Using Scenes in Layout
-
Can someone help me understand what happens when you change a scene for a viewport in layout that only records some of the scene settings e.g. if I have a scene(s) that stores camera & active section planes and then select a different scene which only stores layers and a third with just style settings, does the viewport in layout merge the settings as they are selected or is it not that straighforward?
-
Well, I have never tested such a scenario - have you? I mean it would be easy I guess..
-
Well it seems to work, but I'm thinking it's more good luck than good management. I read a post which I can't find that suggest using this arrangement in S.U. but I don't know if they followed through to Layout. It would help cut down on the number of scenes I require!
-
I don't know if this will help but each scene in SU could be thought of as a snapshot of a specific view of your model. The view in LO could be thought of as a copy of that snapshot laid on the paper space. If you modify the scene in SU, you are basically creating a new snapshot. Save the changes, update the reference and render the view and you will replace the old snapshot with the new one.
As to the parameters that are saved when you update or create the scene in the first place, that just relates to what will be changed from the previous scene. Suppose you have shadows turned on in one scene. Now you modify the view in preparation for making the next scene. Suppose you turn off shadows while doing the prep work and you have Shadows unticked in the list of parameters to be saved. Then when you make the new scene, the changed state of the shadows will not be saved and shadows should be turned on.
-
Thanks Dave that follows my findings and it would appear LO plays the same game so you can use aspects of a scene such as only saving layers to partly modify an established view in LO. I'm hoping this is what the development team was planning because it will be quite useful now I've got my head round the idea. I was just a little nervous of taking advantage of what feels like an undocumented "loophole".
-
FWIW, I rarely find need to untick any of the boxes for the parameters to be saved when I modify scenes. I make only the desired changes to the scene and update.
-
@dave r said:
FWIW, I rarely find need to untick any of the boxes for the parameters to be saved when I modify scenes. I make only the desired changes to the scene and update.
Normally I'd agree, but I have a complex mezzanine building which requires eight different plan sections for the levels to display correctly, which then need to display a variety of different layer combinations for structure, opening components, fittings, fire plan etc you get the idea? Now I only need to save the plan section and one copy of each of the layer combo's, which means in the example above I can show everything in LO with 12 scenes rather than 32!
-
Short answer, I would not recommend using a Scene in LO that doesn't snapshot all the Scene's properties.
Long answer...
If you don't snapshot all the properties for a SU Scene in LO, you're not guaranteed to always get the same rendering each time you update in SU and then update the model in LO. What LO basically does for each model rendering is open the SKP and switch to the Scene you want rendered. If you change a setting that's not being captured in a Scene and you change that same setting between saves in SU and updates in LO, you'll see what I mean. -
@jhauswirth said:
Short answer, I would not recommend using a Scene in LO that doesn't snapshot all the Scene's properties.
So basically what you are saying is LO still has a lot of growing up to do? Considering LO is marketed under the "Pro" banner it feels far from it.Your response is also only half correct. I can certainly mess up my layers, but the camera location & cuts seem to remain intact!?
It's not the thought of having 32 scenes to click on that is the problem, it's the prospect of adding/changing one layer in SU and having to update the affected 32 scenes to suit the change. Layer combinations should be an option, with LO modified to directly read the combination from SU. In fact when you look at the LO import settings this sort of looks where things are or should be going as we already have a badly implemented link to styles, standard views which could include custom views with cuts, and scenes which could link to layer combinations.
Anyway thank you for your input, now we know the limitations I'm sure there will be a workaround while we wait for LO4.
Just for background I've used CAD for 26 years, had SU since V2 and recently abandoned ArchiCAD in the hope that some of @Last's original passion & programming will eventually appear in LO.
-
@arcad-uk said:
So basically what you are saying is LO still has a lot of growing up to do?
How do you make the leap to that statement? I don't get that at all.
I don't see how changing what is updated in each scene affects the number of scenes you need. Each scene is a stand alone view. You should only need to make as many scenes as you'll have views in LO.
-
Ever have that feeling your paying for the beta version? IMHO I think the link between SU and LO is badly implemented hence the suggestion it needs to grow up ...and start working like Pro software.
It's not the number of scenes Dave, it's the time spent updating them due to something minor like adding a new layer, as in all probability you will not want the new layer visible in each of the existing scenes. As I indicated above, in architecture the displayed information will vary between for the same view and therefore if you have to save each one as a scene the numbers can be almost exponential e.g. 2 styles x 4 layer combos x 6 views = 48 Scenes if you change just one of the layer combos that means you have at least 6 views to update, or possibly 48 if you add a new layer that affects all views!
Imagine how much easier it would be in LO if you could simply import your model and with three selections (style, layer, view) have your scene established.
-
I've never had the feeling I'm paying for the beta version. Well, not since LO Beta anyway.
SO based on your example, how will you reduce the number of scenes? Each scene can only display one style, one combination of layers and one camera position. No matter how you save changes to the scenes, that's all you get in each scene. That has nothing to do with LayOut anyway. If you need to display each of your six views with 2 different styles and 4 different layer combinations, you will indeed need 48 scenes. Perhaps you could make an example SKP file that shows those views without using 48 scenes?
FWIW, I've organized my workflow so that I make all the needed layers before I make scenes and all the scenes before I send to LayOut. that works quite well for my use.
There is a plugin you might find useful that creates hidden layers rather than visible ones. Then you can turn on the layer for the desired scenes. It might help.
-
Thank you for the plugin link but that depends if the change turns more layer off than on as to whether it is useful.
I've added a simple attachment that shows how different scenes can be combined for style (st), layer (La) and view (Vw) in eleven scenes which could effectively service 45 different views in LO. That should at least minimise the scene tabs in SU.
Following on from jhauswirth's comments, in LO3 I think the only way to make this work safely for now is to manually update & check viewports when the model is changed. (Need to check this works!)
Please don't try to analyse the SU model with why do you need three styles etc, the point is that it is possible to combine scenes to arrive at a consistent view quickly, and until we get layer combinations as a selection directly linked to LO this is a workaround for me at least.
-
Here are some screen captures from your SKP file.
Snap001: This is of the scene (Vw1) that was selected when you saved the file and is exactly what showed on opening.
After making the screen shot I immediately clicked on St1 for Snap002. From then on I went through the scenes from left to right. After Vw5 I returned to St1. Compare Snap002 and Snap013. The same scene tab but entirely different views. The same applies to Snap003 and Snap014 and so on. The image you get for a given scene is dependent upon the previous scene tab that was selected.
The images in Scenes2.zip were made sequentially. I switched between scene tabs starting with Vw1 directly after opening the SKP file. Then I alternated between ST1 and each successive Vw scene.
This all comes from misusing the tick boxes for saving properties. What's the point of even making scenes if they aren't going to be the same each time you go back to them? If your file was a book, you couldn't go back to refer to some previous page because the text would be different depending on which page you were last reading.
And none of this has anything to do with LayOut. It's all SketchUp scene management.
-
Hi Dave, I respect your position as Global Moderator, but to be honest I feel I'm banging my head on a brick wall here.
The point was that by selecting three scene tabs I can achieve the required views and maintain what is displayed simply, without having to manage 45 different scenes. e.g. click St1, La3 and Vw2 and you have a shaded sketch elevation, then click on St3, La2 and Vw5 and you have a clean section. If I change the layers in the model, I've only got at worst three scenes to update.
I think I'm done with this thread unless anyone else wants to make a constructive suggestion. Hopefully the developers understand my point and can see some way to get LO working on the same principle because I think this could be easily implemented by adding custom views and layer combinations in SU and making them accessible in LO viewports the same as the Style setting.
-
I'm sorry you feel I'm abusing my position as global moderator but this has nothing to do with my position here on SCF. I'm only trying to understand the problem you're having because I don't have those problems when I use SketchUp and LayOut. I've also never run into anyone else who has had the problems you're having.
-
I don't have a problem, if I did I'd have retained my ArchiCAD subscription. This thread started as a question of working methods, but it has evolved into what I hope are constructive suggestions for the future partnership of SU & LO.
I appreciate your responses but we clearly have different backgrounds and agendas for what we "expect" from the software.
Advertisement