Like the Ford example. Some things we hope to be "cheap", meaning inexpensive, but serviceable. Also a person can be cheap, meaning they won't spend money even at a reasonable cost. Some other uses are too derogatory to mention. But it also means something that is poor quality. This is my experience in the US anyway. A common warning: "Those aren't exactly cheap."is more about the cost than the quality.
Physics-based engine takes constraint and simulate the result of a movement, considering these constraints (joints, gravity, etc...).
In Animation plugins (like Animator), you really specify each movement of objects and cameras. So it's not a simulation. Indeed, you have more control on the result, since it is always exactly what you designed.
Normally there is forum from any Program! (and now some FaceBook, Twitter, Instagram even Discord, Twich etc who are less practical than traditional Forum) 💚
Well, I've never had anything to leak. It just seems like a big leap to a conclusion that doesn't have any merit and it feels a bit like stirring the pot.
That item causes SketchUp to scan the model's geometry database looking for conditions that violate the database's integrity rules. That is, data that should not have happened yet somehow did, and that affect the engine's ability to traverse the database - such as an illegal object id. As in any other database, allowing such violations to persist runs the risk of causing more violations and eventually causing SketchUp to crash. So far as I know they have never documented the rules (just as they have never documented the database schema itself).
My own experience is that most of the time the fixups involve internal issues that mean very little to the end user. And, most of the time the fix has no detectable effect on the model. On rare occasions however the fix can destroy geometry that was entangled in the violations. I don't know whether your disconnected dimensions would be considered an integrity violation or not.
As usual, Dave is correct. Probing with Ruby in the console I see that all three of the dimensions that appear to relate to the rack have lost their connection to geometry in the model. I don't know how that happened, but they should be deleted and recreated.
Yes. And it's not new to SketchUp 2017. That's been a feature for years and years. You have the secondary pane displayed. You can hide the second one by clicking on the up arrow in the upper right corner of the window.
Screenshot - 11_3_2017 , 8_38_48 PM.png
You can set one to the In Model collection and the other to another collection. The In Model materials are the ones that can be edited and the tab is displayed only in the primary pane.
You can also use the second pane to save new In Model materials. Set the top one to In Model and the other to your desired custom collection. Then drag thumbnails from the top to the bottom.
This has been discussed many times on the forum, the short answer is, so far, no.
The best workaround I know of is to explode every group and component down to single entities, this makes the model pretty much useless for modification.
There are some developments in converting Skps to view only formats. IE; WebGl.
I don't know much about this.
