Google is Listening!
-
@adamb said:
@kydbmaster said:
Hi John,
What about letting an outside program like xFrogTune generate the files and just build the mechanism inside SU that calls the different files in as the distance from the camera to the object changes. SU would have to support the .LOD file format. It would not matter about the compatibility of the modelers in that case. Both programs do what they do best. On another note, does SU support the .FLT file format?
Well the runtime graphics library Google SketchUp uses does support model switching ("igLod" if I remember correctly), so that part is trivial. The problem for the Sketchup team is how do you solve - in a general way - the issue that this isn't static geometry. SketchUp is a modeler, not a Viewer. So while its possible to export geometry, generate some reduced complexity geometry and chain it into a viewing pipeline, that is a complete non-starter for a dynamic modeler in which users, well, model stuff.
There is no silver bullet here. There is just one - and only one - way of solving the issue and that is to keep a fat, easy-to-edit format as primary data and cache lean, fast-to-draw versions of it. What method you choose to use for this is, as they say, an exercise for the reader.
Adam
Hi Adam,
I have pondered your post for some time and I have some additional observations. First, we would be placing Geometry for Plants. Since Plants do not have legs the placement of the tree geometry is static. As a Landscape designer, the whole point of our work is space management. We must leave enough space between plants and other objects such as buildings (in the model and in real life) for growth of the plants. (Since shortly after planting, the plants can't be transplanted (esp. Trees) if they are planted to close.) Therefore The Geometry is static. To a point anyway. The center of the geometry is always in the same place in the model. The issue is that plants grow over time. We plant them when they are young and years later they reach their mature size. Using .LOD or .RPC files (.RPC files do support keyframe animations as well) would help us visualize the process. An Oak tree planted initially may only be 10 foot tall. In 80 years the same tree may be 80' tall and have a spread 6 or 8 times of that initial planting. Also Landscapes are constantly changing with the change of season. Using .LOD or .RPC files and some mechanism to advance the model through time would allow us to visualize the model correctly over time. If the geometry in the model expands into the geometry next to it that is what we are looking to eliminate. (sometimes the designers want the canopies of trees to grow together.) Landscape designers today are lucky to generate just one or two perspective renderings of a model. (because of cost and time constraints.) Using plant models from a company such as Bionatics (they use the .lod file format) would allow a designer to generate an unlimited number of rendered models on the fly. One of the problems Landscape Designers have is visualizing what a landscape design will look like when it is mature. The Client will have an even more difficult time visualizing what the landscape will look like years down the road (because of their unfamiliarity of how the plants grow.) By implementing .lod and a time mechanism, We could eliminate the tendency of designers to over plant and clients to better visualize what the design they are buying will look like long term. The result would be better designs that are more sustainable. My focus is obviously plant geometry but this could also be applied to other geometry in the model. People in the model for example. People placed in a landscape design generally are either standing or walking down a street or sidewalk. Using models of people in .lod or .rpc format would allow for realistic movement in the model (down a pre-defined path). And maybe this is the answer to dealing with .LOD and .rpc files in general. That is associating a predefined path with the placement of the file. Note: that ArchVision has native and plug-in RPC support now exists in 3dsmax, Autodesk VIZ, Autodesk Civil 3D, Bentley MicroStation, Newtek's LightWave 3D, Maxon's Cinema 4D, AccuRender from Robert McNeel & Associates, Revit, Piranesi from Informatix, Adobe Photoshop, Graffiti RenderPro, Arc+ Render, VR4MAX, and SGI Performer.
s.
-
Hey Google!!Rhino has UV-unwrapping!
http://news2.mcneel.com/scripts/dnewsweb.exe?cmd=article&group=rhino&item=358869&utag=
-
I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..
-
Hello everyone,
Just wanted to ask the forum if there is anyway to map solids on a curved surface to follow a curved path. Is it easy to do with 2D shapes and textures but not 3D objects....
Thanks Alot..
-
<shameless_plug>LightUp gives you unwrapping and alpha texture support.
</shameless_plug> -
@kostas_designer said:
I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..You can export images with transparent backgrounds on the Mac today. Unfortunately, it isn't easy for us to support the same on Windows at this time.
john
. -
@kostas_designer said:
I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..Fortunately ThomThom came to the rescue with this plugin for Windows: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?p=270998#p270998
-
@d12dozr said:
@kostas_designer said:
I've always had this wish, amongst others:
Alpha channel support when exporting images.
Extremely handy for grafic post production works..Fortunately ThomThom came to the rescue with this plugin for Windows: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?p=270998#p270998
Well-well, i didn't notice that!
Great work Thomas, as always!
Google people, I think you should PM the guy
-
Wouldn't it be the same as Parallel projection under the Camera menu combined with (in this case) a Top (standard) view?
-
1/2 a sec while I climb up on my soapbox.
OK. I made it through to page 4 of this, and after Coens comments (all too true) I have to add my $0.02CDN.
First, 64bit is a red herring. If the hardware, the operating system AND the application s/w are all 64bit compliant, the throughput of the machine MORE than doubles. I have heard the same bitches when we went from 8bit to 16bit, from 16bit to 32bit. And on the mainframes, going on to 128 and 256bits.
Long register adds are sped up by 4 at least because there is little overflow checking required.
GRAPHICS is a long register hog.Generally speaking when a "64bit" app performs less than expected on a 64bit CPU, it is all the more likely it is not optimized for 64bit throughout and still depends on legacy 32bit functions, which will slow down any 64bit CPU.
As for Google not listening.......
LadyBugz (Carolyn) posts only the first post, then NOTHING for 19 pages so far.
Same sort of response the last 4 1/2 years I've been using SU, and posting to the other SU BBS's including Googles "official" forum. A very typical "Post, Promise, Disappear" like they are training to become politicians.I've said this many times before..... Google SU developers are more interested in adding new bells and whistles than fixing perennial problems. (a few of the many I've complained about follows)
Like "Hyper zoom"
Like Failing to indicate WHERE the problem lies in face forming (gaps and non-planars). If SU can find a problem, TELL ME WHERE IT IS, not a simply useless error message. In fact SU8 is worse than SU6 in saying what the problem is.
Like gaps in intersecting
Like Feet-Inch-Decimal inch units
Like an Icon to toggle snapping
The list goes on...YES, I am fully aware of the selfless magicians who dedicate countless hours writing Ruby scripts to fix major deficiencies in SU, both bugs and "function not present" but should be.
Like Startup, which defaults the select cursor rather than the pencil
Like ThomThom's TT-Select toys and others
Like Fredo's JPP, Curviloft, and Onsurface
and my pluggin list goes on.Most of my plugins are FIXES to SU shortcomings, not added functionality.
Most of those plugins SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF SU, and some a long time ago.Yeah, Google listens
-
@jgb said:
1/2 a sec while I climb up on my soapbox.
....
Yeah, Google listens
Lots to agree with there.
-Brodie
-
-
I agree too but instead of creating some topics here, contact em each times I got new suggestion or waiting for a real wide 3weeks survey (lol) I prefer post here (as a wailing wall)
Also need a dialog box on new doc creation which propose us a template like all other soft do in fact... (quite bored to change it in preferences window before launching new document)
-
@sm4rt
Mate you should invest more time in the sketchup learning -
@jgb said:
As for Google not listening.......
er... how many times have I posted so far in this thread? Half dozen times, maybe? I think I lost count a few weeks ago. If you haven't picked up on this yet, I'm actually the Product Manager for SketchUp– which means I'm exactly the person you want to be reading your posts if you desire something about SketchUp to change in the future.
It may be useful to remember that having an idea yourself doesn't automatically mean that the feature should be implemented. It may not be something that legitimately benefits every user. Also, it may be that we like your idea, but can't implement it for any of a hundred valid reasons that have to do with time/money/resources or just some limitation in the way that SketchUp is designed to work.
Our occasional surveys and "Moderator" voting series' are a way for us to make some sense of the inbound feature requests. They aren't the sole source of input, but they are quite helpful. If you'd like to discuss new features you think we should implement or old features you think we should have implemented differently, I'm open to doing that. Ordinarily I do that on our Help Forum (in the "Feature Suggestions" category), and I post there quite regularly. Occasionally, I also read posts here on SketchUcation. I think I've responded in great detail to most of the concerns you've raised previously, but I don't mind doing so again.
john
. -
Hi John, don't get pissed off! We know you are a big SCF fan!
-
Look who's in the background. Looking quite splendid for a leper
As for the earlier comments, whilst everyone has their opinions, some should engage in a more appropriate manner.
-
Dear John
With all due respect, Good political answer. Run for congress.
If, as you say, you do read our posts, then PLEASE take the time to at least acknowledge and perhaps explain what you think of the post.
No response equates to NOT LISTENING.
In my case, most of my posts relate to SU shortcomings not new bells and whistles.
WHY have you not addressed the "Gapped" triangle problem, easy to fix as I suggested.
Why have you not addressed the "Hyper-zoom / Hyper-pan" problem, also easy to fix, as I suggested.I can give you a comprehensive list of SU shortcomings and suggested fixes, if you want.
All I ask is a proper response to them.Don't explain it away simplistically. I was a Software Projects manager way back when, so I do understand how these things work.
-
Hi John
I understand where jgb is coming.
I've been moving away from SK in the last months (more work related than SK related), and there's times i really miss SK way of modeling and doing stuff
but the truth is in the end other softwares give me much more garanties and don't suffer from SK shortcomings, from uv mapping to animation, to incredible basic stuff like loop selects, bevels, curves, organic modeling or just extruding more than one face at the same time. And then there's stuff that's completly unforgivable like importing/exporting options, or the way SK unsmoths things without warning after "copy pastes" or "saves" ruining renders or exports if we are not alert.And if you read some reviews of SK8 pro like, in the PC Pro, you see that maybe we are not crazy or alone in thinking like this or beeing more critic:
"However, SketchUp 8 Pro and LayOut 3 add little to previous releases and raise questions about Google’s commitment to SketchUp’s original user-base and those new users who want to move beyond geo-modelling." (http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/software/363466/google-sketchup-8/2)I know that i'm a minority and what sk offers may be enough to almost all Sk users and some pro users, but for more serious model work it's simply not enough anymore. And it's a pity because SK it's (or was) a trully unique software.
So try to be a little more understanble with us and keep sending updates like the last one that solve the shadow bug (congrats on that
). I allways like a good reason to get back a play a litle more with this great software.Best Regards
David
-
Not sure what response you guys are hoping to get. Can you clarify? If you have particular issues, let's discuss them in an orderly manner. Though for the sake of others who don't want to wade through all 19 pages of this thread, perhaps it would be better to start a new one?
John
.
Advertisement