What will SketchUp Free and Pro look like in 2013?
-
@jason_maranto said:
Compared to what? Most of the modelers I've used currently have as good if not better usability/speed than SketchUp, and the UI are leagues better.
Well, in the past few years I tried 3Ds Max, Maya, Cinema 4D, Rhino, Modo, Blender. As I do only architecture, I also compare SU to BIM softwares like Revit and ArchiCAD. Frankly, I never managed to get the same modeling speed as SU in any of these software. The interaction engine, the groups/components fonctionality, etc...
As for the UI, I'm not only talking about the graphic interface, which could be improved, yeah. But about how the user interacts with the geometry.Sure, SU out-of-the-box is far beyond most of the others in terms of power. But for me, it has its speed.
As always, it comes down to "use the right tool for the right job".
For years I used C4D, for modeling characters and props for video games' mods. I found it really intuitive and powerful. Then, I began my architecture studies. And suddenly, for 3D sketching, C4D became heavy and slow. Discovering SU was a slap in the face.
I still often have to use 3Dsmax for rendering purpose, as SU doesn't handle heavy vegetation. And when I do, my only wish is that I could model in it as I do in SU.So yeah, if you need modeling power, move on to something else. I need a good and fast architectural 3D sketching software, and for that I found nothing better than sketchup.
-
..... the other 'side of the coin'
-
@jiminy-billy-bob said:
@jason_maranto said:
Compared to what? Most of the modelers I've used currently have as good if not better usability/speed than SketchUp, and the UI are leagues better.
Well, in the past few years I tried 3Ds Max, Maya, Cinema 4D, Rhino, Modo, Blender. As I do only architecture, I also compare SU to BIM softwares like Revit and ArchiCAD. Frankly, I never managed to get the same modeling speed as SU in any of these software. The interaction engine, the groups/components fonctionality, etc...
As for the UI, I'm not only talking about the graphic interface, which could be improved, yeah. But about how the user interacts with the geometry.Sure, SU out-of-the-box is far beyond most of the others in terms of power. But for me, it has its speed.
As always, it comes down to "use the right tool for the right job".
For years I used C4D, for modeling characters and props for video games' mods. I found it really intuitive and powerful. Then, I began my architecture studies. And suddenly, for 3D sketching, C4D became heavy and slow. Discovering SU was a slap in the face.
I still often have to use 3Dsmax for rendering purpose, as SU doesn't handle heavy vegetation. And when I do, my only wish is that I could model in it as I do in SU.So yeah, if you need modeling power, move on to something else. I need a good and fast architectural 3D sketching software, and for that I found nothing better than sketchup.
Quite spot on! My list of software I've tried and found slower than sketchup for architectural modeling includes: 3DsMax, Modo, Blender, FormZ, AutoCAD, Revit, and Microstation Triforma. There really is no comparing SU's ease of use and quickness IMO. I'll be using SU8 (plugin enhanced) for a long time to come.
(Edit: And just to be clear, I don't mean I've just tried some of these software. I've been using ACAD nearly 20 years, and I used Triforma daily for about 3 years, and formZ about 5 years on and off, so I know their interfaces back and forth. I've been using Blender only the past year or so, but have a pretty good feel for its limitations now.)
-
Hi, andybot:
You mention that you use Blender for architecture. I would be interested in how you might go about doing precision modeling in specific units, such as feet and inches. Or, do you do some kind of proportional conversions? -
I don't do straight architectural modeling so I couldn't say -- but I have recently modeled the exact same complex mechanical structures in several modeling applications and found SketchUp much slower for me (especially as the poly count rises), and generally incapable of even making the forms without 3rd party plugins.
I hear the refrain "it is not the right tool for that" being thrown about... so I guess the "3D for everyone" is also a mislabeling. I mean that phase says SketchUp is meant to be a general modeler -- not an "architectural sketching" specialist.
If a "architectural sketching" program is what Trimble thinks it bought (and wants SketchUp to be) then perhaps it's better for them to simply clearly say so.
If not, and SketchUp is meant to be a general purpose modeler -- then alot of work needs to be done before it can compete on equal footing.
Best,
Jason. -
@mitcorb said:
Hi, andybot:
You mention that you use Blender for architecture. I would be interested in how you might go about doing precision modeling in specific units, such as feet and inches. Or, do you do some kind of proportional conversions?I don't model regularly in Blender for that very reason. I model in SU and bring it into Blender. It's quite a nice workflow with the help of TIG's obj exporter, everything comes in at the correct scale. I do most everything else in Blender, things like "loop cut and slide" are just phenomenal, UV editing is a dream, 64bit environment is night and day vs. SU, and many more delightful functionalities.
-
@jason_maranto said:
I don't do straight architectural modeling so I couldn't say -- but I have recently modeled the exact same complex mechanical structures in several modeling applications and found SketchUp much slower for me (especially as the poly count rises), and generally incapable of even making the forms without 3rd party plugins.
I hear the refrain "it is not the right tool for that" being thrown about... so I guess the "3D for everyone" is also a mislabeling. I mean that phase says SketchUp is meant to be a general modeler -- not an "architectural sketching" specialist.
I forgot to throw in Solidworks in my previous list. I would say that would be the best tool for "complex mechanical structures." Once things have lots of curves, I find the usability of SU goes right out the window, both in the ability to handle lots of faces as well as lack of precision control over curve generation.
-
Yes exactly Andy. When you described Blender versus SU you actually summarised the major problems. If you take SU for Architectural sketching only (planar forms) than I would agree that in terms of quick modelling it is unsurpassed. Going anywhere deeper than that, as it stands, it is no no. A lot of people describe SU as a previz tool and maybe we should accept that SU is no more than that.
(Let us hope that Trimble will come with shiny new 64 bit core...sigh) -
@jason_maranto said:
SketchUp is meant to be a general modeler -- not an "architectural sketching" specialist.
Well, I can't agree with that.
Just look at the section planes, the walkthrough fonctions, the matchphoto, the geo-accurate sun, the two-points perspective, the Google Earth integration, the sandbox (for terrains), Layout, dimensions, even some icons are clearly designed for architecture (Views), etc...So yeah, it may be used for general modeling, but its main purpose is architecture.
-
I became aware of Sketchup toward the "end" of version 5. Back then, I recall it being billed as a program "designed by architects for architects". But it is obviously more versatile than that.
-
I guess they should not have changed that v5 tagline then, since it's quite obvious that SketchUp isn't a great choice of general modeling app compared to the vast majority of pro modeling apps.
The only real modeling tools we got in v8 was a half-hearted attempt at "solids" and Boolean functions -- which doesn't even work well without additional 3rd-party plugins. "Upgrades" like that are never going to make SketchUp competitive... but I'm not expecting any better from John, his track record speaks for itself.
BTW, This is something I realized long ago -- I'm not saying anything I don't already know ... as I've said before I already have one foot out the door. I'm just waiting for final confirmation (upon release of 2013) before I close the door.
If SketchUp becomes a true dedicated AEC app then I'm OK with that, but I have no use for a such a thing -- and I think they are currently doing themselves a disservice by pretending to be something they are clearly not (a general purpose 3D modeling application).
Best,
Jason. -
It was probably just a slogan made up by Google, as a take off on Apple's "Computer for the rest of us". But the fact remains, it was obvious what AtLast made it for and what Google wanted it for. Also obvious that it has not changed that much, nor has Google ever added organic functions etc. unless you count solid tools. If people found it handy for other things then so be it.
Of course on that vein SU has also fallen down, unless you consider it a given that you must export to other programs to add enough polygons to finish the Archviz job.
-
I do wonder how much of that sentiment is driven by the fact that you all use it for architecture? It seems logical that your perspective would be heavily biased due to your desired output.
I would be curious what users from other disciplines have to say about this...
Regardless, to fairly evaluate the program you have to remove all plugins and then consider its utility in your workflow... I would hazard a guess that even the hard-core "architectural sketching" crowd would find this program laughably unusable without their pet plugins. That is as strong of a condemnation as I can think of for how badly the Sketchup dev team has fallen down on the job.
Best,
Jason. -
Isn't the Ruby API a more or less equal sort of feature? Ruby scripting is more than Ruby developers hacking and entering the backyard of SketchUp (with the SketchUp team lazy and doing nothing), all the plugins require an API that needs to be created in the first place. Compare SketchUp's API with what other softwares offer, it's one of the more versatile and well designed ones. That means the SketchUp team did evolve SketchUp a lot while developing the API, and if they hadn't done that, they would have spend the same time on a poor selection of native tools.
-
I guess you can look at the Ruby API as either half-full or half-empty. On the one hand it has some real issues that are holding up 3rd party development, on the other hand if it didn't exist at all SketchUp would be near useless.
I can safely say however that it is not exceptional in any way -- many other 3D software have equal or better APIs... with the most exceptional feature being the ease of accessibility Ruby provides as the language (versus C++ or similar). However there are drawbacks to that choice as well...
I'll never say anything against the 3rd party developers -- they have worked wonders with SketchUp and they are the only reason why the software is remotely usable for me. In all my tutorial videos I made sure to point out some examples of the many plugins available here. However there are many things beyond their control, and SketchUp's performance issues is one of them.
I'm also really tired of half-baked "features" in new releases -- "solid" tools that aren't, and a "toolbar fix" that isn't, are just a few examples of some of them gems we've had to pay for... I hold John responsible for this since he is the lead. However, I also give him credit for Layout since he was lead on that too -- but I do wonder how so little of the advanced elements of Layout (relative to SketchUp) have failed to make it into SketchUp.
Best,
Jason. -
@jason_maranto said:
I do wonder how much of that sentiment is driven by the fact that you all use it for architecture? It seems logical that your perspective would be heavily biased due to your desired output.
I would be curious what users from other disciplines have to say about this...
Given the fact that Sketchup was design for architecture, it seems fair that the most important point of view is the architects' one.
Without its plugins, SU is still a wonderful tool for developping architecture designs, though obviously less powerfull. And I would still use it for my projects.
I think its real strength is not in the plugins, but in the deep core basis. Its engine.
Plugins are just awesome bonus
(BTW, sorry for my poor english, I'm french...)
-
I think your english is very good -- so no worries there
On the issue of plugin-less SketchUp used for Architectural designs -- I could buy that, but only if you are working with a very specific type of architecture (square boxy)...
As soon as you get into more organic structures the native tools fall woefully short (both in terms of performance and utility) -- not to mention if you do interiors you are going to need furnishings which are often too "organically" shaped for SketchUp native tools to create satisfactorily.
At that point you could import them from another app, but where would you be without something like ThomThom's CleanUp? Furthermore why should something like that even be a 3rd party invention? These types of tools should have been made by the development team in the first place -- part of the reason other packages often don't have as many plugins is because there is less need for them since the development teams did their job properly.
I also don't buy the architects POV as being the most important one here -- better general modeling tools and capabilities benefit all users equally... there is absolutely no reason to be against SketchUp developing better general modeling functionality.
Best,
Jason. -
I agree with you about the organic modeling without plugins in SU. But you should know that organic architecture is a niche, really. Look around you, do you see this type of buildings very often ?
And still, there are pluginsThough, I don't agree about the whole "square-boxy" thing. You can do much more than that in naked SU. We are not limited to ortho modeling, we can do diagonals, and some type of curves like circles or ellipses. And everything else is just a clever combination of these (Except organic, of course)
Just look at some modern buildings in your city, and wonder if you can do them in sketchup.@jason_maranto said:
I also don't buy the architects POV as being the most important one here -- better general modeling tools and capabilities benefit all users equally... there is absolutely no reason to be against SketchUp developing better general modeling functionality.
I think nobody is against that !
Here we are arguing about what you said : That SU is near useless and can't compete with other 3D softwares.
My first contribution to this thread was about SU's speed. -
Yes, in modern architecture (which I often find sterile and unappealing) you find those shapes less, but in classical architecture more often in the ornamentation (which is often very sculptural/organic) than you might notice at first.
Any architectural stuff I do is more sci-fi or fantasy oriented so obviously I'm going to be more influenced by the very old or very futuristic architecture -- and tend to ignore everyday styles.
When I said near useless I meant in terms of comparable native capabilities with other general modeling application -- which has been my foundational stance for quite some time... I want SketchUp to become a competitive general modeling application. Anything less than that is unacceptable to me...
Best,
Jason. -
@jason_maranto said:
Yes, in modern architecture (which I often find sterile and unappealing) you find those shapes less, but in classical architecture more often in the ornamentation (which is often very sculptural/organic) than you might notice at first
Yeah, well, like you say : That's ornementation, not architecture !
Advertisement