Sketchup 7?

solo

I agree Biebel, organic modeling tools or even a bolean tool. Wrap around texturing will really help the workflow, however paint on texturing would be amazing. Having a texture editing tool as a plugin is also a good idea.
I do not believe SU needs to get involved with a render engine as plugins available are good enough, and if they did attempt it they would be competing with themselves really, Podium already works within SU and version 2 will be on the level or better than the current Vray engine. (maybe buying out Podium and doing a full integration might be a good option).

Cyberdactyl

I would like to see more flexibility with scene making.

Buying out Indigo might be a lot cheaper. . .

solo

Come to think of it, there is a thread about anti SU snobbery, now if the next "pro version" included a built in render engine, texture editor and additional modeling tools (bolean included) and the free version a basic learning addition without the bells and whistles, we may be taken more seriously.

Rendered animation may also be included this way...hmm.

todd burch

I have no idea what's going to be in SketchUp V7. My money would be on these features:

Features that are aimed at the populace and that make it easy for them to populate Google Earth
Annoyances and bug fixes fixed
Dumbing down hard to use features
Dare I suppose it.... lockable .skp files
Fat Faces perhaps

Todd

solo

fat faces?

Chris Fullmer

This is straight out of the John Bacus interview in September. He's the member of the SU group who led the LayOut team:

@unknownuser said:

I think what you'll see in the future is that Google SketchUp will be broadly focused as "3D for everyone", and we'll try to build more specialized functionality into Google SketchUp Pro for a couple key user groups- like architects.

and even more exciting:

@unknownuser said:

We do have an opportunity, through collaboration with the rest of Google's Geo group, to bring unprecedented geographic context to any SketchUp model. You'll surely see more development along those lines in the future.

I'm hoping he's hinting that the geographic features are making their way in to version 7.

Chris

ps. here's the link to the interview. Its at the bottom of the catchup newsletter: (EDIT by Coen: Interview link added.)
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/catchup/2007/september/index.htm#interview

Daniel

I have to agree that organic modeling and the ability to lock a file would be great additions. I'm not too sure about rendering, though. I'd be worried that if too many additional features are added, SU will loose it's easy intuitive interface and it's affordability. It would be great for Google and the other programs to work together so one can import a SU file directly into other rendering programs like Vue and Lightwave.

Anssi

Fat faces is a feature that the SU team once demoed at a "basecamp" meeting. Shortly it was a way of adding thickness to SU faces, making the modeling ow walls, slabs and similar structures with multiple faces unnecessary. Combined with some kind of tagging system and IFC export you could design and model a building wholly within SU, and export to a full BIM package for documenting-what a dream, as the modeling interfaces in all BIMs I know are much clunkier than SU.

Anssi

ilay7k

Not only or before organic modelling?!
SUPPORT of HIGH-POLY MODEL(ing) with flexible instacing(look at xsi, maya and i like cinema4d) too.

mateo soletic

@solo said:

Come to think of it, there is a thread about anti SU snobbery, now if the next "pro version" included a built in render engine, texture editor and additional modeling tools (bolean included) and the free version a basic learning addition without the bells and whistles, we may be taken more seriously.

Rendered animation may also be included this way...hmm.

Or maybe just a false interface that can be swiched on when client is watching something so complicated that
nobody would understand.

Edson

@solo said:

Come to think of it, there is a thread about anti SU snobbery, now if the next "pro version" included a built in render engine, texture editor and additional modeling tools (bolean included) and the free version a basic learning addition without the bells and whistles, we may be taken more seriously.

it is my opinion that one's credibility has to do much more with the quality of one's output than with the apps we use. in the past, when vectorworks was called minicad, people used to laugh at its name but had to agree in the end that one could produce very good stuff with it.

furthermore, let us for a moment accept that SU is for hobbyists, not for serious pros. in this case, people like you, solo, who are capable of creating amazing work with SU, should be held in much greater esteem than people who use mammoths like maya to create the same thing.

mateo soletic

Right on the mark Edson. People sometime ask me what application do I use as if it is as simple as pressing a button and they would master it overnight. My answer is allways that I work in over ten different apps. and I
decide which ones are appropriate for a specific job.
And that is the only truth. The one thing in common we have on this forum is the fact that we all choose SU for a specific task that we couldnt find in any other application.

Kenny

For me Sketchup PRO really has to earn its title. That isn't with rendering as there are more than enough capable rendering packages out there that integrate very well with Sketchup. My votes would be for:

-Hi poly modelling and faster handling of large models is the number one priority.
-Related to this is the ability to handle large models when it comes to actions such as exporting 2d DWG files, HLR pdf's and draping on to terrain. I've had many instances lately with large files I work with where it wasn't possible as it crashed. This has to be addressed for a pro application.
-Again related to above, the ability to use multi-threading and 64 Bit. This would enable the harnessing of already available technology to improve the handling of large models.
-Support for line weights and hatches
-Rock solid stability. It is much improved and rarely crashes but it could still be improved.
-Some parametric features such as roofs, doors, windows etc. Whilst it is easy to build a model, changing it is another story. If I decide that I actually want a 45deg roof rather than 35 I have to redo the whole roof. If I could just type in 35 deg and it instantly updates it would be a huge timesaver. The only problem is that Sketchup isn't Revit and it then starts to move away from its main idea. Some kind of add on would be worth considering however.
-Enhanced terrain tools particularly for reshaping such as a road tool
-Importation of Google Earth snapshots in colour
-Additional modelling tools may be beneficial for many but it mustn't be at the expense of the sketchup ethos of simplicity. If it was implemented it should be like the sandbox tools where it is a separate tool collection that has to be activated.
-The fat face tool sounds very useful too

As for Layout there was lots of speculation before it came out that it would be an easy to use CAD package with titles like 'draftup' being thrown around. I think there is a huge market for this and Google may do well to move Layout in that direction. I'd certainly use it as I still haven't found a CAD package I like and tend to do everything in Sketchup.

Kenny

solo

By the responses it’s clear that there are obviously different ambitions for different users, Sketchup may have been primarily been designed for architects and still is an essential tool. These days there are many different uses for this magic app and that is probably another reason for the snobbery.
Just perusing around in 3d warehouse makes this clear that many folk use SU for so many different professional and entertainment reasons.

Cartooning, art, gaming, architecture, interior design, woodworking, component engineering, litigation, doodling, decorating, DTP, teaching visualization, furniture design, etc, etc, etc.

So based on the above there are many avenues and directions Google can take, do they keep to architecture and compete with Cad apps or go more general and attract a bigger market? Tough call if you ask me, maybe branching out to various derivatives of the product to be tailored for other industries may be the ultimate answer.

Fletch

I want the scale tool enhanced so that I can use it like the skew tool in Photoshop. Let's call it non-uniform deformation. The easiest example would be to use the scale tool to quickly make an egg shape. Not a perfect oval shape, but a real egg shape... smaller on top, fatter on the bottom.

I would use it for architectural modeling in many situations... skewing the end of a cabinet to fit in an odd corner... don't know if you get what I mean here... but that's the tool I wish for a lot these days... and I want it integrated with the scale too, not as a new separate tool.

stuartb

I pretty much agree entirely with Kenny.

They NEED to fix the text thing though, if they seriously want the Pro version to be used by Pros and not just hobbyists.

I have pretty much given up on Layout for now and dont use it at all. I have pretty good 2D workflow involving exporting 2D graphics and placing them in pageplus to scale (pretty much as Layout is meant to do . . . . ).

But the text thing . . . we NEED to be able place text flat and have it stick to surfaces . . like the dimensions can.

I hope they dont bloat it with render engines and Google Earth nonsense . . . . but I suspect they will. You have to remember that there is a 'google agenda' which almost certainly wont be the same as yours and mine. Google Earth is fun but totally pointless IMHO. If I am working on a site I pretty much always need to buy the full detailed contoured ordnance survey map from Promap, or have a site survey commissioned. We then create a sketchup terrain from the contours. Google Earth should be kept well away from the Pro version.

I suspect that by the time we reach Sketchup Pro v.10 we will look back fondly at version 6 as the 'perfect' version!

thomthom

If there was only one improvement with SU7 I'd opt for higher polycount handling.

I don't see the need for renders in SU. If you need to render realistically there's other packages for this. If all these features suggested where implemented SU would become less of a sketching application.

I like the ideas of plugins though. Extending the app as you prefer. Like Firefox.

lapx

I think concentration should be on modeling like simplier modeling for curvy and round shapes. I agree there are plenty of plugins that allow for su to play nice with other render programs. There should be less barriers to making complex forms,curves, arcs etc. I think some creative and talented modelers have shown that you can create almost anything with su. I say concentrate on improving the modeler with a combonation of speed.

P: lapx

otb designworks

For me, there are four critical things that Sketchup needs to fix.

Animation export on Macs still doesn't work at all. It is unbelievable to me that this hasn't been fixed yet in 6, but I sure hope they have it right by 7.
STOP THE BRUTAL CLIPPING!! I fecking hate clipping, hate it hate it hate it!!!
multi-threading. I am about to spring for an 8-core Mac Pro, and it is depressing knowing that SU will only be using 1/8 of the available power.
better handling of high poly models, especially the Achilles heel of foliage.

Even though SU6 was free (which was awesome, of course) I would be very very happy to pay for a nice and meaty (read not geared for google earth populating) update.

kwistenbiebel

Did anyone already mention the wish to have support for directX 10 in SU7?

DirectX 10 should be much better and would solve the trouble we all seem to have with OpenGL.
Faster viewport panning/zooming etc....

I'm not sure if the Apple users would be happy though....