@unknownuser said:

buy a mac.. then you can figure out why we tend to have more issues with our plugins.
thanks in advance

We know what the problem is: it's because you're on Mac
I've been using PC for over 20 years and in all that time I've had far less problems with it than with my MacBook in the past 2 and a half years.

SketchUp on PC is much faster and easier to handle than on Mac, for me anyway (just to stay on topic )

This is one piece of superb modeling! I wish I will ever become 1/100th as good as you...

@dave r said:

After you've traced around the room once, move the path straight up above the room and the molding profile. Then, running Follow Me won't consume the path. You could make it a component of its own and put it on a "Path" layer or just save it for later until you know you're finished with it.

Ok, I never thought of that... Great idea, thanks!
The path "disappearing" was one of my issues, making it into a group ment I couldn't do a follow me on it anymore. Moving it up, using it as a path and then make a group and hide it on a separate layer will work great.

This seems to have moved a bit off topic, sorry about that. But it's clear to me now.

@dave r said:

It certainly is possible to make it a group afterward. And it is quite simple. Why would you think it is "virtually impossible"?

Of course it is possible, but it is a lot of work selecting all faces and edges because there are a lot of them (see example). I am probably doing something wrong then.
I know there are several ways to select multiple objects (select right-to-left, triple click,...) but those always seem to include things I don't want it to select (geometry or groups/components which happen to be in the way).
So the only way is to double click on each and every face to select it and its edges, while holding the Ctrl-key...

Anyway, I will check out the profilebuilder, maybe that will make my life easier

@thomthom said:

If the operation is done in a model where other objects aren't grouped. Then it merge with other geometry. That's why I keep telling the people at my office to always group (or make components) out of everything - and organize the model properly.

You are right, I usually group most parts of the model, but things like walls (including holes for doors/windows etc) are not grouped. I should really remember doing that systematically...

PS I only use SketchUp about an hour a week or so, I am comfortable with the program but far from an experienced user... I spend more time reading about how to do this or that than I actually build things myself

a fast example

@thomthom said:

You need this plugin:
http://www.smustard.com/script/ProfileBuilder

Free version is also available:
http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=44237

Super, I'll check it out immediately!

@unknownuser said:

he's talking about history modeling.. (or at least that's the term i know it as)

-draw a path & profile
-follow me
-move, say, a vertex of the path
-the extrusion updates accordingly

Yes... I am very bad at explaining myself... But that's exactly what I mean.

@dave r said:

I think your work flow could be more efficient than you describe. I frequently have need to draw things like crown moldings but haven't done it the way you describe and have no problems.

If you extrude the profile without making it into a group first, it becomes virtually impossible to group afterwards (I make rather complicated crown mouldings with loads of corners, "popping out" on top of a column etc)

@dave r said:

What parameters?

The form of the profile, the path it follows,... If you need to make a change now, you need to delete it and start over.

I would love for some improvement in the follow me tool:

1. when doing a follow me, I'd like it to create a new group automatically --> now you need to make a group out of the profile, open the group, retrace the path within the group and then extrude. That's a lot of work, sometimes... Especially when you have complicated paths.
2. I'd love for it to "remember" the initial parameters so I can modify either the profile or the path afterwards, affecting the result, without having to redraw the complete thing.
3. Changing the profile also involves changing the number of faces/segments. For example, if you extrude a crown moulding with a round part in it, you should be able to change the number of segments in the profile if needed.

Hey everybody,
I thought I'd show you a small update on my progress.

In stead of modelling anything new, I think I'll spend the next couple of weeks cleaning it up.
The model is very messy: having over 30 million edges it is becoming unbearable to work with. I will have to draw the interiors in a separate file, replace all columns by even less detailed ones and abandon all invisible technical stuff (like supporting beams for the roofs and inside doors).
I need to rethink the model as well. For now, I've been doing all for which archaeological material was available the easiest. That's why you see the "severan extensions" in their flavian phase, the "vigna barberini" in its severan phase and the "Santa Maria Antiqua" in its domitianic phase, all in the same model... The idea was to have all phases in one model, and browse through them with scenes and layers. But that will be way too heavy I guess.

Anyway, it'll be another 10 years before it's finally finished but I love working on it

Regards,
Tom

Ok, also a bit off topic but still to do with modeling Ancient Rome...
One doesn't always have a chance to be in contact with and get the opinion of someone who is that closely related to the source as Mr Fano

Starting to assemble information on the "vestibule of Domitian" below the Domus Tiberiana to start modeling it, I came across a very interesting paper by someone at the Cordoba University, suggesting a totally different use of the building than what I've read before.

The most current options are convincingly refuted. I won't go into detail, but he claims that:

• it can't be the library of the Domus Tiberiana, since the niches are completely unsuited to house book scrolls
• for the same reason it can't be the Athenaeum (which, by the way, was erected by hadrian and the building already existed by then)
• it doesn't look at all like any temple we know, so the option Temple of Augustus is out too
• it would be quite strange to build a monumental vestibule on that spot, while according to all ancient authors describe the Clivus Palatinus giving out on the Area Palatina as being the main entrance to the palace
• the ramp does not alow for big groups of people to go up, it resembles more a private connection between the palace itself and the "vestibule" complex

In stead, they claim it could have been a new and larger Curia, to replace the Iulian one on the Forum which had burnt down and could house only about 300 senators, while under Domitian there were over 900.
Hints for this are:

• the shape; the three spaces closely resemble the Iulian Curia, which also had one assembly room, an atrium and a chalcidicum.
• the West hall could have easily held more than 600 senators, with the emperor/consuls seated right across the main entrance, just as the Curia
• keeping the new Curia close to the palace, but on a level below it, also shows the power of the emperor over the Senate

Furthermore they say that the building was never finished in its original form (the marble cladding and the vault to be constructed yet by the time of Domitian's death). In line with the damnatio memoriae which was cast over him, his successors (Hadrian most likely) changed the destination of the building to either a warehouse or an "insula" for slaves or the praetorian guard inserting rooms in the senate hall.

I'd love to hear your opinion on this

@hepf said:

The Claudianus was radically modified. ...
on top of the platform that we know nowadays as the Barberini wineyard.

As for my problem with drawing on a xy plane, Fluffy's suggestion doesn't quite solve the problem, I usually redraw in x ray mode a plan that lies at z = 0, and the point I try to draw on the plane gets sunk to the underlying drawing ... I would like to tell the program to freeze the z so the cursor stays put on the xy plane whatever is visible down there ...

Just minor details, but it's Claudianum (I think), and the word in English is vineyard.

I love the video, it is very clear and nicely done. Very nice effect with the construction of the Colosseum too!
I have some questions though, out of pure interest (and because you are so close to the source ).
In the pre-64AD situation, there is a temple facing the Palatine on the spot where Nero would later build his vestibule and Domitian his temple of Venus and Roma (visible at about 1:00 in your movie). What temple is that? Is it just a "plausible reconstruction" of yourself, are there actual remains? I don't recall having seen it on any map before...

About the z-plane problem, sorry I can't help. Maybe Csaba will appear with a better solution.
The thing I do when tracing a plan on z=0, is to draw it on z=0 in a group, and simply move the group upwards along the blue axis for the required height.

@pichuneke said:

An offtopic, but I believe that everybody here will be interested:

Found the exact place where Julius Caesar was assassinated (in spanish)

Very interesting and very surprising. I always thought the remains of the Pompeian Curia were located under the via di Torre Argentina, behind the temples, and completely invisible.

Another trivia on Caesar, while we're at it: many people believe that the temple of Caesar on the Forum was the place he was cremated, but it wasn't. He was supposed to be cremated on the Mars field and, going there from the rostra where his corps was displayed during the speeches of Octavianus and Marcus Antonius, people started to yell he should be cremated on the Capitoline hill. In this quarrel, two people suddenly set fire to the carriage and people started throwing flamable things on it so he was cremated on the spot.
The most probable location would then be somewhere between the rostra and the cross section leading to the field of Mars on one hand and mounting on the Capitoline on the other. So: about between the Porticus Dei Consenti and the temple of Saturnus, or just behind it.
That's my opinion, anyway

@hepf said:

I need some help for Sketchup (mostly from Csaba, I suppose). I often have to draw a floor plan, or something like that, on a fixed plane, let's say at z = 15. I am sure there must be a way to "freeze" the cursor so that it only moves in the xy plane, but so far I haven't found it ... and it drives me crazy ...

What I always do in that case, is simply draw a rectangle on the xy plane on te height you need and draw the floorplan on that. When it's finished, just remove the rectangle.

When I come home I will absolutely watch your video. I recognized parts of your model in the catalogue of the Divo Vespasiano exhibition, it made me smile

@hepf said:

C'mon, you are fishing for compliments! You are doing a wonderful job, very detailed. I work on simplified exteriors, much easier.
My objection is for the conic roofing in the gymnasium, I think a domelike roof would be more appropriate.
Suppose you already have these drawings, but if not it may help. Sheila Gibson was a fine lady and a great draftasman (draftswoman?).
Later on I'll get in contact to see if we can swap models, I have other things in my hands right now.

I'm really not fishing for compliments, promised! just jealous of your work and ability to let go of the details and draw something simple that still looks great. The level of detail I put in is more a hassle than an addition...

You are absolutely right about Gibson. I have a copy of her article she wrote with Janet DeLaine and Amanda Claridge for the British School at Rome, "The Triclinium of the Domus Flavia: a New Reconstruction". That's what I based the measurements of the interior orders on.

For the conical roof, that's indeed something I recently changed, based on a model of the "severan" extensions I saw from the people at DAINST.

Looking forward to a model swap, I'll try to advance a bit further. When the interior of the triclinium is done, I will attack either the interior of the Aula Regia or finish the outlines of the "no man's land".

My God, you make my model sink into oblivion...
I am - again - rethinking the whole thing. It was beginning to get so immense that I had to cut it into different files to make it manageable. And I barely began to add details...
If you want, I can mail you the pieces I already have. But as I said, they are still quite "crude". (it would be a wonderful opportunity for me as well to get your remarks on mistakes etc; there's many things I'm not sure about)

Here's some views of the triclinium interior, on which I'm working now.

Regards,
Tom

@d12dozr said:

There is the Polyreducer plugin you could try...

Cool, I'll try it out... The reviews aren't very positive but you never know

I did a quick search on this, but didn't seem to see an answer. If it is out there, sorry for posting it again and thank you for directing me to the correct topic

I am building a model of a building which I want to become quite detailed, especially the columns/capitals/architraves/...
There are many extrusions and to enhance the level of detail, I used 48 or 96-sided arcs as a basis for each one of them.
The model is growing larger than I expected though, so I need to reduce the file size for it to stay manageable (to give you an idea: I divided the model over 6 separate files each holding part of the building; each of these files is between 20 and 45MB large...).
The obvious way - to start with - is to reduce the number of faces on these extrusions.

Is there a way to reduce them without deleting the whole thing, drawing new profiles using arcs with less sides and extrude again?

Thanks!

Thanks Alan.
I know my way around SketchUp, but I'm a total nitwit in how to count faces etc. I thought the file size/number of faces/navigability were all very much related to each other.
My main goal to reduce file size (or better, if I understand correctly: reduce the number of faces) is I don't want to wait 30 seconds every time I click somewhere or move the camera.
If it doesn't matter a lot for the navigability of the model, I will indeed stick to my first idea to extrude the entabulature in a separate group.

About the column: it is really not that complicated. Much less than I would want it to be anyway.
It's a reconstruction, so the idea was to make a "simple" model first and then replace these raw capitals etc later on with very detailed components, modeled from the real remains.
But thanks for the link, I guess it might be an idea to project the details as an image onto the simple capitals in stead of making an actual 3D-version. Same for the frieze.

Cheers!

Hi everybody,

I was wondering...

Finding some new informations, I have to partly rebuild the basic model in the picture.

I already made a component out of the column and half an arcade, and copied it around the buildings perimeter. That's obviously the less "heavy" way.
But for adding the entabulature (the horizontal thingy on top of the arcades), which way would be the best to obtain a lighter model?

• make the entabulature in a group, separate from the column/arcade component, by using "follow-me" on a profile

• include a short part of the entabulature into the component with the arcade and the column which is copied around

• make a component out of a short part of the entabulature and copy it, but separate from the component with the column and arcade

Thanks in advance for any tips!
Tom

Hey all,
I thought I would post some pics of what I'm doing...
I didn't render them yet, I prefer to wait until the model is more finished before I start putting textures etc.
These are just most of the raw volumes (not quite finished) and the start of some deatils to the hippodrome.
A simple lay-out for Augustus' home and the Temple/Precinct/Libraries of Apollo are there, the "Vigna Barberini" will follow after that.

Don't hesitate to give comments, remarks, corrections, whatever! Always eager to learn...

Tom

@richardcherry said:

There is a plug-in for Blender 3D that does what you are requesting. You could use it and import it into SketchUp.

Yeah, I saw the blender plugin and it is very much like what I mean, only I don't like the results
The columns are very crude, and I think it will be easier to start over than to try adding detail to it in SU...

@unknownuser said:

I think maybe you had better supply examples of the various types of bases, columns and capitals. My imagination isn't as good as yours apparently.

There are many variations. That's why such a plugin would be helpful, in stead of re-drawing the complete column.
A base, for example, can have one or two or even three "tori" (a rounded edge) of different heights.
A shaft can have none, 20 or 24 flutes and the ribs between them can be "pointy" ("C" on the pic, mostly used for Doric columns) or "flat" ("F" on the pic, mostly used for Ionic and Corinthian columns). The fluting can start at the bottom of the shaft or higher up, it can also be filled with a round band.
The proportion between the diameter and the height of the column can vary.
Etc. etc. etc.