You want to "bind" the XREF to the drawing before import (do this to a copy of the drawing). Or you can import a dwg of the XREF file separately.

I am also running sketchup 8 on 10.7.2 , but am not having any problems with rubies showing up. or functioning. I did have most of mine installed under Snow Leopard, then upgraded to Lion. Don't know if that makes any difference. Are you installing the rubies into the user level library or into the system level one ? Mine are at the system level and I believe that they need to be. Dan

@unknownuser said: Polygon Cruncher is a plugin for : Polygon Cruncher interface 3D Photo Browser Polygon Cruncher is included in 3D Photo Browser package. Lightwave Modeler / Inspire 3D 32 and 64 bits : V6.x, V7.x, V8.x, V9.x and more 3DS Max / Autodesk VIZ 32 bits : V6.x, V7.x, V8.x 32 and 64 bits : V9.x, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011. No, when you register for the trial they give you a 35% discount if you purchase within 24hrs. Then 20% if you purchase within the following 24hrs. It does very good crunching but like all poly-reducers it can cause quite a mess if you go overboard. The strange thing with Polycruncher is that when you launch 3D PhotoBrowser and select the model you want to crunch it then launches a second application for the crunching. Makes you wonder why not just make it standalone?

In LayOut, you can print to scale when you are not in those "Standard views" but in orthogonal (i.e. axonometric kind). I believe that the development team tries to focus their attention and resources on LayOut when it comes to 2D output (other than image export) and will not develop and enhance these functions in SU any more (after ll it would mean doubling the work and developing redundant functions). Certainly LO is a Pro only product but I can imagine (and understand) they also try to "encourage" sales this way.

It's a known limitation of the OpenGL rendering engine. See some of the tips and clues below. http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=36261 Eventually (if your model is too large for instance), you can always turn something into a component, right click > Save as... and then open that component as a single file in SU and work on it. When done, save it, go back to your original file, right click again and "Reload..."

Anssi, that's true but as a general practice in SketchUp, it isn't a good idea to move edges or faces to other layers. Of course you know that and can deal with it for your exports to Revit.

Also shapebender would work well there, though it would tend to actually warp the component, which I guess might not be desireable.

Ah, good. I just met my wife's godmother the first time during the week-end (what to say; 3 proper meals a day plus all the drinks in between and along...) One of the meals was duck. I like duck. So where exactly is it?

ExtrudeEdgesbyRails or CurviLoft ? Perhaps adding a central curve across the form and making it in two halves...[image: DczX_Capture.PNG]

Google won't really ever buy a script and implement. They would want to write it themselves. They also like to encourage developers to write scripts, because it adds capabilities to SU, and makes SU even more popular. Soo, it doesn't make a lot of sense for Google to implement things that others have already made, because its not cool to say 'hey, develop scripts', then turn around and re-write them to distribute with SketchUp, and not pay the author. So its not really a good business model for them to follow the way they currently run things. But even still, we had booltools before they released their solid tools. Making a terrain from 3d points was a script before the sandbox tool were added in version 5. Like Alan said, 3dtext was a plugin first, then SU wrote it. So they have done it a few times, though I'm not sure they really did it on purpose per se.

@d12dozr, thanks very much for the advice, that worked a treat. @mitcorb obviously my question has been answered, but cheers for posting. I'm rather new to this forum business, so I appreciate your suggestion and I'll endeavour to be more informative in future. Thanks again,

cgtextures.com has a lot of these

.....p.s. ..... if you would like to help and need more info or would like to touch base off line the email me at: 4mss44nfp[at]gmail.com

@unclemonkey said: ......though as far as I can see, the gap is way smaller than the difference in dimensions indicates..... The gap that Jim noticed is (only) 1mm, exactly the difference between the overall length and the sum of the 2*160+inner wall length. It's not way smaller. @driven said: First thing I spotted was you had profiles set to 2, which can give minor discrepancies at 0.000....etc, as SU can snap to either side of your 'thick line'. I had to check this out so I set profiles to 20. It made no difference at all to accurately reproduce UncleMonkey's wall, incuding the gap and all its dimensions. I don't think profile thickness has to do with accurate modeling. Maybe UncleMonkey had length snap ON and set to something like 1mm? Jeff is right. If an edge is in a drawing plane (in plane with two axes or parallel to that plane) you'll be able to get 3 different dimensions in that plane. One of them being the 'Perpendicular' one reading the edge length. The other two in the drawing plane are along both axes of that plane.

Yes: Update. I repaired permissions, but I find the behavior is intermittent. Does not always happen. It goes away for good periods. Could it be plugins?

And here is a (complete???) list of entries you can use the VCB/Measurement box for: http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=151558 (Always "refer to..." the actual tool for more detailed explanations)

For rendering detailed buildings maybe here

Jackpot! Takes a while to process but does exactly what I require it to do. Great help, appreciated.

Try Extrude Edges by TIG or Curvy loft by Fredo6 or try Ferrari it's more friendly and better result and free than Soap Skin Bubble! [image: file.php?id=58250]