A new home for SketchUp
-
Yes...speculation is the right word !
-
Speculation indeed but I think Scott Lininger, even though his lips are probably sealed tight, may be trying to tell us where things are!
His new avatar says a lot in one new word! @GoobleUp
-
Meh! @Last + Google + Trimble + SketchUp = @GoobleUp. He's telling you they do threesomes.
-
@mike lucey said:
Speculation indeed but I think Scott Lininger, even though his lips are probably sealed tight, may be trying to tell us where things are!
His new avatar says a lot in one new word! @GoobleUp
That was his response when I asked for how the new t-shirts where going to be like.
Combination of @last, Google and SketchUp. -
I was gone for most of the day yesterday so I missed the comments on my post until now -- but here's the reality (as I see it) about the future of 3D:
- Infinitely re-usable assets gradually building up in large quantities
I'm not taking about the 3DW here -- although with some effort it could morph into such a place... but I mean more like FF/Turbosquid/Dosch/etc.
- Increased utility of 3D scanning of real world objects
For instance imagine Google street view, but scanned in 3D -- obviously the technology is not to that place yet in terms of affordability/ease of use/accessibility... but it is coming. Tools like this will become the new norm: http://www.photosculpt.net/ .
- Parametric Modeling becoming more and more commonplace
Not much to say here... this seems like a good thing, and it is in-terms of efficiency and quality control -- but the side effect is it lowers the entry level for people to produce reasonable quality 3D.
Taking those things into consideration you have to say that for the most part direct 3D modeling will eventually become minority concern. With the wide availability of creating a huge range of 3D images without learning any real modeling skills already a very real phenomena at places like DAZ/Poser.
I've watch several very large workforces, in diverse creative fields, be completely displaced by the steady march of technology -- the majority usually do not see it coming or do not adequately prepare... the time will eventually come for the 3D modeler as well.
That said, this is likely 15-20 years off at this point... so it's not a terribly pressing issue right now. But the one thing you can count on with the march of technology is that manual work (by humans) will be replaced at some point... automation is always the ultimate goal.
Creativity and adaptability are the only things that can keep a person or software from becoming a victim of the steady march of technology. Here at SketchUp we have the Ruby developers -- essentially a huge extension of the dev team that can take the software in any given direction it might need to go (to keep up), and in ways the SketchUp dev team is either unwilling or unable (and I'm not sure which is more damning) to do.
Extensibility is the key -- Photoshop is another great example, a big part of why Photoshop thrived over the years was plugins... take that away and Photoshop would/could have been replaced by now.
Building Maker is limited by design -- there is no extensibility that I know of, so it is doomed to fail(eventually) when its designed purpose is no longer relevant.
Best,
Jason. -
from http://www.urbandictionary.com
@unknownuser said:
Gooble
- man or boy who is amateur,but pretend to be mature.No or less experienced.
- a small child, older than a toddler but not quite yet civilized
- unidentified substance, object, smell, ect.
Uhm...doesn't sound too good.
-
@unknownuser said:
@edson said:
and, by the way, why do people generally picture the future as a catastrophic one? let's look ahead to a better Sketchup. it is much better for one's health.
dunno.. my take on it is that people are generally excited about this change.. it's just that one negative comment seems to affect people greater than one positive comment..
(which reminds me of something i heard a few times over the years… "it takes ten positive acts throughout a day to make up for one negative" (or something like that)) …we're (humans) weirdos
Or 10 ah shi$s equal 1 atta boy
-
@cuttingedge said:
Will this whole transfer halt all developments of paid plugins like Vray, Podium? I've been anticipating Vray for so long, now looks like its gonna freeze...
My thought also!
-
Just read through the - Transfer of licenses and personal data to Trimble - here, http://sketchup.google.com/usernotice.html
This paragraph has me a little confused!
*'Opting-out
If you do not agree to Google assigning its rights and obligations under your SketchUp and/or SketchUp Pro license agreement you must cease all use of SketchUp under your license as soon as possible (and in any event before the Closing Date). You may then also request that Google does not share your user data with Trimble by completing this web form before the Closing Date.
If you do not agree to Google licensing, assigning and sharing your Google 3D Warehouse data (including 3D models and user data) as set out in this notice, you must remove models from the Google 3D Warehouse prior to the Closing Date.'*
What I am confused about is, how can a person act before a certain specified date if they don't know what that date is?
What happens to the people that are unaware of these happenings due to vacations etc. Surely there would be some sort of requirement to contact all possibly effected people before a blanket action is undertaken. At least this would, IMO, be good planning and an action that could possibly avoid confusion further on down the track.
As I said, I'm confused
-
@jason_maranto said:
Creativity and adaptability are the only things that can keep a person or software from becoming a victim of the steady march of technology.
I agree! As long as you can create, it doesn't matter the technology. To design is the human endeavor, you can't automate that.
@unknownuser said:
Here at SketchUp we have the Ruby developers -- essentially a huge extension of the dev team that can take the software in any given direction it might need to go (to keep up), and in ways the SketchUp dev team is either unwilling or unable (and I'm not sure which is more damning) to do.
How about 3rd read on this: "not allowed" Let's see what Trimble allows to flourish...
-
@cuttingedge said:
Will this whole transfer halt all developments of paid plugins like Vray, Podium? I've been anticipating Vray for so long, now looks like its gonna freeze...
I asked on the vray forum , and as far as the devs seem to be concerned, it's continuing uninterrupted.
-
@jason_maranto said:
Taking those things into consideration you have to say that for the most part direct 3D modeling will eventually become minority concern. With the wide availability of creating a huge range of 3D images without learning any real modeling skills already a very real phenomena at places like DAZ/Poser.
i think you're cutting out a huge swath of 3D world.. it's not just for creating 3D imagery.. it enables you to completely 'build' something prior to actually building it... sort out problems, develop a sequence/schedule, finer material orders, etc..
as far as creating a model of something that already exists then yeah, i can see that dying out.. we're probably not too far off from '3D cameras for everyone' which will more likely than not, produce superior results in a fraction of the time it takes to create the same model today (fraction of a second vs. days
)but as far as modeling new ideas, i'm not convinced it can be automated..
(that said, i am sure the way this stuff is done in the future will be a lot sweeter than today.. once we get rid of the mouse/keyboard/monitor paradigm) -
...... don't forget fingers, hands and arms, just brains in jars full of some strange greenish liquid
-
@mike lucey said:
...... don't forget fingers, hands and arms, just brains in jars full of some strange greenish liquid
lol..
i don't know.. it's just awkward using computers the way we do.. (and if you think about it, things really haven't changed much over the past 30 or so years regarding this.. and i highly doubt they got it right with the first try
) -
@unknownuser said:
i think you're cutting out a huge swath of 3D world.. it's not just for creating 3D imagery.. it enables you to completely 'build' something prior to actually building it... sort out problems, develop a sequence/schedule, finer material orders, etc..
I think this is fairly well covered under item #3 (parametric modeling). At some point in the future anybody (as in layman) will be able to tell a computer exactly what type of buildings, rooms, furnishings, etc. they envision -- the computer will just adapt the design in realtime, and most likely be able to run complex simulations from this data that we can only dream of. Manual modeling will be redundant (for the most part). Obviously we are some ways off from this, but it is coming... there are already many primitive parts of this in place.
For example, as primitive as they are, Dynamic Components were a step for SketchUp in this direction.
Best,
Jason. -
An area where SU shines, but is very unknown is 3D Printing.
Last summer I attended a seminar on the new version of SolidWorks. If I had the money, that is one app I would buy! (Wash my mouth with soap
)However, at the seminar were 2 3D Printers displaying all sorts of very intricate objects, most with intertwined parts that were molded in place, not assembled after printing. One printer was able to make models with a volume of upto 2ft X 3ft X 1 1/2 ft deep, in multiple contiguous materials from soft aluminum to hard plastic to very pliable silicone, all integrally bonded, like a 1 piece wiper blade. It used inkjet technology and upto 7 material cartridges. Needless to say, I was blown away, but at $250,000 I had to put my credit card away.
What's this to do with SU, you may ask?
I asked about what the software could handle in terms of complexity, and the answer was
"whatever you can create in Google Sketchup and scale to fit"
then pass the SU file through a (still in development) translation app to create the 3D "print" file.It seems that SU was simplest in creating the models , while SolidWorks was better at engineering the models for conventional computerized machining. At least for now anyway.
-
@jason_maranto said:
@unknownuser said:
i think you're cutting out a huge swath of 3D world.. it's not just for creating 3D imagery.. it enables you to completely 'build' something prior to actually building it... sort out problems, develop a sequence/schedule, finer material orders, etc..
I think this is fairly well covered under item #3 (parametric modeling). At some point in the future anybody (as in layman) will be able to tell a computer exactly what type of buildings, rooms, furnishings, etc. they envision -- the computer will just adapt the design in realtime, and most likely be able to run complex simulations from this data that we can only dream of. Manual modeling will be redundant (for the most part). Obviously we are some ways off from this, but it is coming... there are already many primitive parts of this in place.
For example, as primitive as they are, Dynamic Components were a step for SketchUp in this direction.
Best,
Jason.Speaking from my experience with residential (and some light commercial work), as well as custom timber design:
Until there is a sophisticated set of algorithms in place that can take a long form series of essay questions (plus hundreds / thousands of yes / no questions), parse the data, watch the expression and emotion on a client's face as you discuss how they've answered those questions in reference to the images they've shown you of 'what we like' - then adapt that all to budget, climate, local codes, etc. etc. etc. - hands, minds, eyes, and brains from designers collaborating with their clients should still play a huge role in designing spaces for human interaction and occupation.
Otherwise we'll have what? Android for home and offices? A mess of conflicting software / free ware / ad based design tools that the 'layman' (whom I very much respect, but want to help guide) can cobble together? We already have a physical environment that can resemble the worst MySpace pages (I'm looking at you, strip mall developer, and I'm looking at you, lady with all sorts of plastic crap from the last 20 years strewn on your lawn).
Pre-fab, sure, plug together your house from a reputable designer / builder in a web based app, let the model inform the manufacturing in terms of parametric modules that get assembled at the shop in the computer and then output to cut lists, material choices, pricing, and then show up on site.
But, no thanks for some future of fully automated design.
I love the idea of parametric modeling (use it a lot on the timber side of things - wall / window modules, custom timber CNC module, etc, for AutoCAD), and I'd love to see DCs grow up - but simply inputting a bunch of data into a spreadsheet and have a building pop out, no thanks.
-
BMike said (in part) but simply inputting a bunch of data into a spreadsheet and have a building pop out, no thanks.
But doing just that can give you the basis for a building that conforms to a set of rules/standards and dimensions for which designers/architects/engineers can now tweak into what the client wants.
This will avoid continuous re-do's when some standard was violated or overlooked during the fomenting stage. That tends to raise the costs, take extra time and pisses off the client, because it happens every time.
-
Yes, please understand I'm not talking about the need for customer service or good taste/design to go away -- just the need for alot of the manual labor of model building. Lets face it, the world is very much a pre-fab place these days, with a limited amount of options for virtually anything.
Best,
Jason. -
Don't be surprised to see more affordable 3D printing soon.
Not big parts but 6"x6"x6" parts.@jgb said:
An area where SU shines, but is very unknown is 3D Printing.
Last summer I attended a seminar on the new version of SolidWorks. If I had the money, that is one app I would buy! (Wash my mouth with soap
)However, at the seminar were 2 3D Printers displaying all sorts of very intricate objects, most with intertwined parts that were molded in place, not assembled after printing. One printer was able to make models with a volume of upto 2ft X 3ft X 1 1/2 ft deep, in multiple contiguous materials from soft aluminum to hard plastic to very pliable silicone, all integrally bonded, like a 1 piece wiper blade. It used inkjet technology and upto 7 material cartridges. Needless to say, I was blown away, but at $250,000 I had to put my credit card away.
What's this to do with SU, you may ask?
I asked about what the software could handle in terms of complexity, and the answer was
"whatever you can create in Google Sketchup and scale to fit"
then pass the SU file through a (still in development) translation app to create the 3D "print" file.It seems that SU was simplest in creating the models , while SolidWorks was better at engineering the models for conventional computerized machining. At least for now anyway.
Advertisement