Hi TIG,
I am doing a model which has got a lot of curved faces. To reduce the file size we did it in low faces. Then I had to export it to some other software to put it on browser. But I find that the curved faces with low number of faces show some graphic artifacts which is not desired.
I then manually added more lines on the flat parts of the curved face . Now it works fine.
Now I got to repeat this solution everywhere.
So, what basically I need now is a plugin which can add lines on a face. Its like subdividing a face.
I tried the 'subdivide' plugin but it works on a component and curves the corners which is not desired.

Any ideas??

thanks TIG

Hi everybody,
I was wondering if there is any plugin which can join splitted faces.
I have a curved object whose faces were split and now they have become individual faces (lots of them).
Is it possible to rejoin them manually??
Is there any plugin to do it since I have such situation in a lot of places in the model?

Any help is appreciated.

Regards
Pritam

Hi , I took this attached render in KT with following settings.
PhotonMap Fine AA +0.3

I used all KT original materials. What am I doing wrong here?

@honoluludesktop said:

It appears to me that SketchUp will forever be linked to its roots, that is a easy to use architectural building modeler.

I think it would be even easier for architectural modeling if curves are introduced (A sketchup newbie still thinks that the curves are real till he sees the 'input sides' option. By that time he has already spent 3-4 days into sketchup and gained some level of proficiency). Also, import and export to and from other softwares would be seamless and it would not split the 3D max models into ten thousand triangulations.

I often wonder why the people think that the absence of curves is what makes sketchup easier.

@unknownuser said:

I'm one of SketchUp's biggest supporters but I recognize there are some programs out there that do some things better and I think for those who need to do those things, they need to look at those other applications.

To be honest I do not think that sketchup is the best architectural modeling software. Older softwares like autocad microstation can handle the job better and with 100% precision. But still we have shifted to sketchup because of the amount of fun it offers, the cost and time equation, the shorter learning curve. Sketchup is still not THE software for any PARTICULAR purpose so why cant it just serve every purpose in the best way it can.......

@honoluludesktop said:

It would double (I think) the physical size of every new model in the Warehouse, and on Google Earth. Wounder if that could be a problem?

I think the size of the NEW files would actually be smaller. Suppose with the CURRENT sketchup if you have a curvy architectural model worth 10MB, then with the NEW sketchup the file size would hardly be 4MB.

@alan fraser said:

However it's difficult to see how the SU inferencing engine could be made to work with NURBS surfaces which effectively contain nothing to inference off. You have to remember that the inferencing engine itself is at the very core of SU's functionality.

Thats a great point worth pondering. But if you look closely sketchup's inferencing engine works best with flat surfaces only. I do not think it works accurately with curved faces as you do not know which is the BASE POINT of any curved surface. (for example- sketchup circle's do not have any quadrants and nor can any TANGENTS be made). So, as per me inferencing for curved surfaces is never 100% accurate.

When autocad was started back in 80's , I do not think that they had concepts of splines. When 3D MAX was launched , did it have nurbs modeling.... I wonder.
All these softwares have progressed to their current level NOT because they had to do it someday, but because it was the DEMAND of the industry and they HAD to meet it......

Thanks everybody. I was able to get some good outputs.

Yes , as the name says sketchup is for sketches. But sketches need not be just straight lines, a sketch also includes curves.

Anyways.. whats in a name. When sketchup was introduced , the developers probably never expected such huge usage. Today, thousands of professionals are doing serious stuff with the software. Let not the name restrict its progress.

I am in the favour of keeping the free version of sketchup as simple as possible. That is how sketchup has made such huge user base. And it is growing at higher rate than any other software.

Sketchup has patented the push-pull bar and most other features which makes it easy to use. In no other software you will find such navigational capabilities. Since they are patented, the other softwares will have to wait for years to introduce these features.

If one is addicted to sketchup, then he will find it very difficult to use any other software. (And I think all the professionals here on sketchucation are sketchup addicts)

I say why not make the Pro version a box as well as nurbs modeler. Just imagine how wonderful new features SU team will introduce to nurbs modeling. You will be able to model complex characters in minutes. Imagine how easy would be the life of a CG fellow (a CG fellow spends 14 hours a day working, so thats his life ).

And most of all, we all would be able to extend ORGANIC modeling to our profession. Now...isn't that tempting

sorry for being so abstract.
Yesterday I was working on a model of a small ship (4 MB file) . It has some difficult curves. And then suddenly sketchup started moving at a speed of 1 frame every three seconds (during orbit).
Sketchup is well know for its inability to handle curves. But here is a fact . If you have a small file where you have curved faces going in many directions then sketchup hangs. Whereas no other software has such problems.

This is because sketchup cant really generate CURVES and it uses segmented faces to give illusion of curves.
Sometimes these segmented faces range in hundreds or thousands, even for a small model. And thats when the model stops moving.

This also limits sketchup in many more areas.

1. The concept of architectural photoreal rendering inside sketchup has never really taken off. This is because you cant use high poly landscaping elements.
2. character modeling
3. Landscape modeling.

There are many more limitations which you people might have faced.

So, isn't it high time that sketchup introduced real CIRCLE and real CURVES ???

should sketchup introduce 'CIRCLE' ?

Thanks Freidreik,
that tutorial was lot of help. I successfully replaced many trees. Since the widths of the original trees and new trees are different , lot of empty spaces are created between the new trees now. I would like to just copy a tree and paste it wherever I want. Is that possible in KT(copy, move and paste.)

I started using KT since last Wednesday. Kt gives great results and has great library of materials and models. bad for me that I am not able to navigate . A lot of my problems in KT are because I was used to the ease of sketchup.

pritam

thanks Massimo and Gaieus.
The tool can easily convert xml/kzx to obj. But the obj importer in sketchup is a trouble as it takes ages to import small models. Mostly it crashes. Whenever it imports, it also loses all the textures.

I am using sketchup for modeling and kerky for rendering. KT has a great library of 3D plants and landscaping material. but I find it very difficult to move the models around in KT.

Is it possible to import KT xml files into sketchup. even this wud solve my problem. Or is there any better way to handle plant models in KT.

Hi,

can anybody tell me how to convert kerkythea's models (kzx format )to sketchup

regards
Pritam

Hello Gai.
nice to speak to u after almost a year.
I tried posting this on twilight too... I pressed the submit button and then I do not know where the post is gone. i cant see it on their forum. Maybe it has gone to moderators first.

sketchucation contains the best people from all forums. I always get here what I look for.. so i try here first.

anyways... my problem is the edges of the geometry... not the shadows. As you said, decreasing the sun radius wud giv sharper shadows... wud it giv sharper edges to geometry as well. I do not think that is an issue with the material resolution as i am speaking only of the 'edges'
I cant understand why the edges r trying to dissolve wid d background. why cant they stay firm.

Just received a mail frm twilight mods that my topic has been approved. I hope they hav answers to my questions.

pritam

Gaeius and friends ,
... i bought twilight last week... it works like a charm...
i jus repent spending so much time on other renderers whn twilight can handle almost everything in its very easy control panel.
There were few more things that I needed thou... like direct communication betn twilight materials and sketchup materials... It is there but only to a certain level.
It has also a very easy and hierarchical interface which a novice can start using and dig deeper as he grows his knowledge. At no times it felt rocket science (thats the feeling I get everytime i open vray's interface)

I WISHED DISPLACEMENT WAS POSSIBLE.
i was able to get worthy outputs in a couple of days. need to xplore more.

I hav a query for the experts in twilight. See the inserted pictures. The sharp picture is done by somebody else in vray for max. I did the other one (the hazy one) using twilight in su.

How do I achieve sharpness and clarity and resolution as other pic. I tried twilight render in its highest setting... the ultra setting. ... but still a hazy pic. Is it that i hav to Photoshop the image to make it sharp. Or shud I take the image a double the size and then reduce it.

I believe twilight can perform far greater than what I achieved but hw is wht i need to know..

another query is about rendering time. twilight performs IR caching and raytracing for any sized file (mine is 50 mb) in just 10 mins. But it take 5-10 hours for anti-aliasing. hw can I reduce this time. What affects this. is it the bump setting.

enlightened minds... please help

Thanks guys, much help.
What else I wud like to know is that wud it be a gud decision to buy twilight. Or is there any better renderer inside sketchup which is not complex rocket science like vray.

Regards
Pritam

Hi Guys,

I thought of buying twilight renderer so decided to give a trial first.
Please see the image below. It shows ray tracing 53/10000. does that mean it will go on till it reaches 10000. I calculated each ray-trace to take about 13 seconds . So the total time comes to be around 36 hours. and that too with just a simple exterior preset.
shud I hav to wait for 1 and a half day to get a 800 x 349 pixel image???

]Hi,
Can anybody tell me how to tweak the rendering presets in podium v2.
Currently, it is working as a plugin inside my SU7. I seem to to get a blurry picture(non-sharp) and also the pixel color depth isn't any impressive.
Need help. This is the image.
[attachment=0]model 2010-07-14 16112600000.png[/attachment

Pritam

hi guys,
Does anybody have any idea where can I find Ikea furnitures in sketchup. I tried 3d warehouse but could not find the exact model(furniture) I am looking for.
I have the fpf file(ikea 3D file) which contains all the furnitures that i need. Is it possible to convert this fpf file to sketchup?

Regards
Pritam

@chris fullmer said:

I'm not familiar with that ruby, but you could open the ruby console ( Window>Ruby Console )and run the script. If it is breaking mid way through, it will post some errors to the console. You can copy and paste them here and that might help spot the error quicker.

I did that. This is what it said.

Error: #<NoMethodError: undefined method name=' for nil:NilClass> C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 6/Plugins/groupByTexture.rb:51:in texture_groups'
C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 6/Plugins/groupByTexture.rb:40:in each' C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 6/Plugins/groupByTexture.rb:40:in texture_groups'
C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 6/Plugins/groupByTexture.rb:62
C:/Program Files/Google/Google SketchUp 6/Plugins/groupByTexture.rb:62:in `call'

I have this problem with "group by texture" plugin. Every time I click it, it just explodes the entire model and forgets regrouping. I tried with different textures, colors, groups or components, on small models or big models but the result was the same. I thought it might be a problem of compatibility between different rubies. So, I deleted all other rubies and tried only with one ruby and the sketchup.rb which is needed. There wasnt any difference.
Does anybody have any idea what could be the problem? I downloaded the ruby from smustard. I used it in skp 6 pro on xp sp3.

Pritam