Thank you!

I am not 100% sure yet, because documentation on both sides is rather vague, but right now it looks like this is always(?) working:

camera.focal_length = lens_length_in_Rhino * 1.5;

I want to export from Rhino to SU. Unfortunately Rhino's exporter for SU doesn't export cameras so that they end up being scenes in SU. So I wrote a script that gets the camera's data from Rhino and generates a Ruby script that I can then just paste in SU. Here is my camera in Rhino:

And that's the script generated:
` eye = [0.0,-25.0,2.0];
target = [0.0,0.0,2.0];
up = [0.0,0.0,1.0];

camera = Sketchup::Camera.new eye, target, up;
camera.focal_length = 50.0;

view = Sketchup.active_model.active_view;
view.camera = camera;

page = Sketchup.active_model.pages.add('Perspective')`

And here are the two views:

Unfortunately the latter box is a tiny bit closer. Can someone perhaps tell me what I need to do here to get the exact same views?

@dave r said:

You can place the camera with Position Camera from the Camera toolbar or menu And you can aim the camera with Orbit and Pan.

From the Ruby documentation I now have a working script for exactly what I want to do:

` eye = [0,-10000,0]
target = [0,0,0]
up = [0,0,1]

my_camera = Sketchup::Camera.new eye, target, up
my_camera.focal_length = 100

view = Sketchup.active_model.active_view
view.camera = my_camera`

Is there really no plug-in with some tiny UI that lets me do this kind of stuff?

I am using Sketchup 2016 Make and am having problems to setup a cameras precisely.

Usually cameras have a location and target. Is it possible in SU2016Make to say camera location is (0,-100,0) and camera target is (0,0,0)? Or is some plug-in needed? Is this possible in Make at all?

How many curves did you use altogether? (At first I thought of a workflow like one curve "extruded", Joint Push Pull, something like FredoScale and then a boolean operation to get the bottom edges right. But then again I think there must be more to it.)

@dave r said:

Well, those legs are kind of homely, aren't they?

Well, yes.

@dave r said:

The construction as you've drawn it is needlessly complex. Getting everything to fit properly would be a huge undertaking. I don't think you'd be able to get those keys installed in the tenons in the legs. It looks like you've create some potential problems for wood movement. Because of the way the pieces shown in blue wrap over the ends and are trapped in notches, when the two center pieces expand they will put stress on the blue pieces. The outside pieces will expand outward and you'll end up with an unsightly ridge where these pieces are drawn flush with the ends of the end pieces.

Even if you can get all that crazy joinery to fit tightly to begin with, I don't believe it will stay tight. You should study traditional joinery methods used in large tables. Those methods are still around because they work and because woodworkers can make them.

Everything you are saying is probably correct. Although I have to admit that I thought a CNC router's precision would make it at least really easy to assemble such a thing in the first place. Guess I need to build more than just my nifty bike stands...

I have drawn a table and I'd really like to hear what you think about it. Especially about the way it is assembled and from someone who has already built some tables in a real shop in a real life.

The idea in general was to create a solid table where I like the bottom side of the top more than I usually do. And well, I like it, but I am really not sure whether I am simply too optimistic as far as the laws of nature/wood and the solid thing are concerned.

Wellassorted.skp

@cotty said:

@ttype said:

Thanks. I forgot this post...

You ask a question and forget it?

Yes, sometimes I do other things than "trolling the internet" (Dave R). At least I don't forget cooking and cycling...

@dave r said:

You didn't answer my question about the type of material.

That is, because the question more or less just came up while simply being creative and "designing" some things in SU. (I am more a Graphics Design person having an interest in building things I can really touch, but in general I am not (yet) having a clue when it comes to real world construction.)

Just for the record: I reinstalled SU 2013 and directly after installing (before running SU at all) I ran "winetricks ie8" and now the overall GUI experience is better. Don't know whether that makes a difference or the fact that I had SU 8 installed between the installations, but, well, it is better now... Magic Winedows...

@aerilius said:

SketchUp 8 has the same features, except that there is no icon in the tooltips (and because of this the tooltips work). Apart from that, SU8 needs a plugin to customize toolbars, and you need to open Extension Warehouse in a browser instead of inside SketchUp.

...and I cannot open SU 2013 files. Which is not a real surprise, but still a