[Google survey results] Power Tools
-
Thanks Fakirgo for pointing out that link.
A survey like that is a good thing.
It makes me optimistic about the development of SU again.
-
I hope they make some response to this questionnaire so we can get an idea of their views to the various requests.
-
Okay guys,
It' been a long time but here is the result:
http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=112142 -
Interesting to see that NURBS scores so highly with people, especially given its such a different methodology to poly modelling.
-
Yes. And that a mirror tool is so much requested? What's wrong with Flip Along or Scale -1?
-
Indeed, i always thought components did a rather good job of that.
-
Hum,
Just a little note...and the shadows ????...forgotten ?
-
@thomthom said:
Yes. And that a mirror tool is so much requested? What's wrong with Flip Along or Scale -1?
mirror.rb works great for me!
-
I have 3 major fears about what will result from this survey that i think we are forgetting...
1- Google finnally realized with this that the orignal users core are the same from the beggining (architectural and design) and that we REALLY need nurbs, sudivision and bezier tools, BUT this will make models heavier and sketchup 7 is alrealy slower with heavy models than 6 for me. So will sketchup be able to handle it has it is? Will They just code new tools and give it to us or will they prepare first sketchup to receive this new tools?
2- The latest tools we had from Google were basicly ruby extensions (think sandbox and DC components). So will this new tools be more ruby extensions? I have no problem with rubys that but we have to keep in mind as more ruby are added the heavier sketchup gets. And they can say what they want about multicore not helping in modeling but how about in ruby calculations, exporting movies, intersecting models, etc? All this are features that can use multicores for faster calculations so how will the "loading" times be?
3- We waited two years for a new sketchup version that the best new thing it had for modeling (or compared to any other new feature in my opinion) were lines intersecting automacticly (I'm sorry but the DCs were made with the big product firms in mind, not artists, and they are just a litle easier than ruby to code and still they do nothing that ruby couldn't do), so how long we will have to wait to get this new features?
I'm sorry for beeing the pessimist in such a optimitic thread guys
but, after the desapointment sketchup 7 was, i'm just trying to be realistic about this. I also want this features badly.I would also be nice to get some feedback from the Sketchup Team this time.
-
@unknownuser said:
1- Google finnally realized with this that the orignal users core are the same from the beggining (architectural and design) and that we REALLY need nurbs, sudivision and bezier tools, BUT this will make models heavier and sketchup 7 is alrealy slower with heavy models than 6 for me. So will sketchup be able to handle it has it is? Will They just code new tools and give it to us or will they prepare first sketchup to receive this new tools?
Personally i dont think SU needs NURBS at all. It just isnt great for what SU was designed for. Some hard coded subdivision tools would be a different matter though.
-
I sing with the power user choir when I say that what SU needs is some real work under the hood. Forget about creating ruby's I say as we already have the master coders doing a fantastic job in that department, rather spend the time, money and resources getting the core program to address larger poly counts.
-
@solo said:
I sing with the power user choir when I say that what SU needs is some real work under the hood. Forget about creating ruby's I say as we already have the master coders doing a fantastic job in that department, rather spend the time, money and resources getting the core program to address larger poly counts.
Ditto. For SU8 I wish for performance optimization, getting rid of bugs and oddities, and a couple of additions to the API. Don't really feel the need for new tools. We make them our self.
-
@solo said:
I sing with the power user choir when I say that what SU needs is some real work under the hood. Forget about creating ruby's I say as we already have the master coders doing a fantastic job in that department, rather spend the time, money and resources getting the core program to address larger poly counts.
Ditto +1. Hell yeah!
-
well, I have to admit, that a Nurbs- (or even better: T-Splines) Version of SketchUp is my greatest dream. you know why?
- Nurbs Modelling is not at all intuitive at the moment
- SketchUp is as intuitive as a 3D modeller can be!
so if Google manages to combine the ease of use with the capabilities of Nurbs modelling - that would be a breakthrough in the whole 3D world!
my vision is that they manage to combine the way of surface modelling we are already used to, but the geometry is composed of Nurbs. so if you create a cubic building, nothing in your workflow will change. but if you then want to shape it in an organic way, you have the full power of Nurbs (T-splines) at your disposal.
(we had a discussion about this a few months ago in another thread)of course I understand, that writing such a program would mean, completely rewriting the SketchUp code, for everything is suddenly based on an entirely new system (probably even the Shadow-engine is polygon based...). but perhaps that is not too bad a thing after all - take all the experience and the simplicity of the interface of SketchUp and write something new!
-
@plot-paris said:
.... take all the experience and the simplicity of the interface of SketchUp and write something new!
U mean something new like skUrbs????
that would indeed be cool! make a new one! a separate product which converses well with Sketchup though! -
I also agree for a code rewritten/optimization for sketchup first but honestly i don't really think that will happen any time soon because SU7 have just been released. So if any new tool will be released before a SU optimization, it should at least come inside the program and not by a ruby extension.
Take the example of the new scale tool plugin from Fredo6. It's a great plugin that completly turns the sketchup scale tool absolete (for the ones that don't use DCs) but because it's a ruby it's much slower on larger geometries than the basic scale tool that it's part of the program and operates much faster.
So as i said in SU8 whishlist thread before we get anything new we need optimization first.
Advertisement