SketchUp 2017 Wishlist

baz

I might need to defer to more knowledgeable heads here, but the dwg imported ok for me and saved at 2.92MB, Not an excessive size m'thinks.
Also copied arrayed 10 times and still easily navigable without wire frames. Scruffy model tho, don't ya reckon? Trusses are out of line etc.
I think i could draw an accurate version of that in about half an hour, and then have all the advantages of components as well.
But if have the AutoCad skills, I s'pose you would want to leverage them. Though it seems most old ACad users here are so happy to have gotten away from the beast.

pcmoor

if you look at the truss in a Cad viewer, the form is a true curve, whereas in sketchup its segmented. I can (and have) as you have pointed out build the same in Sketchup, even built a DC version, however it still uses a very basic rectangle/triangle surface, whereas the original, I believe, uses a technology that expresses the curve with fewer points and bent or bulged surfaces.
I not an expert in this field, but the change in file size and the difference in models causes concern.
In building the DC, I was always at pains to reduce its file size, as copies become unique. I can share a part from the DC without repercussions, but the full model is currently private, as my efforts may yet be financially compensated for.

the total file size can vary depending on the amount of segments chosen, but sometimes for a decent view a component can be 2MB, then there is the issue of them becoming unique with change and multiplication.

I must stress again that I do love sketchup, but I am starting to see limitations

curve pipe example.skp

baz

@pcmoor said:

if you look at the truss in a Cad viewer, the form is a true curve, whereas in sketchup its segmented. I can (and have) as you have pointed out build the same in Sketchup, even built a DC version, however it still uses a very basic rectangle/triangle surface, whereas the original, I believe, uses a technology that expresses the curve with fewer points and bent or bulged surfaces.
I not an expert in this field, but the change in file size and the difference in models causes concern.
In building the DC, I was always at pains to reduce its file size, as copies become unique. I can share a part from the DC without repercussions, but the full model is currently private, as my efforts may yet be financially compensated for.

the total file size can vary depending on the amount of segments chosen, but sometimes for a decent view a component can be 2MB, then there is the issue of them becoming unique with change and multiplication.

I must stress again that I do love sketchup, but I am starting to see limitations

Fair enuf

JQL

@pcmoor said:

I will make my decision after the next upgrade, until then I will continue with Sketchup, I do on the whole love it, but the file sizes worry me, there is a need for nurbs(or a way of showing curves without loads of faces and memory use), better dynamic components functions and again memory management, better ruby ide (interface with a standard set of userform tools)...I fear that these are years away from improvement.

...

Simple geometric shapes for building is so old hat. curves, shells, organic shapes are a problem to build in sketchup. This needs urgent attention

I agree with you, but I wouldn't wait for 2017 for that, Sketchup will fundamentally be the same. Of course I don't know what will happen but you should really look somewhere else for this:

Nurbs (Rhino, MOI, Blender, CAD, Onshape...?)
Better ruby ID (have no idea how others work)
Better DC (Rhino+Grasshopper, Onshape, Solidworks?)

I don't believe either Nurbs will ever show up in sketchup and I don't believe DC's will receive that much love.

However, there is something in the forge that might interest you, I know it interests me, but I haven't had the time to fully experiment it:

http://www.fluidinteractive.com/products/sketchup-extensions/viz/

pbacot

Aren't you comparing both 2d CAD programs (Draftsight) and organic 3d modeling (like Rhino) to SketchUp? You should indeed try those. Why not AutoCAD? Only used it in school myself, and didn't like it then.

Seems like no program is perfect, like people.

Garry K

I think it is about leveraging a software. I agree that Dynamic Components do increase file size and slow down loading etc. That is why I don't use them. I do leverage Dynamic components for Doors and Drawer opening.

Here is a Stair - lots of curves - built with my Stair Maker - ruby code. The Stair comes out at 1440 KB which I think is reasonable.

stair.skp

pcmoor

Thanks for the insights
Yes I will look else where, waiting is not the answer

I will keep sketchup as a hobby, maybe explore a bit more ruby...in my spare time...for a while

Once I find the software I will move there. Cheers and thanks for the forum, I hope there are equally as good

kaas

@pcmoor said:

..
Yes I will look else where, waiting is not the answer
... maybe explore a bit more ruby...in my spare time...for a while

Exploring Ruby is what changed it all for me. No waiting, just code it yourself-just like you need it. That has improved my workflow a lot and was one of the best worthwhile time investments I ever did.

pcmoor

thanks Kaas & Garry, will give ruby a serious go.
no point in wasting my sketchup experience, although will purchase a CAD plateform, probably BricsCad. although will checkout the others mentioned first

AlexiaH

Perspective - Camera clipping plane

This is a long running issue that has never been addressed properly. I'd simply just like to control this distance from the camera, that's it. I don't want to have worry about mixed large and small components causing degrading clipping plane distance, but currently this happens in SketchUp. And it's not like this is a major issue, but it is most of all a hinderance to an otherwise productive workflow. Most answers to this clipping plane issue are one of these few response that don't help: check Hardware Acceleration, re-import to new file, switch to parallel projection, or changing the fov. Honestly, none of those suggestions will fix it until it's addressed in 2017 in the program itself, this issue should not be left for the end users to handle.

In almost every 3D application, that clipping plane can be manually controlled, I can set the distance to 1 cm or anything else, but I can't do that in SketchUp. Sketchup chooses for you, and not in a smart way. That's ridiculous. Just stupid, and I really hope the dev team works on this.

Multi-core support

This is just overdue, add please. I'd like sketchup to be a little more responsive, so getting that extra juice should be a high priority goal.

GMthompson

@baz said:

@kaas said:

@baz said:

I am really not getting on with the new trays in 16, I would like the option to revert to the 15 version.

100

Thank Kaas, from us here in the wilderness. I thought that the simple dialog box interface in SU15 was so easy, Especially liked that I could stick em all together and click on the ones I needed at the time.

Software designers have to justify their bucks I s'pose.

My bottom line advice is; If it ain't broke, don't fix it, please. (Or,another way of saying it: Don't add 'features' for the sake of it, please.

Me personally, I would prefer if SU stayed just as it is. My workflow can handle 'clipping' and 'UV' mapping and all the other 'things'.

My main ask would be more integration with LO. With similar, if not exact, commands.

I agree i really wish layout commands copying etc matched SU

GMthompson

Why cant we have plugins for layout? has this been covered sorry?

JQL

plugins for LO is a request that seen some evolution so I believe it's being adress. LO 2016 introduced a Layout API that allows other software to create LO files. Maybe 2017 will bring us some ruby... It would be cool.

juju

@jql said:

plugins for LO is a request that seen some evolution so I believe it's being adress. LO 2016 introduced a Layout API that allows other software to create LO files. Maybe 2017 will bring us some ruby... It would be cool.

do you know of any other software currently available that leverages the revised layout API?

JQL

@juju said:

@jql said:

plugins for LO is a request that seen some evolution so I believe it's being adress. LO 2016 introduced a Layout API that allows other software to create LO files. Maybe 2017 will bring us some ruby... It would be cool.

do you know of any other software currently available that leverages the revised layout API?

I know of none, but a plugin (wich is a software itself) for sketchup, can be used right now to create LO pages from a Sketchup file.

Of course it's only the start, but I think it means at least a direction towards external developers having a handle of Layout.

Take a look at this:

https://blog.sketchup.com/developer/abcs-layouts-c-api

And this plugin for Sketchup (wich isn't really useful as it does only basic stuff):

https://extensions.sketchup.com/en/content/create-layout-file

juju

JQL, I know of the article and plugin you linked to. Apart from that, I don't know of anyone else having come up with something useful, thus the question.

Bob James

Ability to nest Layers (enhanced version of BillyBob's Layers Panel Plugin)
Unwrap (enhanced version of wrapR)
Fix the clipping plane problem
Open Selection in new SU Session to edit components in a separate SketchUp workspace (incorporate something like wikii's Sharp Editor)-(as suggested by HornOxx)
Wider Layer Name drop-down display to be able to see full names (I've suggested this for the last two versions)

Napper

For me the most requested features would be Layout-Relevant

Make it possible to activate / deactivate layers of a scene from within Layout
Make it possible to hide/unhide geometry in a model-view from within Layout
(Killer Feature) Make the components of a model browsable from within Layout. Imagine if you could browse your components and you could drag a component onto the Layout-Sheet to generate a "Scene" in which just the component is shown. At the moment I spend so much time simply adding pointless scenes in Sketchup in order to show some detail. This feature alone would blow minds, I feel.
Multi-Point Dimension Lines (don't know how to phrase this). Like saying: this is 100mm and after 19 and after 482 and after that 19 and after that 25 in one go and all the measures on that dimension line stick together.

JQL

@napper said:

For me the most requested features would be Layout-Relevant

(Killer Feature) Make the components of a model browsable from within Layout. Imagine if you could browse your components and you could drag a component onto the Layout-Sheet to generate a "Scene" in which just the component is shown. At the moment I spend so much time simply adding pointless scenes in Sketchup in order to show some detail. This feature alone would blow minds, I feel.

What I do is, from Sketchup, save a bunch of components to a folder, create a new sketchup model and import all of those components and create scenes for those from there.

If you have a template you can set things up in a breeze, with the added advantage that you can create sections and details, further develop the model and reload it back in your sketchup model.

IS+Bancadas.JPG

Napper

H JQL,

great drawing. Something along the line of what I am doing myself. We have a nifty little company called Kiebitzberg ( http://www.kiebitzberg.de ) and do a lot of interior design With that kind of detailing necessary. I often work on projects that contain 12 or more rooms in one file as they are all connected and I need to present the type of details you are showing in your example for a whole bunch of furniture AS WE DEVELOP it. Meaning, there is the initial draft than we present it to the customer, make changes to the model, update the Layout file, etc. So exporting the Components is only so and so great because I'd constantly would need to reexport in order to get the Layout File updated. So far the best way I found was to create ALOT of Scenes in which only the relevant componant is shown but it is quite a mind-numbing task considering how fluid and logical Sketchup is.

So - I stand by my whishes!

Napper.