thank you for fast reply. i'm really a little bit confused because i have less experience in use of Vue. But your advise seems the only way. I will follow that way as you have suggested. If my tests should be successful I will present them in the forum. Again thanks Karlheinz

Yes this is the case I have also tried using this for export to .x: http://sketchuptips.blogspot.com/2009/01/wavefront-obj-exporter-with-materials.html

VirtualDub is also good at image to animation. It's free too. http://www.virtualdub.com

Hmm, perhaps. I made a plugin that converts all faces to components. I think you're looking for something more than that though. Have you looked at Dynamic Components (its built into SU7, its not a plugin)? It sounds like that is what you are asking for. Chris

It looks like a program for homemakers by the level of graphics... Yes still nearly 70 pounds [image: c789ba6ba1bf.jpg]

Is this happening to all of your models or is it only to a specific one?

It's an indoor swimming pool water.. I tried fog with different multipliers but I hardly see any difference. For pool I don't need fog? and I don't need a volume either for a good water effect? thnx for the reply and also on asgvis website.

My knowledge is limited to AutoCADLT, SketchUp and modo so I'm not at all surprised that some of the features I find unique to modo are not unique at all. I'm a furniture maker and a stair builder. I recently purchased, from a junkyard, a pile of old wood painted signs that were destined to be burned. I'm going to cut them up and make cabinets out of them. I was faced with the question of how to render wildly irregular surfaces - some shiny, some dull, many different colors, different degrees of surface distress, etc. I think modo, especially considering it's Painting feature, might be able to do that for me. Of course I've spent so much time working my way through modo tutorials I haven't been in the shop in three weeks!

Hi everybody, The Help of Inglobetechnologies sent to me a "fix" for my problem, as follow: Try to Disable "User Account Control: Only elevate executables that are signed and validated" option; and Try to Disable "User Account Control: Only elevate UIAccess applications that are in secure locations" option And it works, so if anyone have this problem, this can be resolve. Vinicius Deschamps

@ebraahim said: hi guys when u dont have a su texture to size it, how u guys add bump map to it? i use the bump map as my texture and reduce the color mutiplier to 0.01 becuz its not possible to change diffuse color seperately from its texture how you do that? Set a texture in your diffues, as you say you do, then add an white TexAColor map to the transparency slot. That will make that layer invisible when rendering, but still visible in SketchUp. Then you add a second diffuse layer underneath with just a plain colour - this layer is what you'll see when you render. (Note that you use a TexAColor map type in the transparancy slow - no just setting the colour.)

Here's an in-game screenshot of the previous example (added some lights and set some texture maps to illustrate it better, this is not supposed to look cool): [image: 16htgmw.jpg]

Thanx for new's...!

You can get info about your Graphics card by using the menu item Tools->LightUp->OpenGL info. This will open the Ruby console and print lots of info which can help indicate whether firstly you are actually using your graphics card at all, and secondly if its high enough spec. Generally, ensuring you have updated drivers is a GoodThing(tm) not just for LightUp but Sketchup generally. Also there was a time way back with SU3 when the difference in performance between "Use hardware acceleration" and not was pretty minimal. Nowadays thats not the case, and you'll find a much slicker workflow (irrespective of LightUp) by ensuring you're using your graphics card. To put it in perspective, a modern graphics card is at least as much computing power as your main PC. Not using it is turning your back on half your resources. Adam

Good point. Will do.

I want this: http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=180&t=8547&p=51051&hilit=pixero#p51051

I have heard alot of people speaking on Modo possibly not being the best tool for Archviz/Modeling work. While I do not think there is a "best tool", many are good or great, I do think a few really shine and Modo is one of them. Modo is not just a tool for doing organic modeling. While it does do that well it can excel at architectural modeling as well. Modo can model down to as tight of a tolerance as you want to throw at it. I do not know to many architectural modelers modeling tighter that maybe a 1/16" or a customer who expects tighter tolerances that that either. If someone is saying modo can not model accurately then they have not taken the time to learn how. I used to say "sketchup does everything I want it to do" too, but the more I use it the more I find myself doing things in modo that I can not do as easily in sketchup. I think we as artists always need to be moving forward...we just hope that our software is moving forward as well. THIS is where sketchup falls short for me. The lack of high poly support is beginning to be a killer for me. So many people want to add good trees into a visualization (stuff like xfrog or onyx trees) and we all know that will grind sketchup to a halt. Yes, there are good work arounds but they will never equal a great full 3d tree. Again, Sketchup is great but if you are looking for a well rounded FULL 3D package then I would spend the money on Modo. The sketchup importer......Yes it falls short. Much of this is not Luxology's fault though. We have heard this was a matter of Google not working very well with Luxology. Below are some good video's showing the architectural capabilities of Modo. Sorry, they cost but there are some great models and render examples on the modo forum as well. http://www.luxology.com/store/training_series14.aspx http://www.luxology.com/store/15_architectural_interiors/ Scott