professionals do use the free version commercially. I am hoping that I am not going to start thinking I have "Mug" stamped on my forehead.
I really hope Google do have at least a few fat rabbits to pull out the hat that we have yet to see for SU 7.
-
I don't know you, but I believe that most of the pro users come from the @last age: the update fee is not so expensive and I must admit I really need some of the pro features, like importing and exporting to dxf/dwg and the possibility to save big images.
If you really work with sketchup, 500$ is a reasonable price for me too.
Otherwise let me know if there is a reasonable alternative to sketchup (
heresy ) for less money.But now, let me introduce a couple of videos of the new born sketchup 7:
[flash=425,344:1fpqvsjf]http://www.youtube.com/v/4X0RzqAz-lI&hl=it&fs=1[/flash:1fpqvsjf]
the new interact tool[flash=425,344:1fpqvsjf]http://www.youtube.com/v/XbjqpeIvzjE&hl=it&fs=1[/flash:1fpqvsjf]
overlapping lines intersection[/matteo]
-
Stu, i dont think you can compare the development of plugins with hard coded tools.
When was the last time follow me didnt work? compare that to trying to use subd and smooth with 'preserve materials' on.
-
Well, if what I dl'ed and took a peak at today is indeed the New And Improved SU, then I must say I'm with Stu. And with Scott.
Personally, I think I'll keep using SU, but not to the extent I have so far. Still love it, though.
EDIT: I can see you, Bacus!
-
@stu said:
[But the point is, as its been mentioned many times, if these Ruby developers can come up with this sort of innovation why cant Google do likewise? And they have a team of pros to do the 'hard coding'.
Aye!
John?
-
@remus said:
Stu, i dont think you can compare the development of plugins with hard coded tools.
When was the last time follow me didnt work? compare that to trying to use subd and smooth with 'preserve materials' on.
Well I think I can. I find Tools on Surface or Joint Push Pull, for example, pretty stable and I'm happy to put up with a few quirks for the amazing added functions they offer.
The last time Follow Me didnt work as I expected was probably last week.
But the point is, as its been mentioned many times, if these Ruby developers can come up with this sort of innovation why cant Google do likewise? And then they have a team of pros to do the 'hard coding'.
-
stop, i was joking about Whaat-UP and ect. (ex)-alast/google made platform for developing.
Thanks to them for it.
Same situation is holding with...maxon's cinema4d, several years c4d's users wish new modelling features(write this in wish list) but got new motiongraphics tools with recent 10-11 versions...you want lwcad in modo, you need lwcad in modo?
-
One wonders why all the frantically requested stuff isn't in the new release (if indeed the one available right now is the new one - still hoping they're playing a practical joke on us
) - you know, 64 bit, high poly ... They can't possibly think no-one needs those features. What's the Big Plan we don't know about? -
Thanks Matteo for your little videos. For me I'm excited about the improvements in basic modeling you illustrate in the clip about intersections. I've noticed basic modelling is much improved in SU7 -- it does what you expect it to do. I'm hopeful that that will translate into productivity improvements and I anticipate that those occasional moments of frustration I felt w/ SU6 will be less frequent (or eliminated altogether).
I remember when ruby was first introduced many users thought "ho hum what's the big deal?". With time we saw the true importance of the ruby feature thanks to inventive users willing to share or offer reasonably-priced scripts that added new useful features to SU. I'm predicting the new Dynamic Components feature will have a similar path. I'm thinking it may lead to some exciting new & powerful components that will blow us away.
I'm also looking forward to the Google folks explaining the improvements in Layout. I'm hopeful it is now going to live up to the potential it originally seemed to offer.
Regards, Ross
-
@unknownuser said:
Make texture unique works as Whaat's explode photomatched texture
from his Indigo exporter.
I am glad to see SU7 finally.It almost starts to feel like Google missed the opportunity and ruby writes do offer more value for SU6, when comparing to upgrade cost to SU7.
Well... perhaps I am too hasty, better wait and see for the proper release of new features or next patch... Early news do not made me feel rushing. -
Actually, Ross and thanks Matteo, the intersection stuff does look good and from the bit of practice Ive had does make drawing a lot more predictable.
-
It seems most people just really wanted High-Poly and Multi-Core. Better modeling will just let these whiz-kidz max-out their models a little faster.
-
@pbacot said:
It seems most people just really wanted High-Poly and Multi-Core. Better modeling will just let these whiz-kidz max-out their models a little faster.
High-Poly and Multi-Core - model of landscape from dxf or by using D.Bur pointcloud-tool with 1-1.5 millions of faces(i worked with such) or subdivided model. Then using spray-tool or copy of trees, 3d-peoples and clone it at landscape or detailing of model. Sketchup died at 3-5 millions of faces, turn the shadows also. i understand early concept of this tool - simple and make easy to sketch, but now is time of High-Poly and Multi-Core. And i want to work in single application, but should work in 2-3
-
@pbacot said:
It seems most people just really wanted High-Poly and Multi-Core. Better modeling will just let these whiz-kidz max-out their models a little faster.
I just don´t know how do multi-core could be of any value besides export videos and images, I think there isn´t any other modeling program with multi core enabled 3d Viewport.
-
I tried to update at 64$ but my registration was rejected
The renderer is very interesting, it takes out the "moirage" effect of materials
Marc
-
@unknownuser said:
I remember when ruby was first introduced many users thought "ho hum what's the big deal?". With time we saw the true importance of the ruby feature thanks to inventive users willing to share or offer reasonably-priced scripts that added new useful features to SU. I'm predicting the new Dynamic Components feature will have a similar path. I'm thinking it may lead to some exciting new & powerful components that will blow us away.
totally agree with you Ross!
btw: the pdf 2d export works still bad
-
@matteo said:
@unknownuser said:
I remember when ruby was first introduced many users thought "ho hum what's the big deal?". With time we saw the true importance of the ruby feature thanks to inventive users willing to share or offer reasonably-priced scripts that added new useful features to SU. I'm predicting the new Dynamic Components feature will have a similar path. I'm thinking it may lead to some exciting new & powerful components that will blow us away.
totally agree with you Ross!
btw: the pdf 2d export works still bad
Whats wrong with it? I use it all the time for good quality image export. Just have to change the setting from draft to high.
-
Just as a general reply to high poly stuff: if their was an easy way of doing this im sure the google guys would have done it. The fact that their havent been any major imporvements in that area tells me it isnt easy.
-
Remus,
While I am with you in the thinking that high poly integration must not be easy, I would have to say that after 18 months in development Google of all companies should have found a way. I am sure that they (Google) frequent these forums and have seen the cries for high poly support along with the shadow bug to be fixed but yet have not done so tells me that Sketchup of all the things they have their hands in does not rank high on their lists of of development dollars invested. Sad but sure seems to be true. For the shadow bug, I have to say that is one of the bigger disappointments for me. I have to say I do not see too many models being displayed without shadows on so that tells me I am not the only one wishing this would have been addressed.
Scott
-
@remus said:
The fact that their havent been any major imporvements in that area tells me it isnt easy.
That's quite possible. It is also possible that Google is a marketing firm first, and a software developer second.
Advertisement