SU 9 Wishlist
-
Yeah, same technique as I was thinking though I generally wouldn't use a guideline. Just select one of the lines forming the angle then copy/rotate it to the other. Then /2
-
@unknownuser said:
Yeah, same technique as I was thinking though I generally wouldn't use a guideline. Just select one of the lines forming the angle then copy/rotate it to the other. Then /2
Fine if you want to repeat the line at half angle.
My method returns a guide that's the bisector, for more general use...
Depends what he wants to do - either one is pretty simple - I find it hard to image a simpler way... I could write a script... activate tool, pick apex, pick first line, pick second line etc... as many picks as the rotate-copy method ? with less options for what you are getting...
-
@escapeartist said:
64 bit support
Have you ever had SU run out of memory? (just pure SketchUp, no render engine plugin.)@escapeartist said:
Dare I beat the multi-core horse one more time?
Why not just ask for better performance? That's what you want, right? Instead of asking for a particular technical implementation that can't be applied to most tasks. (most 3d apps that boost this feature refer to the render engine they bundle.) -
@thomthom said:
Have you ever had SU run out of memory? (just pure SketchUp, no render engine plugin.)
Like exporting giant images, or heavy calculations operations (intersect) on giant models, or maybe for a better platform for developers to program for?
@thomthom said:
Why not just ask for better performance? That's what you want, right? Instead of asking for a particular technical implementation that can't be applied to most tasks. (most 3d apps that boost this feature refer to the render engine they bundle.)
Like multipe frame export in movie sequences, or any calculation that can be paralelized (like multiples modeling operations - multiples faces push pull, and doing better modeling tools in the process...and i've just make this up...can't imagine what a paid professional could do) or maybe (again) for a better platform for developers to program for? (since right now users seem more dependent on plugins developers like you
than google)But right now i would trade any of that for real UV/Maping tools...
-
@unknownuser said:
or heavy calculations operations (intersect) on giant models
You've run out of memory while intersecting? You've seen Sketchup.exe reach 2GB+? (or in the case of SU8M1 under 64bit OSX, over 4GB?)
@unknownuser said:
or maybe for a better platform for developers to program for?
How does 64bit make it a better platform?
I gives you more memory to play with - but which plugins has had that problem?@unknownuser said:
Like exporting giant images
Fair enough, this has been an issue where memory seemed to be an issue. But in M1 they made SU LAA and in addition they changed the method they used to export the images. And now you can export larger images. But, this is the clue, how are you use 64bit is the solution? Maybe a different algorithm in whatever you have problems with will work much better than just adding more RAM.
For developers it's better to hear the feature, end result of what the users want - not to be just told to do a technical implementation without knowing what the user expects from it.
So many times when people have asked for 64bit they appear to be under the impression that 64bit makes everything run faster. While in reality it might as well just make things slower.@unknownuser said:
Like multipe frame export in movie sequences
You see, there's the core of it. That's what you want faster. Straight to the point instead of just an ambiguous request for multicore.
@unknownuser said:
paralelized (like multiples modeling operations - multiples faces push pull,
You're sure this can be parallelized because...?
I'm poking at this not to be mean, but because 64bit and mulitcore request is always just a cloak for something else - something more concrete where people has just made the assumption that 64bit or multicore is the solution. And as long as one clings to these assumptions and keep on hoping that they'll be there in the next release one only puts oneself up for disappointment.
Concrete requests like "Faster exports", "Faster explode", "Faster intersect", "Being able to export larger images" is so much more relevant and useful to the developers. Let them take care of the technical.
-
@thomthom said:
@escapeartist said:
64 bit support
Have you ever had SU run out of memory? (just pure SketchUp, no render engine plugin.)Yes. I've had occasions where implementing a plugin has consumed 3+ GB of my 4 GB system. SU crashes or I have to kill the process and restart what I was doing.
@unknownuser said:
@escapeartist said:
Dare I beat the multi-core horse one more time?
Why not just ask for better performance? That's what you want, right? Instead of asking for a particular technical implementation that can't be applied to most tasks. (most 3d apps that boost this feature refer to the render engine they bundle.)I'd be happy with that too, but with most cores in PCs these days leveling off at the ~3 GHz range and the status quo seems to be implementing more cores instead of faster ones I don't know how much improvement can be obtained on a single 3 or 4 GHz core. If it can be done, great! I'm all for it.
Please don't take this as me knocking SU or any of the devs, I've used everything from Maya to 3DSM and lots inbetween, this is by far the best and easiest to learn modeling app out there, and with all the free plugins there is simply no comparison. While I have no desire to turn SU into Maya, I think that would defeat the purpose behind SU, I keep wondering if there aren't ways to provide some similar functions and performance as these higher end application while maintaining the spirit and intent behind SU.
-
I'll keep it simple and post my wishes:
Advanced UV Tools and mapping. (sooo important)
64 bit support
Support higher polycount
Dare I beat the multi-core horse one more time?Consider working with the plugin devs here on the forums to integrate some of them and make it seamless.
EDIT: Add tools to better perform organic modeling (includes higher polycount). I don't necessarily mean NURBS, but any tools and performance enhancement to do this would be great.
Support quad modeling instead of tri based as a system setting. Better for animation and I personally find it easier to model organically and UV map.
-
@escapeartist said:
Yes. I've had occasions where implementing a plugin has consumed 3+ GB of my 4 GB system. SU crashes or I have to kill the process and restart what I was doing.
Render plugin or normal SketchUp plugin tool?
-
@thomthom said:
...
I don't think you're seeing the big picture thomthom. big pictures, movie exports they can use multicore/64bis, but if that something that it's in the platorm and developers can use maybe instead of big pictures there could be a plugin that would handle big pictures for textures, with real time editiing and painting with baking them in the texture map in the 3D model at the end, and instead of movies maybe a plugin for better animation that could then export the movie with more options at the codecs, or maybe a basic sculpt tools suite without the lag in the brushs that the current plugins suffer from...And the list could go on.
And it seems everything around SK goes by workarounds...yes there maybe be a work around for exporting larger images (like exporting partial images and put them together after) but you will allways reach a point where that workaround brakes, a pixel is info and info takes memory and like it or not you'll need memory in the end. Workaround for texturing, workaround for shadows (thank god no more of that), work around for modeling, hell we even have workarounds for toolbars! Isn't it about time we got something a litle more professional?
And Btw why does render engines plugins don't count? because the blame is from developers that should all build everything a studio apart? does that count for physics engines, fur and texture editing or baking softwares? we brag that sk is great because we can add plugins as we like but then we put others apart...
Oh and i'm no programer but by following logic, if we use multicore to calculate intersections in lines (rays) from point A (light) to a point B (objects) to get a shape in the end (shadow) i think that logic can be aplied in intersecting lines in 3D models...(keep in mind i'm no programer so this could be completly wrong, but i think i remember something about luxology using multicore in intersect...)
-
@thomthom said:
Render plugin or normal SketchUp plugin tool?
I have yet to give up on a render exporter, they do consume memory like crazy though. As for "normal", do you mean stock or community created? I've had soap bubble, intersect and cleanup and a fw Of course, this occurrs on complex scenes and models.
-
Here's one!
Maybe ThomThom (or somebody) has a tool for it, but I haven't seen it.
Make the "Select" tool a bit more selective; in optionally, selecting faces and edges that are only currently VISIBLE. No elements you cannot see, like objects hidden behind what you select, or the back side of the object.
Maybe use the ALT key to force the restricted select.Example; suppose you have a sphere and you need to select a bunch of faces. Right now you have to hunt and pick each one. If you use the sweeping select function, it will select the faces & edges you see and want, as well as the faces & edges on the back side you do not want. Then you have to hunt and pick those back side face & edge selections to de-select them.
With an "ALT-Select" it would only select the visible front faces & edges.
-
@escapeartist said:
@thomthom said:
Render plugin or normal SketchUp plugin tool?
I have yet to give up on a render exporter, they do consume memory like crazy though. As for "normal", do you mean stock or community created? I've had soap bubble, intersect and cleanup and a fw Of course, this occurrs on complex scenes and models.
hmm... you've had CleanUp run out of memory? How large models are we talking about here?
How much memory did SU consume before starting cleanup? How much did it consume while crashing?
(I wonder if it's CleanUp holding too much in cache while working, or if it's SU's undo stack eating up the memory. If it's the Undo stack then there's nothing I can do, but if it's CleanUp usage of variables, then I might be able to do something. But I'd have to be able to reproduce it.) -
@thomthom said:
hmm... you've had CleanUp run out of memory? How large models are we talking about here?
How much memory did SU consume before starting cleanup? How much did it consume while crashing?
(I wonder if it's CleanUp holding too much in cache while working, or if it's SU's undo stack eating up the memory. If it's the Undo stack then there's nothing I can do, but if it's CleanUp usage of variables, then I might be able to do something. But I'd have to be able to reproduce it.)Ah, wish I could help you out by handing you the model, but it's been a long while since I had the issue so I don't remember which model it was. Probably something with multiple surfaces using SD&S or some ivy. It was definitely a large/high poly model though.
-
@jgb said:
Here's one!
Maybe ThomThom (or somebody) has a tool for it, but I haven't seen it.
Make the "Select" tool a bit more selective; in optionally, selecting faces and edges that are only currently VISIBLE. ...
That's backface culling. Very useful, and I agree. I've lost count of the occasions where I've accidentally selected something behind the area I was working on, missed deselecting it and wound up deleting or otherwise nerfing my model. Sometimes if I'm lucky I'll be able to have caught it while it's undo-able, sometimes I wind up rebuilding a lot of my model. Somewhere I think I recall seeing a backface culling plugin, though...
-
Thom's Vertex Tools has 'Ignore Backfaces'.
Back to wish list
Native filleting tool or lozenge tool.
-
@unknownuser said:
Thom's Vertex Tools has 'Ignore Backfaces'.
It's not doing what's truly visible though. It acts like 3ds Max does with this feature. It just ignores entities who's normal is pointing away from camera. I has no awareness if another object is between it and the camera.
I tried real visibility checks - way to slow. -
I'm no expert at 3D programming, my programming skills are at least 30 years old, but to me "backface culling" as EscapeArtist terms it, should be not that much more complex than hidden face/line removal.
The general sweeping select collects everything in its' lasso. Then you do something akin to hidden line removal within the collection of elements, leaving only that which is visible. To me that should be relatively straight forward to implement.
-
@jgb said:
I'm no expert at 3D programming, my programming skills are at least 30 years old, but to me "backface culling" as EscapeArtist terms it, should be not that much more complex than hidden face/line removal.
The general sweeping select collects everything in its' lasso. Then you do something akin to hidden line removal within the collection of elements, leaving only that which is visible. To me that should be relatively straight forward to implement.
If there's a quick way to do this via the Ruby API I'd love to see it. But it might be something SketchUp would have to implement nativly...
-
@thomthom said:
If there's a quick way to do this via the Ruby API I'd love to see it. But it might be something SketchUp would have to implement nativly...
I honestly expect that to be the case, as HLR is a native function to 3D display. I doubt the Ruby API has the extents needed to get down to that level.
Ah well, maybe SU V17 judging how fast the SU team implements NIH (Not Invented Here) ideas.
-
Its actually a tough geometry problem.
You're basically having to check whether a given face is in the umbra of any other face wrt the camera view. With Faces that can have holes in them thats hard enough, but with materials on Faces that can have alpha textures of chicken wire on them, its even harder.
Some very cool work was done by the Hybrid guys in Helsinki on this. I'm not aware of any other tech that solves this in a general way.
Adam
Advertisement