There's two sets of coordinate systems at play. One is the photomatch - pair of red and green dashed lines, red and green vanishing points, the yellow horizon and the yellow Origin point. The other is the model, or 3D space, with red, green and yellow axes, meeting at their own Zero point.

What I'm having trouble with is aligning these two coordinate systems.
Your suggestion to reset the model axes seemed like it would be helpful, it at least sounded like it could be the solution. However, the option to reset the axes is greyed out; I presume they are then already in their default state.

The discussion if the photo is suitable for the photomatch is irrelevant, since with a different Sketchup template I achieved the result I wanted, seen in the screenshot on the left.
The reason I'm asking how to remedy this problem is to fix my own template and to gain understanding what might have gone wrong in the past that lead to this situation.

I'm afraid there's been a misunderstanding.

When I click on the gear icon, it just gives me the regular photomatch editing. I still cannot relocate the zellow square to the zero point in Modelspace.
Am I clicking on the wrong gear icon?

Hello everyone

After a long time I needed to do some light 3D work and I chose SketchUp again for its quite easy to use PhotoMatch feature.

After struggling for a long time I realized that the reason why my model axes and the PhotoMatch axes are not aligning is because the origin and vanishing points do not match anymore. When I used one of the default SU's templates, it all matched and I was able to measure the stuff I needed.

So my question is this - how can I move the PM origin point back to 0 in the model?

Adding screenshots for reference, both of the wrong and the correct result.

Hi,

So I've recently circled back to using SU and V-Ray for a sideproject of mine. It is an interior refurbishment project and I wanted to explore the material options of a wardrobe assembly.

What I wanted to do in V-Ray is apply a texture to the assembly. I largely succeeded, by using the Texture Blend material, with Texture A having the original color and Texture B the bitmap with alpha channel, setting Blend Amount to 1 and ticking the Composite box.

However, if I wanted to see what it looks like at half the size (keeping the aspect ratio of the texture), I would get the image twice (four times in fact) on the whole doors. That's when I tried to untick the option "Tile" in the bitmap settings under the Placement tab.

This however makes the texture completely disappear from the whole stack. I tried modifying the texture position in SU, in hopes of "finding" the decal, to no avail. Resizing the texture in SU also didn't bring any results.
Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong?

Thanks for any ideas.

Hi guys,

Thanks for the replies.

@TIG, SketchupIvy is exactly what I'm using to generate branches right now. The trouble is, I would like to generate loads of them (and ideally make them follow the underlying geometry of the cables). This is my current procedure:

As you can see, this is only one branch, which, when growing vertically, gives a good result. But even if this branch turned out well, do I have to try my luck getting a good RNG per each plant? What if I had diagonal leading cables? What if they were on a curved surface (like for example here)? I guess I would love to be able to tell the branches "stay within Distance from these Curves when growing."

@Pilou, the component replacer is an interesting suggestion, although that turns the whole thing into a panelling problem, see:

...where black is the steel cable geometry, blue are the branches and red are the component boundaries. Probably not a general solution, but it could work in this simple case.

Hello all,

I am trying to grow ivy / vines for a garden for an archviz project. My goal is to produce a result similar to what can be seen here or here.

Generating leaves is easy thanks to Skatter. I am looking for a way to speed up generating the guiding geometry (ie. branches) that grow along the cables.

So far I can use the Ivy Generator extension combined with Skatter, the result being such:

...which, to be honest, is not too bad, but not great either. I have to click manually for every branch/plant to grow, which can be time consuming. Also I think the directionality of the growth would be problematic.

Hence my question - is there I way I could automate generating the guiding geometry (branches) on a surface? Or do you have any tips on how to speed this process up? Thanks a lot.

bump does a similar plugin exist already? or am i just bad at googling?

in this case, there IS a correct FOV to be had, and it's the angle between the two lines defined in the brief. I was looking for a way to get it correctly from the geometry, not having to measure and type in the angle.

@hieru said:

You can do it using faces. Select a face then Right Click > Align View.

Thanks, that helps in some way, although I'm not sure I understand completely.

Align View aligns with the normal vector of the face, ie I could get the viewing direction after ensuring the lines are of equal length, but I still would need a tool or a way to set the FOV itself (i don't want to guess it using the zoom tool).

EDIT: ok, it kinda works, I think I'm fine with guessing the FOV for now. The way used this was that I created a face perpendicular to the viewing direction, set the camera with Align View, position the camera and then eyeball the field of view so that the face's edges are aligned with my screen.

Hi,

Is there any way to set the camera FOV and its direction along geometric lines defined in the model? In an architectural competition, we have currently the camera view defined with only two lines. To set the camera position I am using the Position Camera tool, which is easy, but I still have to guess and eyeball the field of view. I would like to do this with a few clicks (define left/right edge or something similar)

thanks for any suggestions