I prefer the fidelity of a non-notched wheel myself.

I would like to see more flexibility with scene making.

Buying out Indigo might be a lot cheaper. . .

Of course the technology is already commercially available by Microsoft.

Also, as we all know, touch screens have been around for decades and still languishes as an input method usually limited to public use information access, i.e. bank ATMs, airport information terminals, etc. to limit maintenance of peripherals and/or breakage or limit being vandalized. As well, there's a good reason this technology has remained out of the household or office environment. . .it requires a lot of energy to use 'hour after hour'. I don't know about you all, but I certainly wouldn't want to attempt to model a complex machine part for 3 hours sitting in front of a 36" monitor waving my hands the whole time, let alone standing at a 60" monitor doing the same.

Tom Cruise was quite dramatic in his hand waving 'orchestrations' in Minority Report, but let's see him do that in an eight hour business day.

P: Cyberdactyl

@robmoors said:

So if anyone comes to me with these arguments I just refer them to this:

A list of my models

And the gallery of this forum.

Very nice collection there.

P: Cyberdactyl

@unknownuser said:

@unknownuser said:

its not the tool you use, its how you use it!

Mirjman, IMHO I think you and I are on the same wave length about this, sorry, my previous post sounded a bit harsh, I misunderstood. What I can't understand though, if SU is just part of the process, why do some people have a problem with that? Maybe it is better to just not publicise your process? I am a proud SU user though

It certainly is an odd attitude to look at SU as 'insufficent' in some manner.
If you do master work with SU or some other software, it should recognized as such. It would be like saying, "M. C. Escher uses a pencil? Oh, well. . .it's nice doodling."

Similarly, from my experience, -some- who don't use an engineering or architectural graphic package everyday, but have 'drawn some lines' and 'added some text' several dozen times over the span of a few years have an odd attitude that such programs don't warrant recognition in the office environment. It's the, "Autocad? (or any graphic software). . . I've worked with it for years!" syndrome. However, those same few do have periods of 'seeing the light' when they come to the guy in the trenches everyday with the software wanting him to fix work that has been raped with exploding hatch and blocks ALL on the same layer, etc.

P: Cyberdactyl

Twice now in the last month I have run into new clients who, once they saw proposals by my firm were partially done in SU had less than enthusiastic responses. Not that the work was under par, no, they were pleased with the design ideas, it was more that the work was done with that "shareware software" their kids were playing with at school.

I explained SU Pro was a powerful application that was easy to learn, but difficult to master, but I still had a strong feeling SU had lost the dazzle it had even a few months ago. My only guess is that it is indeed now so popular everyone sees it as old hat.

Has anyone else had experiences similar to this recently?

P: Cyberdactyl

Heh, I've even grown to use my 30 minute autosaves to alert me to how long I've been working at a model.

P: Cyberdactyl

Here's a another with a generic electrical cord cross section. I made the plastic a bit too shiny.

(Cyberdactyl)

@unknownuser said:

If you have Autocad, you could use arc text, explode the text and import into sketchup.

Robert Good
http://www.digitalnursery.net

Great idea. Then simply extrude.

Cyberdactyl