SketchUp 2016 Wishlist

numerobis

Comparing my wishlist for 2013, 2014, 2015...

importing improvements (maybe this is improved with new face finder)
Quads
sub-D modeling
better texturing tools
~~64bit~~
multicore support (yes, this is the way processors evolve now - since a few years)
high poly support
faster ruby script execution (it's just a joke, that you have to watch a counter when you round some edges, where another app can do this instantly...)
faster saving/auto-saving (!)
faster explode or copy/paste (i have to test 2015...)
disable/configure snapping

I add to my list:

less wasted space around the icons, like it was up to v8. I can't find it to be better readable, it just looks worse and i have less space.
a PhotoMatch window that has the same width as the other windows (layers/info etc.) so that they don't get wider when you dock it ...like it was in v8. I don't see any reason why this window has to be bigger now, same content. Just wasted space, again.

and... since this is a wish list (i don't really think this will ever happen): non destructive and parametrical modeling using a modifier stack or node graphs. But maybe we'll see a ruby

Krisidious

You just put that code in Text pbscot.

Lushi

The option to move objects without sticking together, as in AutoCAD, where the "Move" tool to differentiate the "stretch", and thus without a little more "groups" that accumulate in our models .

A "mirror" internal tool in the program, that way it would avoid problems with external tools, and the quality of it would improve, for example, to differentiate a "2d mirror" to "3d mirror", showing in real time where would the reflected object, the option of inverted symmetry (rotating on two axes), or copied to a "group" to prevent sticking.

the possibility to enable or disable the snap, in ALL the tools

angular Dimensions

A "splice" internal tool

A soft line to create surfaces, but it does not hide

a 'ellipse' internal tool (also arcs of ellipse)

divide the screen into four: Top, front, right, projection (default)

Tool "Clone" in matrix, row, rotate, And scale

A "Align" internal tool

Export a blueprint of the current view to a 2d dwg file with Their model layers

View from below

That the sun is visible in the sky, giving us a better idea of where he is located

Improve the follow me tool

uv mapping

Button groups such as layout or bar "first steps"

Layout attached to sketchup (no sense having them in separate programs)

Launcher with recent files, templates, recovered files, and models uploaded by the community

Inscribed and circumscribed polygons

Groups of scenes to higher order and open them to more easily

improve tool "freehand" to deactivate the snap and lock to a 2D plane

achieve world peace

Reliving the dinosaurs

Get me a cup of tea

We could start there

JQL

@rich o brien said:

or at least offload that presentational aspect to StyleBuilder.

Which is still the same since its inception.

Though I wouldn't like that, I understand it would be a good feature.

You can do that already if you simply Xref your model to a new file and manage styles there.

BTW Style builder would only be nice if shadows and face colors boundary lines would also twist and bend or if, those areas of color could also have a texture with multiple sizes as lines do right now.

JQL

@krisidious said:

Yes... I would love Layout to have Ruby. Never understood why Layout was such a separate program and had no developer support. We had all the drawing and text tools in SU. I always wondered why Layout wasn't actual inside of or part of SU.

The idea of having more computational efforts on SU for such heavy tasks such as layout's is not easy on me.

Besides that I like the fact that:

You can insert multiple SU files in LO;
You can work on a 2D workflow;
You have very high graphical output and, nowadays you go towards making a SU model only model, with all dims, texts, and leaders inside LO.
PDF export is beautiful

I don't like the fact that:

All commands are different in LO than they are from SU (we are so used to SU why reinvent the wheel in LO?);
Selecting has no CTRL or CTRL+SHIFT modifier keys;
Drawing commands are less effective;
Lines don't break nor faces get generated, nor can we paint a shape like in SU wich is much better than filling and stroking stuff;
No components, only groups;
Layers are confusing to work with. In SU you CAN'T change active layer, In Layout you MUST change active layer... awkward and opposite workflows.
Drag methodology for moving stuff around is awfull. Move should be "M" or Icon.;
Drag+CTRL for copying is terrible;
Double click for editing viewports is Dangerous as double clicking is also used to edit objects wich are always on top of viewports...
Scale? SU is better;
Rotate? SU is better;
Inference? SU is WAY better;
That dongle for inference, scale and rotate... OMG...
Offset tool... where is it?
Guide Lines?
Ruby?
DWG export is flawed;
Auto text is good but limited;
Auto tags are good but VERY limited.

I still love Layout and because of it I ditched CAD... so why am I complaining? Because I work with it a lot!

Krisidious

agreeeeed.

Frederik

@jql said:

I don't like the fact that:

All commands are different in LO than they are from SU (we are so used to SU why reinvent the wheel in LO?)

I agree 110%...
The commands should be the same...

All in all that's a really great list, Joao...!

highlander

Material menu:
-when right click on material it's taking so long for the pop-up to show (with lot of materials)
-maybe a button for save/export the material to skm??
-edit function can be a lot better, CMYK, bigger color wheel, maybe layer system with multiple textures

just a tought

sander

oceanembers

@lushi said:

The option to move objects without sticking together, as in AutoCAD, where the "Move" tool to differentiate the "stretch", and thus without a little more "groups" that accumulate in our models .

But Sketchup is not Autocad, and besides, the way the move tool functions can actually be used very effectively in the modeling process. Groups and components are there to allow exactly the kind of movement you are talking about.

I do think, however, that entering and exiting of groups and components could be much more streamlined.

Hieru

How about the ability to toggle camera clipping off and on?

ken

What I would like to see are more native tools.

Such as:

Rotated Box
3 Point Circle and 2 point circle
Rotated Circle/Cyclinder
More guide lines tools
Entity Info, be able to change the volume to another attribute, such as, weight, i.e (Steel/lbs), (Alum/lbs) etc.

They did a great job with the rotated rectangle.

Ken

jeff hammond

@lushi said:

The option to move objects without sticking together, as in AutoCAD, where the "Move" tool to differentiate the "stretch", and thus without a little more "groups" that accumulate in our models .

that's a key difference between sketchup and other cad applications.

in rhino, if you draw a line on top of another line, you'll have 2 lines.
in sketchup, if you do the same thing, you'll have 1 line.

both have advantages and i can't really say one way is better than the other.. you just have to have a slightly different mindset/approach in each program.

i'm willing to bet this difference will remain for the life of the software(s).

@unknownuser said:

3 Point Circle and 2 point circle

i'd be curious to see how a 3pt circle would be implemented in sketchup..

ultimately, if you're drawing a (segmented) circle using 3 points, you'd expect each point to coincide with a vertex on the circle.. but in most instances, at least one of the vertices of the circle won't fall on one of the points (unless the circle were divided into 3 separate arc segments each with a different number of segments)..

anyway, it could get confusing i imagine.

LOAM

I would like them to resolve the clipping of objects that aren't close to the origin, I hate having to reduce the FOV to 1 to see what I am doing

ken

Jeff wrote:

"Ken wrote:
2. 3 Point Circle and 2 point circle

i'd be curious to see how a 3pt circle would be implemented in sketchup..

ultimately, if you're drawing a (segmented) circle using 3 points, you'd expect each point to coincide with a vertex on the circle.. but in most instances, at least one of the vertices of the circle won't fall on one of the points (unless the circle were divided into 3 separate arc segments each with a different number of segments)..

anyway, it could get confusing i imagine."

I have a plugin that does draw a 3 point circle. I use it on Images and CAD files. As shown, here is a rectangle 10' by 20'. I made the 3 point selections, and presto I have a 6 segment circle, (normally this would be a 72 segment circle, or a segment per 5 degrees. The radius is equal distance from each of the 3 points. I don't expect each vertex to fall on the circle since circle are made from line segments. However, I expect to have the circle radius to be corrects, as shown in the illustration.

The math, each two points selection define a line that is cord of the circle. A line perpendicular and at the center of each of the two cords, interset at the circle's center. So from this intersection to any of the vertex, is the circle radius.

Works great, just think something this simple should be a native tools.

Guess I am wishing more since I saw how the rotated rectangle was implemented.

Ken

3 Point Circle.png

hkla

Decrease the minimum on Network licensing.

How low? 2 would be nice. I have 6 potential users, who may jump between 7 computers depending on the task (one computer is a render or complex model computer for all to use). However, each user only uses the program in sparse bursts, only up to 3 at once, but I'm not allowed to have a network because 50 seats in a small office is insane. This becomes very annoying.

I will gladly pay more per seat to unlock network licensing.

jeff hammond

@unknownuser said:

I don't expect each vertex to fall on the circle since circle

well that's the difference with you and I then.

personally, I expect a vertex to fall on the point I used to define the circle.. in the same way if you draw a circle by clicking the center point then radius (like the current circle tool).. the vertex coincides with the point being used to define the radius.

if you don't expect that to happen then I guess that's fine too.

Bep

Support of Linux

Krisidious

Looks like we can remove trays that move between program starts. mine would pile up in older versions when I restarted. Now they are exactly where I left them.

jeff hammond

@jeff hammond said:

@unknownuser said:

3 Point Circle and 2 point circle

ultimately, if you're drawing a (segmented) circle using 3 points, you'd expect each point to coincide with a vertex on the circle.. but in most instances, at least one of the vertices of the circle won't fall on one of the points (unless the circle were divided into 3 separate arc segments each with a different number of segments)..

not sure how i missed this before but... the new 3pt arc tool actually does what i was thinking it should do.. all three points will coincide with a vertex on the arc then the segment lengths are figured out accordingly (and automatically)

smart programming

AirWindSolar

How about not assuming all users are brain damaged? The "By adding a location..." monologue is annoying enough once, but popping it up every time is wasting time and effectively telling the user you don't think they're bright enough to remember what this option did the last thousand times.

Or be consistent and have every tool pop up a similar window:

Pencil: By drawing a line...
Eraser: By erasing objects...
Paint bucket: By adding materials...
Etc.