The problem was resolved by installing su 2014. Thank you for your support ...

Many thanks both, I have downloaded the plug in, looks very comprehensive.. I will report back. Best wishes, Tom

If you are having trouble downloading instant road contact the developer. Here is one tutorial. I got many results searching "road on terrain". http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18%26amp;t=19522

Hiding geometry that is connected to other geometry does not 'separate' it - so it moves/deletes as one thing. Using different on/off layers for part of some connected geometry also 'hides' it, BUT again it's still connected. It's a recipe for madness. Make a rectangular face. Select the face and assign it to an 'off' layer. Now erase one of the visible edges. Now switch the 'face-layer' on - the face has vanished as it depended on the edge that you just erased ! Always model raw geometry on Layer0 - have it as your active layer.. To separate parts of geometry use a group [or make a component of it]. You can then hide/layer that 'container' separately from the rest - it is no longer 'connected'... Geometry that sticks together is very useful, but when you don't what that effect put the geometry inside 'container' groups or components...

Vray for SketchUp is a known weak link. SketchUp 2013 on Mac has been very stable for me, too. Try disabling the Vray plugin and work with SketchUp for awhile. See how it goes.

Sketchup itself doesn't use lighting, only sun. Different render engines produce lighting so It depends what you are wanting to do. You might have more luck importing the SU model into Maya, but I can't help you with that.

Thank you very much, to you and Dave. That is the problem as you have described. We were able to correct it and now can successfully launch SketchUp on my son's Mac. Happy New Year to all!

Exciting!

@userquestion said: Dave, could you point me to the URLs for those videos? Try this one to start. @userquestion said: Looking at the before & after PNGs, the change looks like a. splitting it apart b. chopping off the right legs/apron c. copying the remainder and flipping it, and d. inserting an intervening area with top Not exactly @userquestion said: I was thinking more of a situation where I have, say for example, a breakfront/cabinet with drawers, doors and interior parts. I might want to massage it wider, and re-gauge the relative sizes of the doors and drawer fronts. Making the cabinet wider (if I am thinking this right) involves: moving the right end over; stretching all the intervening stretchers etc on the carcass and their stiles/rails; then playing with the drawers the same way. It just seems....ugly....to have to touch all that stuff. Another example would be a plain kitchen cabinet. If I wanted to stretch it (without changing the vertical components), I have to make lots of interior adjustments, frame adjustments, and drawer adjustments. And then, if I don't like the size, or need others, I have to repeat the whole thing all over again. Working out the workflow, or easier ways to maneuver the workflow, is my goal. I sense I am handy enough with the software, but this trick eludes me. Maybe after I look at your examples, I might catch a trick or two, new. I'm thinking, too, that I am wanting too much from the components behavior.... I don't find it "ugly" to touch all of the components. By going through the model logically I know when I get finished the model will still be accurate. I don't find it to be a problem at all. By correctly using components and nested components, it is all pretty easy even on complex models. I mentioned Dynamic Components before. They could be used but in order to keep tenons the same size while changing the length of an apron, the apron would have to be made of three separate parts. The tenon on one end would get moved while the center section would get scaled. The downside is a cutlist would be full of garbage dimensions. And DCs aren't quick to make. I can easily modify an entire model before I could make the DCs to build the model in the first place.

Also you seem to have some "reversed faces" - fix those too...

newnoob; What you are showing is typical of folks assuming they are doing things correctly and in fact that is not the case. If you are really interested in understanding the issue then you should post your OP model . There are several suggestion to help you; First and foremost learn and use the SU inference engine; Secondly draw a ground plane and draw your shape on that to make sure it is planar; Thirdly do the same for the rect and make sure to use inference in both cases. If you do not clicking of the mouse can cause very small inadvertent movement which can cause problems; Forth set units precision( this is display ) to max, use the text tool and check the vertex x,y,z. This is not 100% but since SU uses 32 bit float ( 24 bit significant precision( 23 explicitly stored), sign bit 1, exponent this may show an issue whereas lesser display precision will not. Note, when you click on the rect face and the face shows in your shape you know your model is wrong.

Thank you. I didn't know about the imperial bug so I didn't look for it... Solved that point. Solved the other poinnt too: I used the quotes but not far enough. I thought it should be used only for the name or input entries. But not as far as the !X too: ANIMATESLOW("28P6 kompleet!X",0,(-81.5/2.54))

it is a pity the videos are not in english. they could at least be subtitled the way fredo6 does his videos.

If you've used SketchUp at all, you'd know that curved surfaces are represented by by small facets. Just as arcs and circles are represented by a series of line segments. You can't get around that. On the other hand, it shouldn't be a problem in rendering if you've made it correctly. If there are internal faces, you'll have problems. For example, here's a ring drawn in SU and rendered quickly in KT. [image: 6318648290_530026a3b2.jpg] No visible tesselation despit the fact that the surface is made of small quadrilateral faces in SU. [image: 6318128569_6e28da4fd3.jpg] Have a look through the Gallery here. You can find any number of examples better than mine. It is like any other computer related stuff, though. Garbage in, garbage out.

The tools on surface with the push pull tool was great, I am noticing now that when i start to curve the rolls are not smooth and have irregularities in them. Is there a way to smooth out the surface or am I not connecting the arcs correctly? As well is there a way to connect all my arcs together so i don't have to pull sections of the wall out separetly? [image: Sy9b_example.jpg] [image: 1YWZ_example2.jpg] [image: eTGl_example3.jpg]

It looks like you need some anti-aliasing. This seems like an issue for someone well-versed in Artlantis. Do they have a forum you could use to ask your question?

Thanks laudhi, thanks Box, the link to those plugins is very useful, many not available through the Sketchucation tool. And Box you are right Meshmaker is ideal for what I want, thanks so much for your time. I would have thought this was a simple question as it seems to be something everyone needs to do, but I guess not, so thanks again for your helpful answers.

Okay I think I've resolved the issue, the selecting is not 100% but after installing a new APU driver from DELL I am able to use the select tool quite a bit better than before!

Rich's tutorial is excellent and it'll get you on your way. I do the first part a little differently when I create new textures. I create faces in the model on which to paint the images. Then I import the images with File>Import and paint them onto those faces. My textures are almost never square images. I know lengths of them but the widths are generally arbitrary so the rectangles I draw are to the lengths of the textures but random in width. I wind up with something like this in the model. [image: mats5_xl.png] After the textures are in the model I save them by dragging the thumbnails from In Model to a destination library as Rich showed.