sketchucation logo sketchucation
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. jbacus
    ℹ️ Licensed Extensions | FredoBatch, ElevationProfile, FredoSketch, LayOps, MatSim and Pic2Shape will require license from Sept 1st More Info
    Offline
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 1
    • Posts 170
    • Groups 1

    jbacus

    @jbacus

    10
    Reputation
    1
    Profile views
    170
    Posts
    0
    Followers
    0
    Following
    Joined
    Last Online
    Age 56

    jbacus Unfollow Follow
    registered-users

    Latest posts made by jbacus

    • RE: Sketchup 64 bit?

      @jason_maranto said:

      To clarify -- I'm always interested in performance benefits for all users...

      Exactly, right? And that's what I care about as well. That's why I think it is worth spending time explaining these technical issues in such detail— I'd hate for folks to have the wrong expectations about the benefits available.

      Whether you think of SketchUp as a toy or not, performance is really the key issue here. "64-bit" just isn't a technology which delivers the kinds of performance improvement you're looking for. Wouldn't you rather have our development team working on stuff that will make a material difference for you?

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Sketchup 64 bit?

      These 64-bit threads always seem to head in more or less the same direction— here's what I've gleaned from this one so far. People want the SketchUp team to work on:

      performance improvements for all users: Users should be able to load, save, operate upon (ex: "explode") and render at interactive frame rates models with (some big number that gets bigger every time we increase overall system performance) of polygons.
      Everyone always benefits from improvement to SketchUp's performance. The reality (for all software systems, not just SketchUp) is that performance is always bottlenecked somewhere. We're always working on removing the 'next' bottleneck in line. The 'last' bottleneck we worked on was rendering performance for large models— SU8 has an entirely new rendering pipeline. 'Merge' operations (implicated in 'ungroup', 'explode', 'import' &etc.) are a reasonable 'next' bottleneck to work on, though there are other

      "64-bit" as a technology, however, really offers no panacea for performance in SketchUp. Specifically:

      • **64-bit modeling operations don't execute faster than 32-bit ones.**Look to faster CPUs for improvement to execution speed for core modeling operations. A single fast processor core.
      • 64-bit computing does not improve realtime rendering performance. Look to faster GPUs for improvement to realtime rendering performance. Lighter models will always render raster than heavy ones.
      • 64-bit computing does not improve file open/save performance. Look to faster disk I/O (as with SSDs) for improvement to disk-access operations. Larger files will always be slower to open than smaller ones.
      • 64-bit computing does not improve software reliability. 64-bit operations are just as likely to crash as 32-bit ones. Submit crash reports when you can— that's the only way we can know what went wrong.
      • 64-bit computing can address more memory, but SketchUp modeling operations are not bottlenecked by memory. Models of 1-2m polygons still fit neatly within 32-bits worth of memory.

      improvements for developers: Rendering engines (mainly, V-Ray; to a lesser degree, Maxwell) should be able to execute 'inside SketchUp' in a 64-bit environment, rather than running their rendering in their own thread.

      3rd-party rendering engines are free to execute operations in 64-bit environments if they design their architecture to do so. Many of them have done so today— there are significant architectural advantages to doing so. Some renderers, like Maxwell, market the ability to execute in a 64-bit environment (as well as the ability to do things like distributed network rendering) as an advanced feature that justifies purchasing their "Maxwell Studio" rendering suite.

      Oddly, perhaps, the single strongest argument for a 64-bit "version" of SketchUp hasn't really come up in this thread yet. Developers who implement .skp import|export in their applications using our freely-licensed SDK will benefit from 64-bit builds of our precompiled libraries when they begin shipping 64-bit builds of their applications. They don't strictly speaking need them, but it would simplify matters greatly if they could have them.

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Real world revit|archicad <-> sketchup

      Maybe it would help if you were to describe the data you want to exchange with Revit users.

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Real world revit|archicad <-> sketchup

      @pixero said:

      some things like wals with window holes in them isn't automatically transferable so workarounds have to be made.

      Alternately, Autodesk could improve their .skp import such that windows with cutting behavior are respected. I believe that both ArchiCAD and Vectorworks, for example, are able to do this. 😉

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Sketchup is Inacurrate???

      @gilles said:

      No what I we want for circle tool is chose center then pick any inference for axis then chose radius
      the same way rotate tool and protractor tool work.

      Sorry, but isn't that exactly the way the Circle tool works today?

      edit:
      @unknownuser said:

      No, he probably means this: http://sketchucation.com/resources/tuto ... click-drag

      Gotcha- you want to be able to set the working plane without using the inference system.

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Real world revit|archicad <-> sketchup

      While I don't think Autodesk widely promote the capability, Revit does implement a .skp import path which uses a library (the SketchUp C++ SDK) that we provide to them.

      Revit can import .skp models as either Mass or Family entities. It can also 'link' .skp files rather than importing them. A google search will uncover lots of tips and tricks to make this work.

      I've seen some very successful workflows where all modeling is done in SketchUp, .skp files are referenced into Revit and all construction documentation is done in Revit.

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Sketchup needs to be BIM

      According to the 2012 "AIA Survey Report on Firm Characteristics", of the 38% of U.S. architects who have purchased BIM tools for their firms, 91% are using those tools for "Design Visualization." I guess that's something that SketchUp does pretty well already.

      edit: I should also mention that only 27% of them are using their BIM tools for "Quantity Takeoff" or other related data/analysis tasks.

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Should Trimble write plugins?

      @dale said:

      Sorry, didn't mean to re-ignite the 32, 64bit debate with my comment

      See this thread or any of the many others on the same topic.

      @dale said:

      I was just trying to understand the difference between what's under the hood in the core, and what I put into the gas tank in the form of plugins.

      SketchUp's Ruby API exposes a broad range of SketchUp internals and it permits 3rd-party developers to build profoundly powerful extensions to SketchUp's core tool set. With power must come responsibility— it is entirely possible to write extensions which cause crashes and other sorts of general instability in the core SketchUp application.

      While most Ruby developers are quite good about testing their code inside SketchUp, the interactions between extensions are almost impossible for anyone to test. Many of you reading this thread probably have dozens of Rubies installed at the same time. There really isn't a good way to ensure that these will all work well together.

      You could argue that we should make it impossible for poorly coded Ruby scripts to crash SketchUp. In fact, we do two things in this area. First, we track down developers who have written code that causes crashes that we see in our crash reports— and we help them fix their code. Second, we modify Ruby methods inside SketchUp such that they are harder to crash. The reality is, however, that poorly coded Ruby scripts will always be able to crash SketchUp.

      As you heard me say at 3D Basecamp this year (about 35 min in) we are working to bring some order to the chaos of Ruby development. The Ruby API has been a great success from my perspective. I have even studied it academically. I think you'd probably all agree, however, that a little bit more structure wouldn't hurt. You've seen us already launching things that will help.

      There's a fine line between the work the SketchUp team does for Ruby developers and the work that those developers do for their user communities. Users love to have new features— but you can't have features without a solid platform underneath. We're all in this together.

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Sketchup is Inacurrate???

      @gilles said:

      and also a circle tool wich works like the rotate tool

      I'm not clear what you mean by referencing the Rotate tool. I think you mean you'd like a tool in SketchUp similar to LayOut's Arc tool— with which you set 'center point', 'arc start' then 'arc end'? Is that correct?

      john
      .

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus
    • RE: Sketchup is Inacurrate???

      I figured the main point was that you guys would like to have a true arc entity added to the object model from which can be generated arc-arc and arc-line intersections. And some new arc drawing tools to make them. You've seen me acknowledge that I'd like to have those, too— and also seen me explain why they aren't there today.

      The Ruby API exposes almost all of SketchUp's internals for the use of 3rd party developers. While it does allow them to write new tools that operate on the SketchUp object model, it doesn't allow them to make fundamental changes to that object model.

      Adding a a true arc entity would have to be done by us... and it isn't something that can happen quickly, easily or without risk. There is a feature request filed on the subject.

      john
      .

      Jeff: I suspect that the changes you want to see could be implemented in the Ruby API- someone would have to write a new offset (and FollowMe) tool that reverses the direction of the geometric tradeoff we made when we wrote our tools.

      posted in SketchUp Discussions
      jbacusJ
      jbacus