@unknownuser said:

I wish they had a plugin for SU that would work with Archvision RPC.

You might take a look at IRender. It takes RPC objects, places them in SketchUp as low-geometry placeholders and renders then with the RPC

As I understand Google Searches, it is important that you have "Important" web pages on other sites which link to your site.

You have some Google pages linking to your page, so the inclusions here and on groups.google.com/group/pro-gallery do help.

I would try to get links to your page posted on other forums and/or try to get other people to add a link to your site.

Here's an idea: Add an RPS 3D PDF to the site, and I will be glad to add a link from the RPS 3D PDF forum. See the link to another of your images at: http://forums.renderplus.com/wiki/index.php?title=RPS_3D_PDF_Samples. (Interestingly this page lists PDF files made with the trial version of RPS 3D PDF.)

You can embed a PDF into a web page. Here is a sample web page with an embedded 3D PDF: http://www.renderplus.com/pdf/pdf_sample.htm

Kristoff's idea is interesting - at list for English language versions - we could find the SketchUp window and find its title window.

Looking for an exporter in the support files would work if people downloaded different versions for pro / non-pro. Is there a difference between a "free" version and a Pro version which was never authorized after the free 8 hour trial?

Is there a way to discover if a user is running the Pro or Free version?

We thought we could write a 3D dummy exporter, or try to access one of the 3D exporters already part of SketchUp.

Does anyone have a different idea?

I actually wrote the script to help with four wine bottle models.

http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/cldetails?mid=1e0876791887078a4556a050c4f938b&prevstart=0

I have attached a ruby script which will add a command to the Tools menu to clear 3D Warehouse data for the current model.

Place this ruby file in SketchUp\Plugins

The command "Reset 3D Warehouse Info" will be placed under "Tools"

When executed, the 3D Warehouse information (but not any previously uploaded 3D Warehouse models) will be removed for this model.

The next time you "share" the model, it will create a new 3D Warehouse entry.

@unknownuser said:

I uploaded a model to the 3D Warehouse, then made a change to the .SKP file, saved it with a different name and uploaded a new version of the model.

When I clicked "Share" it remembered the information about the first model. I changed the information and uploaded it, but it "replaced" the original model rather than creating a new one.

Is there a way to "fool" the 3D Warehouse into realizing that the new model is not the same as the old model. (I am guessing that the model information is saved in the .SKP file)

clear_3d_warehouse.rb

Thanks for the help.

We were able to extract section planes in the main drawing. However we just treat them all as active (or none - based on a user option). And we ignore all section planes in groups or components.

@kevd said:

In fact, creating my own scrambler was an option I was toying with.
Kevin

Most methods of scrambling things yourself are pretty easy for Ruby programmers to hack.

I couldn't tell from some of the replies whether you were looking for the Scrambler, or some way to unscramble the scripts.

Assuming you are looking for a scrambler:

1. Some Ruby developers use a "ruby" method to scramble scripts. This ruby encoding make is hard for a casual user to read your script, but it would only take a good hacker about 30 seconds to un-encrypt it.

2. The Ruby scrambler from SketchUp works quite well except for one problem. The way they have implemented it, error messages and other tracebacks from inside the script to not report the line numbers properly.

There is a fairly easy way to fix this line number problem which I am prepared to share with other developers. If you get a hold of the scrambler, and want help with the line number problem, contact me directly.

I tried it in two places, but perhaps another Ruby programmer has found a way to solve it.

For example, I am trying to apply a 0.05 rotation to the current rotation. Perhaps there is another way to do this.

Also, I have not done a test to see if all component rotations are rounded off (or just very small ones). For example, I could try rotations of 10.05 and 10.06 degrees and see if they give the same result.

In my other CAD systems (we are the developer for ARRIS CAD), this would be a problem, because if you had a very large component and rotated it, and the rotation was rounded off, and then you measured something it could be off by several feet.

@krisidious said:

is this a rhetorical question? cuz you seem to know the answer...

I seem to be able to place a 0.06 rotation on a component, but not a 0.05 rotation.

Here is the code setting the transform on the component:

			trace("ROTATE angle; %g in rad; %g",angle, deg2rad(angle))
			trot = Geom;;Transformation.rotation(center, axis_vector,  deg2rad(angle.to_f))	
			show_transformation("TROT",trot)
			component.transformation = trot
			tmid = component.transformation		
			show_transformation("TMID",tmid)

Here is the output for a 0.05 rotation angle. The transformation does not seem to be applied to the component.

ROTATE angle; -0.05 in rad; -0.000872665
TROT
	1 -0.0008727 0 0
	0.0008727 1 0 0
	0 0 1 0
	0 0 0 1
TMID
	1 0 0 0
	0 1 0 0
	0 0 1 0
	0 0 0 1

Here is the output for a 0.06 rotation angle. It is applied properly.

ROTATE angle; -0.06 in rad; -0.0010472
TROT
	1 -0.001047 0 0
	0.001047 1 0 0
	0 0 1 0
	0 0 0 1
TMID
	1 -0.001047 0 0
	0.001047 1 0 0
	0 0 1 0
	0 0 0 1

TMID is the rotation on the component after applying TROT.

0.06 works ok, but 0.05 does not seem to take.

has anyone run into a similar problem?

Only those "dumb" enough to move the ruby console to a second monitor, and then try to use their computer at home with only one monitor.

Seriously though, if we create "sticky" thread of know Ruby bugs, it will take too long to scroll down to the new threads below them.

@unknownuser said:

maybe this thread should be sticky? or does this not affect a great number of people?

Every time I clicked 'Windows/Ruby Console' this moring, nothing happened.

I reinstalled SketchUp, and removed several .rb files from plugins thinking that one of them was changing things.

Then I remembered that yesterday I had placed the ruby console on screen 2 of a 2 monitor windows layout and that SketchUp is not smart enough to return it to the main screen where using only 1 monitor is available.

The fix is to alter, or complete remove, the settings in: HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Google\SketchUp6\RubyConsole

I thought I would make a posting here so others would remember if this ever happens to them.

Rptools does a Dir.chdir before loading a Ruby Extension DLL. (This causes the DLL to search for other DLL's is uses in its own path.)

It should have changed the folder back after loading the DLL, but somehow the line:

Dir.chdir(scur_folder)

got lost.

I will put it back for future versions of RpTools.

However, there may be other Ruby scripts, or other activities which change the current folder. So it might be a good idea to have ComponentReporter.rb specify a specific folder to save the file into.

1. You could grab a copy of the current directory when ComponentReporter.rb first loads with: (ComponentsReporter.rb will load before RpTools_loader.rb because it comes first alphabetically)

$srpc_cur_folder = Dir.getwd

and then reset the folder before saving the file with

Dir.chdir($srpc_cur_folder)

or add the folder name to the .CSV file name before saving it.

2. You should be able to get the Windows My Documents folder with code along the lines of:

require "Win32API" # you would have to put Win32API into the SketchUp Tools folder
SHGetSpecialFolderPath     = Win32API.new('shell32', 'SHGetSpecialFolderPath', 'LPLL','L')
my_docs_folder = " "*512 # build buffer for file name 
CSIDL_MYDOCUMENTS             = 0x000c
SHGetSpecialFolderPath.call(0, my_docs_folder, CSIDL_MYDOCUMENTS, 0)

But I wasn't quite able to get this to work. I wound up writing a ruby DLL to fetch the path of the current folder.

We are working on two RpReports capabilities.

1. RpReports is designed for manufacturers or distributors who want to make a library of components for their dealers of end users.

The dealer or end user places the components and gets a PDF report which includes an image (or interactive 3D PDF) or the components and ar report with quantities, pricing and totals.

2. Space Design is a free add-on to create reports from components in the 3D Warehouse.

If you place a description in the model using SketchUp "Model Info", the component name and description appear in the report. If you want to include more attributes, you can user RpReports to populate the SKP models with attributes.

Also, there will be a special version of Space Design for the cleint to customize attributes and reports.

@crojack said:

I was hoping you had found a way to use bump maps inside sketchup so than we wouldn't have to actually model the stones, etc. to get some nice shadows etc. off of them. Just using the stones as an example.

This thread is mostly about creating Bump Maps.

IRender, and several other add-on renderers for SketchUp, do process bump maps as part of the rendering process.

We have been communicating with SketchUp to try to convince them that bump maps would be a useful addition to the SketchUp Renderer and/or the Google Earth Renderer. But we need to come up with a compelling example where bump maps kept a model small while adding useful detail.

IRender does do one clever thing with bump maps. We let you apply both a color image and a bump map to the same surface by placing the bump map on the back. That way you do not have to redefine the bump map material after you export the geometry to the renderer, but can store everything you need to define it directly in the SketchUp model.

The modeled stone would always create a better rendering since the bump map only emulates it, and will never look better.

On the other hand, if you had a large stone wall which was in the background, you could easily bog down your SketchUp model with 100's of 1,000's of faces which were not that important to the main rendering.

If your model was getting too large or if it was taking too long to render, then you might want to replace the model with a bump map.

For instance this brick pattern uses bump maps quite well, and would need quite a bit of geometry to draw the cement between the bricks with faces.

On the other hand, it may not be practical to create this bump map with SketchUp, it may be better to create it with PhotoShop, or some other paint program which helps to make bump maps.

We may be wasting our time here (trying to create bump maps). But we are hoping to hear from some renderer users who have found a need for bump maps and can help us figure out if this is a useful tool to add to SketchUp

@crojack said:

Is this for getting a model is sketchup to utilize bump maps, or for an external rendering program?

This latest feature - automatic creation of bump maps from SketchUp models - is designed to let SketchUp users create bump maps for use with external rendering programs.

Bump maps vary in intensity depending on depth changes in the unerlying geometry, rather than the color of the geometry. They the renderer shades the image based on the angle of the light to the image.

![Bump map for stone surface - darkness is based on the depth of the stone.

Note: This bump map was not created from a SketchUp model. In order to create the bump map in SketchUp, you would have to be able to create a 3D model of the stone itself.](/uploads/imported_attachments/H0H4_stone-bump.jpg "Bump map for stone surface - darkness is based on the depth of the stone.

Note: This bump map was not created from a SketchUp model. In order to create the bump map in SketchUp, you would have to be able to create a 3D model of the stone itself.")

![Stone bump mage image placed as a texture in a SketchUp model and rendered with an external bump map renderer.

Note how the lighting of the bumps is determined by the angle of the sun.](/uploads/imported_attachments/A8sE_stone2-bump.png "Stone bump mage image placed as a texture in a SketchUp model and rendered with an external bump map renderer.

Note how the lighting of the bumps is determined by the angle of the sun.")

Many people use photographs as bump maps - because oftern a photo will be darker where the surface is indented. However a good bump map ignores lighting and only include the depth of the surface.

We are hoping to create a feature which will let you model a surface in SketchUp, then create a bump map and replace the complex surface model with an image of the bump map.

@krisidious said:

Al... have a look at my 3D Stone Hatch...

The hatch doesn't work as well as a bump map - because most of what makes it work well in SketchUp is in the stone textures in the image - which the depth changes - which are are what make bump maps work - are flat and square.

Still, I may be able to do better with it after I work on it more. Part of this whole exercise is to see whether bump maps are valuable. (They were less valuable before because there was no good way to make one. It is much easier to make one from a SketchUp model.)

Also, the edge lines in your SketchUp model are part of what makes the hatch model look great, but don't really work well in bump maps. (We hide the edges when creating the bump images.)

Thanks Chris.

This gives me some interesting stuff to work with.

Note: Your rocks were rotated at an angle, so the process creates an alpha image of
them. (Alpha images are transparent where there was no geometry in the original model.)

You can see some 3D detail here.

Note: Bump maps will never look better (or even as good as) a rendering of the same geometry in SketchUp. The advantage is that you can include an image in your model rather than a lot of geometry. You will want to use it for background detail, not for important foreground items. You cannot tell from this single image, but the bump map shading will change with the angle of the sun or other lights.

Also - bump maps are usable in OpenGl. They do not need a Ray Trace engine. So if we find a use for them we may be able to convince SketchUp to add them to the SketchUp or Google Earth renderers.