They are only 700k in size as well, which is pretty neat.

I wonder whether this approach would lend itself to a Ruby script. Once you have the branching structure, level 1, level 2, level 3 etc created with simple components, if the Ruby script determines the insertion point, rotation, angle of each component, you could swap out or load in any number of more complex branches. This is in effect what I did manually with the predefined components. I made the paths for the branches manually, used Tapermaker to create the 3d extruded versions, and built the (and modified Richard's) 3d leaf clusters.

Let's say you have an L-system script which creates the basic structure, you could have modules which create the leaf components, and the branches. Then, you swap the simple components for the more complex ones and you're there.

I think one could create a fairly straightforward typology for trees. There are a few basic variations of form, which simplify the hundreds of variations in the parameters to build trees. For example a scots pine (like most conifers) has a single trunk, with branches radially around the trunk, projecting horizontally. Larch trees have a similar single trunk with branches that are angled downwards and curl up at the ends. Birch trees also have a primary single vertical trunk element (although some species have more) with slender branches that are generally angled upwards, but tend to droop. Oak trees have a short (relative to the height of the tree) primary trunk, which branches into a number of thick branches which are inclined to branch more or less horizontally. There are also only a few types of basic leaf arrangements.

I think that it ought to be possible to build up maybe a dozen basic templates which will cover maybe 80% of the most common tree types.

I realise that this is a gross over-simplification, but having tried at least 8 different tree generation applications, it is difficult and time-consuming to create trees that look like real species. Without any real understanding of the botany behind the tree growth patterns, one can struggle to create something that looks like a real example of the species.

The application Woody3d (http://woody3d.com/home/) is a good example. If you look at their tree library, some of the examples there look good, but nothing at all like their real life counterparts. It looks like a nice application, and some of the rendered images look good, but the trees look a bit limited. For example it doesn't seem to be able to simulate branch droop. One of the things that stops me spending a lot more time on this is my limited knowledge of trees

There are lots of Open Source applications whose code that could quite legitimately be used for this, but I suspect it would be a very time-consuming task!

Thomthom's Selection Toys (http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?t=14975) is indispensable for this. It's a one-click operation and one of my essential plugins.

When you have a renderer which renders instanced components, using 3d trees becomes feasible, as long as you use some form of proxy object in SU to make performance acceptable.

There are many 3d tree applications, and to the best of my knowledge, none of them have instanced leaf components when imported into SU. Sometimes you can use plugins to regularise these things. Thom also has a plugin called Component Comparison (http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?t=30143), which might also help with components which aren't quite identical.

Updated file uploaded. I'm sure many of you can improve on my efforts

I have optimised the file to make it easier to swap out components to change the leaves and branches.

TREE FACTORY 2_1_4.skp.zip

I have taken Richard's excellent work on this, added some more branch and leaf types, and done some restructuring with regard to names and insertion points, and come up with something that can build some pretty nice low poly 3d trees.

I probably ought to warn you that it does take a little time and effort, but the results are good and render fairly quickly.

Apologies for the Podium 'plug', I have just left the info bar on to show the render time on my 2010 Core i5 MacBook Pro.

TREE FACTORY 2_1_4.skp.zip

This still doesn't work on the Mac. In case anyone is tempted to try the updated version in the hope that it will work on the Mac, nope. Not for me, and after all the posts so far, I'm not the only one having trouble with this. This updated version doesn't actually fix anything as far as I can see.

To summarise:-

The dialog works. This latest version has the default values as krisidious shows in his post. I'm grateful for this, it was one of the things I thought that might be the cause of the plugin not working. However, the ivy will still not 'grow'.
Also the problem where this plugin inserts the leaf components into every single model still persists. This is a bug in my opinion.

I'm guessing that it's bad etiquette to modify someone else's plugin, but I really wish someone would fix these issues. It's one I have been itching to use for a long time, and it's still frustrating that it almost works.

I haven't seen anything from Pierreden for some time, but surely he wouldn't mind someone else fixing this...

Are you planning to build on your programming skills and add functionality to this?

What I have always found really frustrating is when you use the group/component 'handles' to rotate components. It is a neat time-saver, but for years I have always wanted to rotate about a component's origin.

Alternatively if anyone else out there has a plugin that does this, I would be grateful if someone could please point me in its direction.

Gaius, you're a Godsend! I have struggled with this for years actually, but haven't persisted because until now, I haven't really needed the facility.

Thanks a million!

Apologies if this is a stupid or obvious question, but is there a plugin that will do this?

I can create cutting components, but the fairly obvious limitation is that it seems to me that cutting plane has be be flush with a surface. This means that (if I have understood everything correctly and am doing it properly) you can't create components which have a cutting plane in the middle of the geometry so that the component 'penetrates' the face.

I want to make a recessed spotlight with a bezel. I can create the component which has the recessed body of the fitting, and that will cut. I can create the bezel and glass diffuser, and that will also cut a face. However it doesn't appear to be the case that I can combine both elements and have the face cut so that the body sits behind the face, and the bezel sits in front.

The reason I'm asking in the this particular part of the forum, is because I have seen plugins which cut multiple faces for things like door and window insertion, so I'm presuming it's possible.

If I have got something wrong or have misunderstood the principles, please let me know!

Actually every one of my Macs in the office (3 in total) has the same problem of being unable to import dwg files in SU Pro. This has been the case for every version of SU8 pro that I have used, and in the office it makes no difference whether we are on Lion or Snow Leopard.

The import seems to work fine, the geometry seems to be imported, and the summary dialog pops up with the imported entities, but then SU crashes.

Works fine on my MacBook Pro at home with the same version of SU Pro 8.0.11751 though. This probably has more plugins than any of the other machines.

Pathcopy is not the culprit for me because it's on my home machine which works, and on my office machine, which doesn't.

Works fine on the PC under all situations.

@valerostudio said:

Autodesk or Adobe are the only two company's I think should have got their hands on this.

SketchUp is being used every day to make design decisions, visualize ideas, and document creative thoughts. I think a company that is closely aligned with this industry should be handling what happens to it after Google.

Are you smoking something?

Autodesk - those people who introduced the cut down version of their main app, and then simultaneously increased the prices of both their high end and low end applications, introduced annual updates with file formats which are incompatible with older versions, then introduced annual licence fees for upgrades and support. Now their entry level app is more expensive than some of their fully-featured competitors.
In addition they have swept up a load of competing and complementary companies and absorbed them into one large, corporate anonymous whole, with crap customer service, and zero understanding of what most of their customers really want.
They have improved since Carol Bartz left, but not nearly enough...

AutoDesk would have been the absolute worst nightmare for SketchUp users!

@valerostudio said:

I hate to even say it, but I would have rather seen Autodesk buy it.

Go and wash your mouth out

Why?

@unknownuser said:

From the people at Trimble I have met and talked to I can tell you...they are lot like we are, they "get" SketchUp. They know we are passionate about SketchUp. They know our users are passionate about SketchUp. They know our users are not just some people that use SketchUp, it's a community of people who don't want their baby being touched by a stranger.

I excited about the future! I don't know what is going to happen in the future but I'm moving forward with the SketchUp team to Trimble to get this party started.

Thanks a lot Brad, this helps! The corporate ethos is important I think. When you see a faceless corporation, you tend to think the worst. It's nice to know they have identified the passion, and more importantly, have some of their own!

I agree 100% with kwistenbiebel's calls for a 3d engine that works much better with a massive polygon count. Any BIM type development is definitely going to need it!

@mrdentini said:

I really can't believe that people judge a company by just looking at their web site!

What other basis to we have right now? How do you assess any company or individual? If it's face to face, it's by what they say and how they say it, and to an extent how they look. If it's a company, you look at how they present themselves on the internet, in print, in reviews.

Have a look for the software applications quoted, and tell me that you have come away really excited.

I'm not saying change is bad by any means. Hell - I'm not even saying Trimble is bad either. We all have our views about how SU progressed under Google. It definitely improved, but perhaps we all expected that a company with the vast resources of Google and its reputation for hiring the smartest people, would make available the resources to push SketchUp far further than it did. Google's acquisition of SketchUp was different. It was a company we were all familiar with. We had all used its services and we all knew its values. We certainly knew that it was dedicated to giving away free applications. Admittedly you paid for this with your privacy, but for those of us who aren't rich or secretive, it was great! We know very little of Trimble. An analogy would be like a guy in a sharp suit and dark glasses who comes along to your favourite and much-loved coffee shop, slaps a sign on it saying 'Under new Management', and says "Thank you very much, we'll be in touch..."

I love SketchUp, I have been using it since V2. I was one of the very first users here in Wales in the UK, and it was a revelation. I really look forward to the times when I don't have to spend hours and hours writing documentation and managing my staff or my construction contracts, and I can play with SketchUp building 3d models of new buildings. And I use the word 'play' intentionally. SketchUp is the part of my job where I have the most fun and enjoyment!

I really want to be enthusiastic about the new ownership and new potential. Having looked into Trimble and their product portfolio, I can't see any joy or love or creativity or inspiration, and I'm not usually prone to hippy-type statements like this. So yeah, I need a bit of convincing from the dudes in the suits...

@jbacus said:

Since this deal hasn't yet closed, there are specific legal restrictions that control what Trimble can say. That's why you don't see them here. Until then, you'll have to be satisfied with what's said on this site. You should expect to see more information added there as things progress.

John, we're really glad you are here answering questions, and we know you and the team are apparently all really happy with what has been promised/offered to you. It's not that we don't trust you, we (certainly I) haven't seen anything so far that gives mea any reason to trust Trimble. They may be good guys, but their website is a mess and it doesn't relate to to or engage end user customers in the slightest. It's vague, unfriendly, difficult to find stuff, and full of commercial speak that is almost meaningless

We've all seen mergers before where the staff are all really pleased, because it often means job security and direction, where previously it was lacking, and sometimes it also means more money. However, I've tried to look at what the company already does, as a means of giving me confidence that these are the guys to push SU forwards in ways we have all been dreaming of.

So far it's not looking good. No screenshots, no Mac versions, no galleries, no nice friendly product pages, no forums, no awe-inspiring 3d software portfolio. This is the public face of a company that is principally known for making survey equipment, and they think we're going to be enthused about the takeover on this basis? They don't even speak the same language! This sentence, "SketchUp and the 3D Warehouse, together with other Trimble Tools from Accubid, HHK, Meridian, Plancal, QuickPen, Tekla, Trimble Business Center and the Trimble Connected Community will provide a stand-alone and enterprise solution that will enable an integrated and seamless workflow to reduce rework and improve productivity for the customer" gives us some clues about some of the other apps Trimble have.

However they are a disparate bunch of totally separate applications, mainly related to building services, with minimal information about any of them and no evidence of a consistent corporate branding or integration strategy. Without exception, all the websites for these products are uniformly awful. How is this integration going to work? Obviously that's rhetorical Are they proposing to make Mac versions of all their applications, or drop the SU Mac version, or basically leave the Mac version to stagnate without the stuff they are proposing to integrate.

Most of us don't use 'field data models' and aren't terribly excited about 'project management tools'. We love SketchUp because it's creative, fun and easy.

I don't buy the argument that Trimble can't or won't say anything until the deal is done. What on earth is wrong with coming out with a nice reassuring statement saying something like, "Hi, we're Trimble, you might not have heard of us, but we've been doing this and that for such and such years, we're really excited to be taking on SketchUp, we know there is a vibrant community, we would like to reassure you that we aren't planning to kill off all the cool stuff. We love your enthusiasm and we're really looking forward to working with you all to make SketchUp a better product, with more relevance (or whatever) to you all for the future." Not exactly going to make the shareholders or investors run for the hills is it?

I'm not totally averse to the idea of integrating some new functionality from existing applications into a more advanced, building-specific version of SketchUp, with better support for site survey data and with integrated modules for structural and building services design in a BIM-type IFC compliant wrapper. I'm just not totally convinced that Trimble are the people to do it well without losing the things about SketchUp we all love.

I've spent a little more time looking at Trimble. You can't get any information on their software. You can't even find out whether the software runs on Mac. Tekla doesn't, and it doesn't look like any of their software does. How is this going to work with integration with other Trimble apps? Quite simply if they don't have any Mac apps, what is the point in spending money on upgrading the app to have the same features as the Windows versions, if there is no Mac version of their other software to integrate with?

And try finding Tekla BIMsight on the Trimble website!

One could reasonably infer that Trimble would seek to implement BIM features into SU. I don't have a problem with this per se, because BIM is complex and cumbersome, and SU is the opposite. If SU could remain substantially as it is but implement BIM functions in a simple and straightforward way, it doesn't seem so bad. In fact if it means we can all still use SU and not have to pour thousands into AutoDesk and Bentley's coffers, that's not so bad either!

However it would most likely need a faster 3d engine. We all know that SU performs poorly with complex high polygon models. I would also hope that they don't screw around with the interface.

I'm kind of worried. Still.

I very much appreciate the time that John and Mark have taken to post here to allay concerns. Unfortunately it's not worked too well.

The really nice thing about @Last and Google, is that they were (are) very much forward facing companies who fully engage with customers and are dedicated to understanding their requirements. You could tell just by looking at the Google and @Last websites that the companies were dedicated to making things simple, transparent, easy and user-focussed. That's the way SketchUp started, and that's the way it stayed.

We've had no-one from Trimble here to say anything about the application they have just spent a lot on, with millions of users. Why?

Their corporate announcements are all full of commercial jargon which makes no sense to me at all. The fact that I haven't heard of them makes no difference. The fact that there isn't much in the way of understandable useful information about their products does.

What can we learn about Trimble from their website? That communication with end users in a clear and friendly way isn't something they seem to think is important.

SketchUp is based around a huge community of active and passionate users, who work tirelessly and freely to add value to the product for the benefit of the community.

Does anyone here remember what happened to Ecotect when AutoDesk bought it? The team was really happy at the time and thought that it represented a new start with lots of new resources dedicated to continued development. To me it seems a completely different application, subsumed into the corporate AutoDesk product range. Everyone I have spoken to about the application tells me it has lost its soul and hasn't improved. Ecotect had a community and a development team that really engaged with its customers. Now it's just standard Autodesk fare.

So - Trimble, if you are reading, talk to us. Convince us that you really do understand and care how SketchUp works, and why everyone loves it. Tell us that you'll give the team their heads to push development faster than it did before and that we'll all really, genuinely love it even more. We know the SU team gets it, but they aren't paying the bills and running the show.

@kais said:

nice rendering but 53 mins. is too much
now in Lumion 2 you can do it less than 53 sec

Yeah, but the quality won't be the slightest bit comparable. I can make an omelette in around 60 seconds, but I wouldn't like to eat it!

I've seen what Lumion does, I've seen what all the render engines can do. They all have their benefits and drawbacks. Lumion's main benefit is speed, its main drawback is quality. Yes, I'm pretty sure you'll disagree but you'll be wrong - certainly as far as Podium is concerned.

Actually, there are some German people that will find the Fuhrer comment offensive, or at least a little bit irritating (to be honest - I do, and I'm British ), and the thing is - most Germans will be far too polite to mention it!

Of all the things you could think to say about the country, you have picked the single worst person in their entire history. It's like making jokes about Serbia that in the not so distant past some rather unpleasant people were murdering their neighbours in the name of national unity - it's not funny and it's not nice.

I know you weren't trying to be even the tiniest bit offensive, but it's best to avoid comments like this

There is also a problem with this plugin in that it inserts your materials into every model. This is not a good thing because it means that unless the model is purged, it will be larger than it needs to be. In the past I have had problems when components or textures are inserted into every model by default.