Construction & Working Drawings - Discussion
-
I'm new to the forums here, its been a treat to see all the good work. I thought it might be worth weighing in on this conversation. I also wish Sketchup and layout developers would consider adding true 2D documentation abilities. I've been using Sketchup for many years, well before Googles introduction. My desktop changed dramatically the day the CD showed up, Sketchup 1.3. I had ordered it through Architectural Record (I think) It was a quirky little program that seemed like a good fit for the planning work we were doing. Never did I relise the true implications of adding this to the firms list of programs. Sketchup literally has changed the process of how we work, the presentations, and the products we create. Nothing in 26 years has had anything close to the impact of on our work; and more specifically, me. I'm fortunate to now make a living creating stuff, presenting stuff, and building stuff. One of the real un-intended problems with Sketchup is how it now dominates my daily work-flow. Autocad, Datacad are all history for me. As a architectural illustrator I have no issue with Sketchup, as an architect I need more. I feel that Google almost owes to us to develope a professional 2D program that in theory, works like Layout3 with yet more capability. I do use layout regularly, especially when post processsing of isnt an issue. When used in a modest way, specifically formatting conceptual or schematic designs and their multiple iterations Layout is magic. Sometimes I feel that Googles purchase of @Last software was both a blessing and a curse. I like the fact that Sketchup is popular, I also like Googles mantra, 3D for everyone. I just wish they would consider that we users are acually professionals trying to make a buck and we need to evolve. I had expectations of a faster Sketchup, a faster layout. I envisioned a render component and a better 2D document tool. What exactly is Google going to do with Sketchup? Are we forever going to be regarded as those "fringe" 3D folks. You know, "thats not a real 3D program", yadda, yadda. Where does Sketchup go from here? Is this it? As a professional I feel its becoming a one trick pony, or maybe its me having become, a one trick pony. Sometimes I feel like Sketchup is a game complete with addons, mods etc. A plug-in for that, and app for this. I'm to old and grumpy to spend all my time investigating and downloading different plugins etc. I wish Google/@last was able to bring us what we need and less of what we want. Will openGL be used as a platform forever? Where was Sketchup going before the Google entered the picture. I don't have any issues with Google, a great company for sure. I just wish they would consider more and that they meet our expectations going forward.
-
Stevo,
Welcome to the forum and thanks for bumping this thread.
I think the fact that LO was developed at all is some indication of understanding of needs like yours. Those who mostly do the PR rendering don't really need that. Meanwhile some people are using the program for construction drawings as best they can. I haven't made the switch. I separate my 2d and 3d work for the most part, transferring geometry and images when useful.
One trick pony? If you look at what people use SU for from building analysis to models for PR rendering, it seems like a lot of tricks. Recently I've been using SU's Google Earth aerial image import to do quick overlays of various site scenarios. People use a lot of different programs in conjunction with SU and probably always will. I guess you are hoping that SU becomes another Revit? Join the club.
I know some people want more rendering inside SU. What would that have to cost to be worth it to Google and how good could it be? What would we have to pay Google for that? On the other hand you can pick from a number of rendering programs that cater to the SU interface. Pay them instead. Those developers are outdoing each other all the time. Seems like a better outcome for the user.
Peter
-
Well, I agree with the rendering part at least. There are a number of 3D modelling software which have their built in raytracing renderers yet what we see is that many users of these software go and render in 3rd party renderers. Okay, some basic thing would do quite much for those who are now lost but I doubt that Google could (or at least would be interested to invest enough to) develop something that satisfies everybody and beats the market.
-
Thank you Pbacot and Gaieus,
After having read my post this morning I see your points. I have to say that I do like the fact that Sketchup is infact a pretty open SDK and that people and companies do have the opportunity to invest in addons etc. I wouldnt want that to change. I think Sketchup could focus a bit on the GPU alternatives such as DX and the limits of Sketchup; the texture size, the poly count, and shaders within SK8 etc. I would think there would be room to expand SK8 professional capabilities. I'm not a software engineer but something tells me that a quality render solution would be enhanced if it was integral to the software. I agree and disagree about the 3rd party developers, yes they do bring healthy competition to the scene. Outdoing each other is a problem only in that I inevitably buy many solutions, always a user, never a master. The integration of Google Earth is a good example of a really productive and a useful tool. I agree wholly, Sketchup is infact the most diverse modeling tool. A tool which many different industries use. I'm just curious as to where Sketchup may have gone without Google. The answer to that could be good, maybe bad. Would Sketchup still be used and have such a loyal base or not? As Pbacot indicated LO was develpoed specifically to use as I do. I've learned to use Layout in a manner that fits the work-flow. Expanding its use would infact be more useful to me than a render component. I'm not sure about the Revit thing though. I would hope it be something more robust and simpler. Autocad has a nasty habit or making stuff thats not very intuitive, over engineeered, way to expensive, and lacks any character; not to mention its relatively worthless for existing conditions. Its like they have to make it complicated to get the money for the product. Personally I'd pay the same for less, a simpler solution. I was wrong in suggesting I'm a one trick pony, its likely I've been used in a manner that fits the work we do; and after all, at least I have one trick up my sleeve. I hope Sketchup recognises that we users need to maintain that edge or we will begin to evolve outside the box. After all, how hard would it be for another company to do just that? start with a render program and develop a push pull inference modeler. For instance, Combine Bonsai and Maxwell, or Artlantis, maybe Podium and you would see some competition. It seems to me that Google is sometimes more interested in our modeling the world for them than they are in a product that continues to evolve.
-
here are a couple of examples how I use layout. These are part of a package I sent to a solar company when we were trying to integrate shadow masks and a PV installation...
-
hmm... multiples didnt work.
-
We are currently renovating two structures that are getting completely reskinned with EFIS and a new window wall system. The buildings are going from being major energy hogs to about as green as green gets.
-
I submitted some stuff to Google a few years ago. They used some as examples of what you can do with Layout. Ironically these images were not made in Layout; however many others were. I can't seem to find the others right now.
I found them. There located in the same picassa portfolio they use.
Images:
1,5,6,7,29,30, and 45 -
Nice work Stevo.
I'm new to this forum, but was part of the old google forum a couple years back. I've been using sketchup since it was owned by ATLAST - i think since 2003. I have used it in conjunction with ACAD for several years. ACAD finally got me so frustrated (I've been using it since version 2.3!). I don't understand why Autodesk insists on maintaining their cumbersome path. At any rate, I completely dropped ACAD last summer and I have dedicated myself to making Layout work for complete construction documents for all my work. I primarily do custom homes in the Tahoe area. I am 3 projects deep in the process and so far, I have no regrets at all. I have structured all my scrap books and standard layout sheets to the point that I am now far faster than ACAD format and the graphic output is far superior. Every contractor that looks at my documents has been very complimentary. I also provide fairly in depth drawings - usually 30 sheets plus. It is great to see so many going down this path as I would love to see some improvements and development of Layout for my use.
Cheers!
-
Sonder,
Welcome! Any tips you have on the CD process with LO would be great to hear.
Peter
-
To Sonder: I second Pbacot's request for some examples of detail and Tell me, do you experience any glacially slow periods at the Laying-out stage with Layout? I have found that with very large files I need to break them into parts to keep from bogging down in Layout ...
Thanks -
Thanks for the welcom.
I would post an image, but I have never done so online like this. How do I keep the quaility like those posted above - are those hosted somewhere? Sorry for the ignorance on this, but when I convert a pdf to an image, the quality is awful.
As for the LO speed, I have found more ram helps, but the key is management of the model. Always set the file so the references do not update or render automatically. Always work in Raster format. Purge all SU models prior to updating (components first, then materials). Utilize groups, components and layers to only show specifically what you want in a particular scene. I have found that this helps the workflow move nicely. The biggest time hog is updating the reference and rendering in Vector. I only do that at the end of the day or at night when home. It is the number one aspect of LO that needs improvement. Updating of the references, especially large ones takes time. My home designs are typically around 30Mb for the home alone and 40mb for the home on the site. Separating the two is a huge help in working with building specific drawings opposed to site specific.
Now all that said, I have only been really exploring Layout since this past summer. I am now finding that until LO deals with the reference update time crunch, I may temporarily switch to one page per file. This would certainly speed things up opposed to how I am working now. I have 6 page documents for floor plans. When you update that reference, Layout takes 6 times longer than if it were 1 page. It appears that each viewport updates and renders separately timewise.
-
Interresting topic.
I noticed something perculiar last week.
I got the impression LO is slow when number of objects increase, regardless of meshdensity.Had this model of a rock-climbingwall. When I added climbinggrips(many instances of them), update was dramaticaly slower in LO.
Off course if you add stuff, you will pay the price. But the grips where instances and not "very" dense. At least I don't think they where. No noted lag in SU. -
Some recent permit drawings:
-
Ok, nuff said..
I reckon there are a fair amount of components in your model Bmike
Beauty BTW -
@jolran said:
Ok, nuff said..
I reckon there are a fair amount of components in your model Bmike
Beauty BTWthanks.
collaboration between an engineer i work with and his client.
we did about 4 iterations in sketchup. showed to client via walk through and jpg.
he eventually nixed some of our more creative approaches (curved braces, some mirrored and tapered elements, etc.)i worked on each sheet in vector, but would keep them from auto-updating, and switched them back to raster when i was done.
it sucks, but otherwise it gets really slow switching from page to page.11 pages (i've worked on sets with 26 and 30 pages - i had to break those into 2)
-
In SU the users (and Ruby makers) are the developers! Google just has to Catch-UP!
BMike Thanks for this. Can I work for you? Love your projects!
Sonder, you might check out this page RE attachments. Would love to see some of your examples:
http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=25217 -
Thanks all.
Here's another recent project:
Engineer (who took my Intro to SketchUp course...) sketched this up on paper and as a first go in SketchUp.
I cleaned up his overall model and added all the details, joinery, steel.
-
You get such cool projects.
-
x-ray viewvector view[quote="jolran"]Interresting topic.
I noticed something perculiar last week.
I got the impression LO is slow when number of objects increase, regardless of meshdensity.
quote]I have found the same result ... when I delete multiple copies of the model (or duplicate portions of it that were set up separately just for clarity or convience) Layout speed increases, but as Sonder has noted going to 1 page per file really speeds up the processing and updating.
Also the clearest results are definitely with vector graphics, but I have to use raster if x-ray is a part of the scene (i.e., joinery within a timber). I will see if I can find some examples and attach to a following email. See also this topic for other examples of my recreational work: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=81&t=39961.
Advertisement