Using Different Axes
-
First off, I searched and couldn't find a suggestion like this. I saw a similar one posted, but it was really not what I was thinking of.
Okay, so, yesterday I was doodling in Sketchup. I was trying to make a pretty snowflake with hexagonal symmetry, but it wasn't working well. Sketchup was, as usual, addicted to our wonderful default axis with its wonderful 90 degree angles that are only remotely useful when making something like a snowflake, where the world revolves around 60 degrees.
Later, I was messing around with 8-fold buildings. I was okay at first, laying out the blueprint of the building (which was basically an octagon with rectangles sticking out of the ends) and then giving it some height. Of course, as the building got more complex (I cut off one of its "legs" and as it grew taller I removed a few things to make the facade stick out), it got harder and harder to make what I want. I rely a lot on inferring and that-all, so when I'm trying to make something 60 or 45 or whatever degrees and Sketchup just doesn't get it, I can't do anything about it. The closest we have to a solution are being able to put down our own axes, but as you know, those are just the same old thing, with the added (read: almost useless for me) advantage of being at a custom angle.
I propose that we are able to make axes of varying types; hexagonal ones, for example, where the distance between each one at any given point is 60 degrees, not 90; or octagonal, where it's 45; or, hell, dodecagonal if we so please.
So, what do you think?
-
@catmando said:
So, what do you think?
protractor and guide lines.
i dunno, working with simple angles is pretty easy in sketchup. i think a hexagonal axis (?) would be more confusing than helpful (or maybe i don't understand what you mean by hexagonal axis)
-
@unknownuser said:
@catmando said:
So, what do you think?
protractor and guide lines.
i dunno, working with simple angles is pretty easy in sketchup. i think a hexagonal axis (?) would be more confusing than helpful (or maybe i don't understand what you mean by hexagonal axis)
I used guidelines with my snowflake. Very handy at first, but they quickly became a pain, and they don't have the advantage of lines matching their angle spontaneously as with axes.
As for a hexagonal axis, well, it's hard to describe. You know how the degrees between each line that forms the current axis is 90, 180, 270, or 360 degrees? Well, in a hexagonal axis, the degrees between each would be 60, 120, 180, 240, 300, or 360 degrees apart (arranged equally around a point of origin, of course). I tried to make one with guidelines earlier in Sketchup, but it wasn't working out very well, as you can imagine.
-
I agree. I have always wanted to turn off the various inferencing options and maybe add my own. Why the Sketchup devs don't make such a simple to implement feature after so many years is a mystery to me. I guess they think everything' hunky-dory?
-
i think if people actually thought that through then it wouldn't be such a common request..
you wouldn't be able to draw anything without inferencing.
-
@unknownuser said:
i think if people actually thought that through then it wouldn't be such a common request..
you wouldn't be able to draw anything without inferencing.
Sometimes, people (myself included) don't want some of the inferencing, or want inferencing based on different angles; that's the point of this thread, I think.
-
Yes it would be nice to turn snaps on and off or control them. The interferenceing kicks ass in sketchup. It would be great to control snaps but sketchup is free. I don't see to many problems laying out what you have said and don't see any need for strange axes at this point.
-
@agamemnus said:
@unknownuser said:
i think if people actually thought that through then it wouldn't be such a common request..
you wouldn't be able to draw anything without inferencing.
Sometimes, people (myself included) don't want some of the inferencing, or want inferencing based on different angles; that's the point of this thread, I think.
The point of this thread was different angled axes which is possible. It takes some prepairing to set up other axes but overall it's not that helpful.
Many tools hold on to the orthogonal axes in the background while line direction inferencing with the new axes may work well. See attached file.Your idea to disable (some) inferencing like in your parallel thread to me only seems useful when tracing an image. Then you only need 'On Face'. The rest is eyeballing where inferencing to axes and other geometry gets in the way. In other cases you need the full inferencing engine (combined with locking to... edge direction, on face, on axis etc. to be able to model properly in 3D.
-
Eyeballing? Doesn't sound very accurate.
Sometimes I simply accidentally get the wrong inferences in the beginning, don't notice it, and it heavily messes up the rest of the model. .995m vs. 1.000m can make a huge difference when that measurement is at a critical point in a model.
-
@agamemnus said:
Eyeballing? Doesn't sound very accurate......
It is'n't accurate indeed, but often quite enough to cut out the image part you need, say for a new 'Face Me' component. Then inferencing other than 'On Face' gets in the way. That was my point. I can't think of another time disabling inferencing would help at all.
The main reason for answering here was that other axes (as in the question by OP), like R/G/B with 60/60/60 degrees is possible.If you would like to exchange suggestions about working around the orthogonal axes as mentioned in this thread:
http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=34690
let me know in that thread. (here we are to much off topic, sorry)
Unfortunately, in that thread your uploaded image contradicts what you are writing. So I'm not certain why you cannot just do what you are after without disabling inferencing to axes or disabling whatever.
Advertisement