Bad News for Architects in the next ver. of Google Sketchup
-
@al hart said:
Has anyone noticed if text and dimensioning and "orphan" edge lines (often used to draw twigs in trees) are exported to Collada, or is it only 3D?
Very important question, Al.
I also would like to know.
Without orphan edge lines, importing CAD through Collada is useless.
Most of us import 2D plans and not so much 3D. -
Interestingly, the collada format is more versatile than virtually any other 3d format that SU already has. Whether removing dwg is good or bad, I think in the future Google's decision to more fully support collada will prove to be advantageous.
-
It's XML people! just throw some info between <tagname> and </tagname> and whamo! It now supports "tagname's" functionality.
...well that is, as long as the receiver knows what to do with the extra info.
If you want to see it first hand, draw some geometry in SketchUp and export as kmz. Then rename the file to zip and open the .dae file in a text editor. Beautiful! Makes DXF look like lipstick on a pig
-
@jessejames said:
If you want to see it first hand, draw some geometry in SketchUp and export as kmz. Then rename the file to zip and open the .dae file in a text editor. Beautiful! Makes DXF look like lipstick on a pig
I took a model, exported it as .KMZ and them imported it.
Here is what I got.
Al Hart
IRender nXt from Render Plus -
JesseJames, Aside from your use of colorful adjectives, your post was informative, and reasonable. Thanks:-)
Just keep in mind that a lot of us depend on DXF. Some, have no other reasonable option
-
@al hart said:
Has anyone noticed if text and dimensioning and "orphan" edge lines (often used to draw twigs in trees) are exported to Collada, or is it only 3D?
How about images (rather than textures of faces)
It's been around for a while; standalone edges now export to collada. The decision was made in order to let people model say cable supported bridges for GE without unnecessary extra geometry (faces) added.
Jesse - yes, your reasoning is correct. Probably some kind of "company policy" (breaking ACAD monopoly( is also behind the curtains.
I wasn1t "repeating" any official Google opinion however just trying to think aloud and understand some background considerations, too.
-
@honoluludesktop said:
Just keep in mind that a lot of us depend on DXF. Some, have no other reasonable option
Yikes i feel really bad now
In an effort to relate to the loss of DXF i imagined for a second (and only a second!) that scripting or some other functionality that was important to me where removed and ouch i am very hurt and angry now! Google, you really know how to put the hooks in us don't you! But at least you give instead of take, take, take -- like you know who!
Please understand Honolulu that my beef is with proprietary formats that have been shoved down our throats for years now by M$, ACAD, and the other greed mongering corporations out there who's evil empire aspirations make my head spin around in circles whilst spiting pea soup!
And my happiness is only in the fact that we will now get a true "modelers" file type for Import/Export of SU files. Sadly though at great loss to many among us!
But now i can feel the damage that you must be feeling. What could be next? Scripting? Printing? Reduced Functionality? I understand the financial reasons but...???
The only way to fix this whole conundrum would be to OpenSource SketchUp. But alas, that is but the pipe dream of fools. This software is sadly too revolutionary for open source.
If we could only find a way for Google to profit from this app then maybe...?
ahh rats, life stinks!
-
@unknownuser said:
'we want to make a bigger gap between free and Pro so that hobbyists will have a great free program but hardcore users will be more encouraged to buy a great cheap modeler. In the future we hope to use this extra revenue to improve development of both the free and Pro versions.'
That should be carved in stone and mounted above the main entrance at the Googleplex.
-
@jessejames said:
my beef is with proprietary formats that have been shoved down our throats for years now by M$, ACAD, and the other greed mongering corporations out there who's evil empire aspirations make my head spin around in circles whilst spiting pea soup!
Having been engaged with a Mac drafting software forever, I know about trying to work with the "proprietary" formats. I think you may relax some!
AutoDesk developed DWG and DXF for use in their software. Other developers have to make translators with mixed success for these formats because AutoCAD is so popular and successful, us users of "other" software need to be able to share files with AutoCAD users in order to do business. It's usually these users who assume you'll provide a DWG file etc. if you wish to collaborate with them.
I don't think, I don't really know, if Collada can aspire to provide the same sort of interchange for CAD but isn't that up to "us", and not AutoDesk, if we want an open source file exchange format that can handle the needs of CAD (or modeling) exchange?
Autodesk does make software that drives the industry forward (perhaps they also greedily consume other perfectly good software). I happen not to use their flagship AutoCAD, but I don't blame them for being successful.
Sorry for the run-on sentences.
-
@linea said:
@unknownuser said:
'we want to make a bigger gap between free and Pro so that hobbyists will have a great free program but hardcore users will be more encouraged to buy a great cheap modeler. In the future we hope to use this extra revenue to improve development of both the free and Pro versions.'
That should be carved in stone and mounted above the main entrance at the Googleplex.
haha, I'd spring for the stone masons.
-brodie
-
Well i get back fom vacantion, came to my favorite forum, and i find this news about sketchup, and what a news about sketchup in many diferent levels!! Well after reading the original post from google and every post in here this is my toughts on this matter:
There's a good side and a bad side in this. The good is that first Google is talking to us!! i still can't believe it but it seems true. And other good thing is a promissed better collada export, and many may see these not worthing much but, believe me, this will be great in the future. An open format that anyone can use, that right now just needs a good vehicle to spread fast, and sketchup it's perfect for that.
But there's a dark side to this news: Removing features it's never good, be it in a paid or free aplication and will always bring the argument of "it's free so don't complaint" and that's never a good argument if you want to keep a good user base. Other thing to take notice is that if this collada importer/exporter is coming as good as the others importers then i wouldn't brag about it...SK has not one single importer for 3d models that work as it should specially in large or complex models. They always lose uv coordinates specially with unwarped meshs, or parts of the model go missing or completly loses materials, so before i see it working i won't stand by it.
Conclusion: I'm very surprised in a good way by these move, is good to see they're trying to change and comunicate with us even if it's bad news (and keep in mind that i'm one of the biggest critis of SK7...). I also agree that the gap between the Free and Pro version should be clear and these change will help on that, and these proves what i have already said about the free beeing the biggest rival of the Pro (and i use SK free right now) but it will be a "cold day in hell" if they're hoping to see 500$ from me for importers (there's companys selling plugins with importers for sketchup at 25-50$). So i would like to see "real" features first, and in sketchup, NOT layout, NOT style builder, JUST sketchup. Because the worst thing they can do right now that they have a lot of users felling "betrayed" (i'm one...) is starting a hype about a new version that in the end will not deliver...again, and i seryously doubt that these time would survive without damage for them
The Odd thing about this: Just for curiosity how will people develope their models to google earth without some basic plans? i'm suspecting they start with some basic plan from a dwg import.(i really don't know because i always wonder why would people work for free for helping a multi milion dollar company making more money enhancing there products...).Strange that these decision may bite them back in the end if they're not carefull.
In the end i can say i really like and understand their decision, and BTW i'm an architect (but that also does some design, and 3d visualition).
Sorry the long text (if someone reads it
)David
-
Well I read it DacaD
I'd have to say I agree with a lot of what you mention. In particular I think it'll be interesting to see how the Pro users react to the next version. SU7 was certainly a disappointing release for me. In my arch-viz work I haven't found any place in my workflow for the tools that SU7 brought about. Even though my company foots the bill, I'm sure I'll be more hesitant whenever SU8 comes around.
I think it's an interesting comment regarding google earth as well. I can't see how this sort of change wouldn't put a damper on that project. Many of the models are made by city planners and architects but many of them are made by bored teenagers with little to do until the next Halo game comes out. Like you I'm not quite sure what the point is aside from shear novelty. By the time they've got the whole world in low poly boxes with low res textures someone will figure out a way to attach some super scanner onto a satilite and scan the whole darn world in a day.
-Brodie
-
@unknownuser said:
........ but it will be a "cold day in hell" if they're hoping to see 500$ from me for importers .........
Now I know what was bothering me!-)
-
@unknownuser said:
there's companys selling plugins with importers for sketchup at 25-50$
hi david,
could you be more specific about this info?
-
@edson said:
@unknownuser said:
there's companys selling plugins with importers for sketchup at 25-50$
hi david,
could you be more specific about this info?
-
Well, those are almost a hundred bucks each.
Yet I can imagine that the price can be justified (especially if works better than SU native importers/exporters). -
Anyone have experience(s) with AutoDesk's "FBX" converter?
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=8224926
http://area.autodesk.com/fbx
http://images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/autodesk-fbx-converter-guide.pdfWhile there's an AutoCAD plugin, the "FBX Coverter" is a standalone program (free download) that reportedly has COLLADA and DXF conversion capabilities (import & export.)
-
I've used their FBX. Been trying to get FBX files from Revit into either 3ds or dwg format.
-
I always have appreciated the philosophy of Google and they have been good to make all kinds of useful information belong to people, not to corporates(in terms of their mission statement). I think they are making efforts to make the exclusive format of DWG more universal. This is just start. For those who want to make this world better, they need to participate and put up with the inconvenience along the necessary change.
A corporate can easily dominate a market with their enormous money and sometimes the method that the company takes along their profit is not necessarily good for the majority of human kind. Once it happens, it is really hard to make it back. I believe Google is the one of those corporates with good will. I value their idea that they try to bring the result of one's effort back to the creator(3D model and its information to the creator in this case). There are many ways to work around; you can stick to the previous version, you can buy or download a DWG import/exporter ruby plugin, or just buy the Pro version. I have benefited from all the things Google provides for free. May be, this is one small thing that I can participate to support their philosophy, having patience and shifting from old habit to new one.
Advertisement