Google is Listening!

[kostas_designer]

I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..

[TLD]

Hello everyone,

Just wanted to ask the forum if there is anyway to map solids on a curved surface to follow a curved path. Is it easy to do with 2D shapes and textures but not 3D objects....

Thanks Alot..

[AdamB]

<shameless_plug>LightUp gives you unwrapping and alpha texture support. </shameless_plug>

[jbacus]

@kostas_designer said:

I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..

You can export images with transparent backgrounds on the Mac today. Unfortunately, it isn't easy for us to support the same on Windows at this time.

john
.

[d12dozr]

@kostas_designer said:

I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..

Fortunately ThomThom came to the rescue with this plugin for Windows: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?p=270998#p270998

[kostas_designer]

@d12dozr said:

@kostas_designer said:

I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..

Fortunately ThomThom came to the rescue with this plugin for Windows: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?p=270998#p270998

Well-well, i didn't notice that!
Great work Thomas, as always!
Google people, I think you should PM the guy

[Gaieus]

Wouldn't it be the same as Parallel projection under the Camera menu combined with (in this case) a Top (standard) view?

[jgb]

1/2 a sec while I climb up on my soapbox.

OK. I made it through to page 4 of this, and after Coens comments (all too true) I have to add my $0.02CDN.

First, 64bit is a red herring. If the hardware, the operating system AND the application s/w are all 64bit compliant, the throughput of the machine MORE than doubles. I have heard the same bitches when we went from 8bit to 16bit, from 16bit to 32bit. And on the mainframes, going on to 128 and 256bits.

Long register adds are sped up by 4 at least because there is little overflow checking required.
GRAPHICS is a long register hog.

Generally speaking when a "64bit" app performs less than expected on a 64bit CPU, it is all the more likely it is not optimized for 64bit throughout and still depends on legacy 32bit functions, which will slow down any 64bit CPU.

As for Google not listening.......

LadyBugz (Carolyn) posts only the first post, then NOTHING for 19 pages so far.
Same sort of response the last 4 1/2 years I've been using SU, and posting to the other SU BBS's including Googles "official" forum. A very typical "Post, Promise, Disappear" like they are training to become politicians.

I've said this many times before..... Google SU developers are more interested in adding new bells and whistles than fixing perennial problems. (a few of the many I've complained about follows)

Like "Hyper zoom"
Like Failing to indicate WHERE the problem lies in face forming (gaps and non-planars). If SU can find a problem, TELL ME WHERE IT IS, not a simply useless error message. In fact SU8 is worse than SU6 in saying what the problem is.
Like gaps in intersecting
Like Feet-Inch-Decimal inch units
Like an Icon to toggle snapping
The list goes on...

YES, I am fully aware of the selfless magicians who dedicate countless hours writing Ruby scripts to fix major deficiencies in SU, both bugs and "function not present" but should be.

Like Startup, which defaults the select cursor rather than the pencil
Like ThomThom's TT-Select toys and others
Like Fredo's JPP, Curviloft, and Onsurface
and my pluggin list goes on.

Most of my plugins are FIXES to SU shortcomings, not added functionality.
Most of those plugins SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF SU, and some a long time ago.

Yeah, Google listens

[brodie]

@jgb said:

1/2 a sec while I climb up on my soapbox.

....

Yeah, Google listens

Lots to agree with there.

-Brodie

[sm4rt]

@thomthom said:

@sm4rt said:

I don't know if this was already mentioned but we really need the orthogonal type in sketchup like AutoCAD do in order to simplify the building of object with Sketchup.

"orthogonal type" ?

I was speaking about this

[sm4rt]

I agree too but instead of creating some topics here, contact em each times I got new suggestion or waiting for a real wide 3weeks survey (lol) I prefer post here (as a wailing wall)

Also need a dialog box on new doc creation which propose us a template like all other soft do in fact... (quite bored to change it in preferences window before launching new document)

[rv1974]

@sm4rt
Mate you should invest more time in the sketchup learning

[jbacus]

@jgb said:

As for Google not listening.......

er... how many times have I posted so far in this thread? Half dozen times, maybe? I think I lost count a few weeks ago. If you haven't picked up on this yet, I'm actually the Product Manager for SketchUp– which means I'm exactly the person you want to be reading your posts if you desire something about SketchUp to change in the future.

It may be useful to remember that having an idea yourself doesn't automatically mean that the feature should be implemented. It may not be something that legitimately benefits every user. Also, it may be that we like your idea, but can't implement it for any of a hundred valid reasons that have to do with time/money/resources or just some limitation in the way that SketchUp is designed to work.

Our occasional surveys and "Moderator" voting series' are a way for us to make some sense of the inbound feature requests. They aren't the sole source of input, but they are quite helpful. If you'd like to discuss new features you think we should implement or old features you think we should have implemented differently, I'm open to doing that. Ordinarily I do that on our Help Forum (in the "Feature Suggestions" category), and I post there quite regularly. Occasionally, I also read posts here on SketchUcation. I think I've responded in great detail to most of the concerns you've raised previously, but I don't mind doing so again.

john
.

[Gaieus]

Hi John, don't get pissed off! We know you are a big SCF fan!

[Rich O Brien]

Look who's in the background. Looking quite splendid for a leper

As for the earlier comments, whilst everyone has their opinions, some should engage in a more appropriate manner.

[jgb]

Dear John

With all due respect, Good political answer. Run for congress.

If, as you say, you do read our posts, then PLEASE take the time to at least acknowledge and perhaps explain what you think of the post.

No response equates to NOT LISTENING.

In my case, most of my posts relate to SU shortcomings not new bells and whistles.

WHY have you not addressed the "Gapped" triangle problem, easy to fix as I suggested.
Why have you not addressed the "Hyper-zoom / Hyper-pan" problem, also easy to fix, as I suggested.

I can give you a comprehensive list of SU shortcomings and suggested fixes, if you want.
All I ask is a proper response to them.

Don't explain it away simplistically. I was a Software Projects manager way back when, so I do understand how these things work.

[dacad]

Hi John

I understand where jgb is coming.
I've been moving away from SK in the last months (more work related than SK related), and there's times i really miss SK way of modeling and doing stuff
but the truth is in the end other softwares give me much more garanties and don't suffer from SK shortcomings, from uv mapping to animation, to incredible basic stuff like loop selects, bevels, curves, organic modeling or just extruding more than one face at the same time. And then there's stuff that's completly unforgivable like importing/exporting options, or the way SK unsmoths things without warning after "copy pastes" or "saves" ruining renders or exports if we are not alert.

And if you read some reviews of SK8 pro like, in the PC Pro, you see that maybe we are not crazy or alone in thinking like this or beeing more critic:
"However, SketchUp 8 Pro and LayOut 3 add little to previous releases and raise questions about Google’s commitment to SketchUp’s original user-base and those new users who want to move beyond geo-modelling." (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/software/363466/google-sketchup-8/2)

I know that i'm a minority and what sk offers may be enough to almost all Sk users and some pro users, but for more serious model work it's simply not enough anymore. And it's a pity because SK it's (or was) a trully unique software.

So try to be a little more understanble with us and keep sending updates like the last one that solve the shadow bug (congrats on that ). I allways like a good reason to get back a play a litle more with this great software.

Best Regards

David

[jbacus]

Not sure what response you guys are hoping to get. Can you clarify? If you have particular issues, let's discuss them in an orderly manner. Though for the sake of others who don't want to wade through all 19 pages of this thread, perhaps it would be better to start a new one?

John
.

[brodie]

John, it sounds to me like the conversation to have is about where you see the software going, at least in the next few iterations. Are you looking to shore up the week spots (some of which jgb pointed out) or are you looking to add new features (the lack of which DacaD pointed out - at least in the SU8 release).

If it's the former I totally get that, for one. I believe Modo's model is to alternate versions between those which add lots of features and those which refine the workflow and fix the issues. I also commend SU on finally putting the shadow bug thing to bed (although it was never really something that I ran into in my work).

If it's the later, then the question would have to be, not necessarily what features are you developing but at least, who would you be gearing those features towards? Folks modeling cities for google earth? Folks using the free version of SU for professional work? Many of us who pay for SU and use it professionally, and see the value in it, are worried about being forgotten.

-Brodie

[dacad]

I agree with you Brodie. i think the question it's not only fix stuff VS add new stuff, but also whats the target and goal for SK.

I know that most probably john/google aren't allowed to discuss this, and it's totally understandable, but would be nice to now where's SK going.
Should we expect for the next releases stuff like much more refined Google earth integration, like five new things Google Earth related, lots of new stuff added or fixed for layout, and just one tool added to modeling and nothing more fixed or added in SK itself? (i don't mean any of these in a disrespectfull way, because i know that was a lot of work).

I have no problem with google earth stuff beeing priority, It's your software and your development plan, you guys know better than anyone your goals and to get there, but some people may use SK to make 3D models not google earth related and most of the time complex and heavy, poly and texture wise, others use SK more for previz and need more from the animation or presentation stuff. So for some of us that information can be very valuable, to know if the prioritie here it's still the same as in the begining: doing, in a easy and understanble way, better 3D models and previz; or doing, in a easy and understanble way, better GE 3D models?

So yes, i would love to know how you see SK in the future.

Best Regards

David