Well, thank you; I did that, and more specifically searched for face me trees. The first in the list returned with your search is not face me and is 3mb, not what I'm looking for. But I should have also clarified that I'm looking for trees without added photo bits or extra texture which bulk up the file size and also make for a look which I don't want. Extra lines, multiple branches, leafs and such are fine, though.
Posts made by brookefox
-
RE: Face me trees for SU, not render
-
RE: IMPORTANT: critical upgrade to Fredo6 scripts (grayout menu)
I have nothing to add but a humble pile of warm, clean compostable thanks
to all afflicted action figures
who figured this out and fixed it.
-
RE: DC StairCaseBuilder
Thank you, Howard. At heart, of course, I'm just another spoiled child, wanting it all on my plate, served up, with savory sauce.
Thank you for delivering.
-
RE: [Plugin] Repeat Copy UPDATED 2-24-2010
You are very kind, and yes it seems to be.
I will keep mine peeled.
Thank you much.
-
Face me trees for SU, not render
I've done searches and read threads; I understand I can create them myself, but I would rather just copy them. For use in SUF natively, for help in visualization and modeling but not for export or rendering. Summer deciduous and/or evergreen, not to be used in large quantities but efficiency always a plus, of course. Links or files much appreciated.
-
RE: [Plugin] Repeat Copy UPDATED 2-24-2010
Yes, yes, most useful and thank you, but I must respectfully insist: where do those nice face-me trees come from which are in the page 1 tutorial? Your private collection seems not searchable from here, and a nice woods they would make should I need some place to inhabit.
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
@unknownuser said:
Brooke has rejected all of my ideas out of hand
Uh, beg pardon.
Regarding your rejection of my rejection,
That's out of hand!
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
You have offered me a job description entailing a business plan I'm having a hard time endorsing. Going in and out of other progs as you again suggest still has the pitfalls mentioned earlier. As far as a 'solution' to my original problem goes, I'll have to re-read the thread, I guess, as I don't remember anything I can use. I mentioned in my original post that I was aware of the usefulness of Layout in addressing my issue, hoping to imply that I ain't got and don't want Layout.
I do appreciate your efforts.
@unknownuser said:
But I do get your dilemma. The "easy" way does seem to be a standing "edit" of a sort in a 2D program that modifies the image from SketchUp.
That leads me to something like MS Word. You can work in SU, export the current image, swap over to Word, click on the previous image there, go into it's properties and update/change the file that is the image source. I haven't experimented with the workflow, you might have to add a "Send to Back" operation on the image after you reload it. I'm not sure, but I think when you import an image into Word, you have the option of linking to the original file rather than keeping the data in Word, so you could Save in Word before you go to SU, then Revert in Word after you have exported the SU image and Word would automatically reload the new version.
Word will certainly let you add little masking bits that are invisible to the reader in the final version. You can lots and lots of Layout kinds of things in Word (but not dimensions and no click-through into the SU file).
All of the multiple steps in both SketchUp and Word could be automated with something like AutoIt3 (free for Windows), MacScript (free, do I have the name right?), or QuicKeys (Win and Mac, $120). Or Ruby in SU and Word VBA (both included with their products). Using any of these automation tools could get the in-and-out cycle down to just a couple of hotkey clicks.
Or you could go back to my rejected suggestion at the top of this post and decide that adding 20 extra layers is worth $25 per layer that you aren't having to spend on Pro, and worth an amortized couple of hours per layer of programming time to get AutoIt or MacScipt to work for you or even $6 per layer and still some programming time with QuicKeys.
You have several options, nearly all free, all very doable, with varying degrees of difficulty and usability.
If you go the max-DIY-automation route, Ruby and VBA or AutoIt or MacScript, you might have a package that you could sell 25 copies of for $20 and pay for a copy of Pro.
I hope I've provided a perspective or a suggestion that helps.
-
RE: How to Post Pics
Thanks for the link, Rich. I tried it and will again but display behavior was actually erratic and jumpy, and I could not easily configure the keyboard shortcuts.
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
@august said:
I'm waiting to hear why Layers and Scenes doesn't work for you.
There are scores of layers not being displayed in the scene shown, likewise different layer sets in scores of other scenes. The offending items are parts of groups on layers which I want displayed in this scene, i.e., '0 wall foundation / crawl - EXIST - footings, posts, misc to remain'. I think the most viable approach would be to bust the items out of their 'proper' group and put them in another not to be displayed group but this is tedious as it would only be effective for this one scene and so is a poor solution, in my opinion.
Another shortcoming of Free (incoming worm-can!!!) which you perhaps are not afflicted with, like many, and so have not recognized, is its inability to print to scale, in spite of SU claims to the contrary. My usual workaround may afford me a means of addressing my problem in hard copy, by editing the PDF. That is not, however, what I was looking for, and I haven't really figured that one out, either.
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
Thanks, anyway. I don't want Pro as to me it is not 'pro' enough; I have had AutoCAD, do have Vectorworks, and have not sufficient need for a $500 SU as well. Perhaps if I were not a one man shop and did more and larger projects than I do... As it is I'm just working on this little issue, this little fraction of an inch wherein all is revealed.
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
@unknownuser said:
What I've gotten so far is that you would like to be able to make a section cut, but sometimes you want to edit the result. You can do that editing in Layout by, for instance, putting a white box with white lines over the bit you want to mask out, but you have not figured out how to do that in SketchUp alone. You hint that just hiding the offending bits is not a solution, but I don't have a clue why.
Hiding is not a preferred option, ever, but in this case it is not because the offending bits are part of geometry which is generally wanted; it is just the bits which are between the cutting plane and the cut face a fraction of an inch away that is not wanted. In the images, the little triangular bit is a cut pier block like the ones shown to the right down stream, but the little cut piece is impossible to make sense of and so is not welcome.
@unknownuser said:
I have only limited familiarity with Layout, but I do have access to a system with Layout on it, so I could experiment to understand your goal. I do get that you're looking for a workaround that can be used with SU Free, but I don't yet understand the real issue. I hope you can clarify that for me.
Since I often make the claim that one can do just about everything with Free that one can with Pro, I have a small ego stake in seeing if I can make that true in this case.
I daresay, respectfully, that is you ever tried to do architectural production work with free you would immediately withdraw your ego from the stake, or give it up. Wise me up here if I'm wrong.
(I'll insert some images here later.)
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
I appreciate that and them, TIG. Thank you. I should revisit them. My first attempts over a period led me to give up just because of the shenanigans you had to go through to make them work and which the users thereof could not therefore be free of when editing them, etc.. I decided for my purposes that I would just use the native stuff and try to work around the limitations: print only in ortho or very selected 3D views where the true nature of the text and or leaders was not evident, owing to the 2d nature of the view. If I had ongoing or extensive production needs I would have given up long ago. This time, though, VectorWorks remains unsheathed, and I plod along.
( 2Dlines, (of 2DTools fame) consisting actually as they do of faces, don't display in hidden line mode?)
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
Well, I appreciate your input and intention, even if it helps me not. I appreciate SUF very, very much; maybe you thought I was griping and that was likely my fault. I've been misunderstood on more than one occasion, and have rightfully, I think, been dissatisfied by claims made for SUF which I think are beyond what it provides, but that was not at all my purpose here. I was wondering if I were missing some capabilities of free that could help me do what I want to do. I'm not exporting to another program for the reasons you mention: time, tediousness and the need for back and forth updating. But doing it like I am may make FREER or at least better able to deal with the limitations which I share with my enabler (SUF). Thanks again for your tips.
-
RE: No Fudge With Free
I was referring to the dearth of 2D tools in free, as compared esp. with Pro / Layout. In the examples above, I know of no way to mask the entities I don't want showing as they are valid parts of the model situated between the cutting plane and the cut plane face which has been created some fraction of an inch away. With layout, as I understand it, I could mask the items in a viewport equivalent to my heart's content. I believe the text abilities of Layout facilitate 2D production work far beyond that which can be achieved handily with Free. It is positioned as a viable 2D production tool as well as 3D modeler.
(After reading back over the first post, I tried but did not succeed in clarifying the language a bit.)
-
RE: How to Post Pics
Thanks, Rich.
Users of Vista and I guess 7 have a surprisingly handy screen capture / annotate tool included with their OS called Snippet in Vista, under 'accessories'; saves are in jpg. It is missing an auto-save feature which Picasa has but which is prone to derailment and which only saves in bmp. IrfanView's screen saver has no auto-save but will convert to jpg prior to save if desired.
-
No Fudge With Free
By that I mean, when drawing building (model) sections it's hard to fool the program or its output that something is different from the way the model actually is, with masking or whatever. Section cuts with faces may hide what is behind, but since they or any masking layers, which I use for note placement, must be placed fractionally behind the cut in order to be visible, they cannot hide geometry which is present but not wanted to be displayed, say for instance because one doesn't want section info in an elevation or perhaps because the model isn't perfect.
In the pics following, SU seems to be trying to help out by not displaying entities which it should be displaying and which it sometimes does, but which I don't want displayed but haven't figured out how to conveniently hide, say by busting up a group and hiding the offending sub-group.
Have I got this right? Any way around it?
I guess there is also the muddying water of the way graphics cards display what SU sends. Is the correct display for the cut 'edge' of a cut face nil at the 'edge' itself?
Yes, I know that in some small part fudgability is what Pro and Layout bring to the 2D table.
-
RE: How to Post Pics
This was appended to another thread posting (by me), rather off subject there.
The image shows the SU upload dialog which leads one to believe you can upload more than one attachment at a time but which then ignores the request. I must be doing something wrong as folks seem to be able to use this. Simon mentioned a 3 file limit; if so, the dialog should say so, but I have no success with even 2. After browsing to and adding the files, and hitting the available singular 'add the file', only the first file is added.
-
RE: [Plugin] follow me rotate
The renaming (and re-starting SU, as opposed to just re-loading the scripts) worked, but behavior is erratic. (I didn't want to trouble you further, Chris, if I could make the re-naming work.)
First 4 images show a failure with a welded straight path (called a curve by SU) and a rectangular face.
Second 4 show success with a truly (apparently) curved path and a round face.
The final image shows the SU upload dialog which leads one to believe you can upload more than one attachment at a time but which then ignores the request.
-
RE: Revolutionary SketchUp Library
My confused reading is a little different: I assumed he meant made electronically available, that is, as this forum is available. So since it already is, for free, what is the change, some sort of simplified delivery, bundling of available knowledge? Seems like the hard part may be the hardware provisioning to allow access to the web, but perhaps he means something more academically technical than is proffered here? I missed the point.