"this community is only a drop in the ocean compared to the multiple millions of active SketchUp users in the world, and I very much doubt that anywhere near even 5% of world-wide Pro users would see tangible gains from adding 64-bit support"
Andrew[/quote]

Andrew, I would disagree on several points here. First, while the active users from here may be 'a drop in the bucket' consider that many in the rest of the ocean are people who have the free version installed and are modeling things for fun from their basements. For many of us here, Sketchup is our bread and butter. It is a tool in our business plan. The type of users represented here are your biggest evangelists, scripters, salesman, and customers - though small by percentage. By ignoring them for the vast ocean, you may slowly loose some of your greatest assets. Furthermore, if you really are aspiring to compete with the 'big boys' as it relates to BIM and IFC, you simply cannot ignore the 64X issue. Not developing 64X sounds like a dollars and cents decision, which may, in the long run, prove to be short sighted. Not going to 64X may also be tipping the hand as to who the intended user base is, and it seems that may not be many of us here.

Second, I seriously doubt only 5% of users would realize the performance improvement. Anyone working on a large architectural model is familiar with the perfromance issues especially with terrain. If this isn't an issue, why does almost every Basecamp have sessions on working with large complex models?

Kaas,

My apologies, your explanation is fine. I can follow it and will give it a try. Thanks again!

Kaas,

Excellent work! Is there any way you could supply more detail on your process with Mesh Lab of converting points to mesh? I have been experimenting with downloading point clouds from Earth Explorer. I did try the Trimble extension. Unfortunately it only loads Trimble's file format, I am assuming, from scans from their equipment. The Global Mapper program allows you to crop your model, and it allows you to separate topo points from vegetation and building points. But I do not think it allows you to create a mesh. It costs around $500.

[quote="brewsky"]I am a "architectural engineer"(i hope it's correctly translated , and in my spare time I try to make a BIM plugin for sketchup, but it would be great if the SketchUp team would make a real SketchUp BIM-addon(without losing sketchup's coolness and simplicity )

As a user of both Revit and Sketchup, I agree with Brewsky's idea of a BIM plugin that doesn't sacrafice Sketchup's coolness and simplicity. I think the idea of plug and play is a good one. To me trying to transform Sketchup into a Revit knock off, would be a huge mistake, because it would mean losing the things that make Sketchup great. Currently, Revit and Sketchup are two unique tools in my tool box that are used for different purposes. Sketchup is used for design and visulization, and Revit is used for documentaion, coordination, analysis, and basically taking a project from design development through CD's and final construction. To me Sketchup's current strengths lend themselves to the beginning phases of a project, and Revit to the later phases. Given the choice between the two I would choose Sketchup hands down when it comes to modeling and visualization. It is more inuititive, faster, and easier to learn and use. If I am on a Revit project and have to produce renderings, or model design options, I often export my Revit model and bring it into Sketchup. I can model 3 design options for a project, to a nice rendered quality, much quicker in Sketchup than I can in Revit. But it is hard to make those modeling efforts pay off after one of the design options is chosen and we move to construction documents. As others have said we need to find ways to make the Sketchup model more beneficial down the pipeline in the design process.

There is so much discussion and much confusion on what BIM is. I have had wade through a lot of it in order to help our partners, colleagues, and clients understand. There is BIM the tool and there is BIM the process. The process of BIM, which has been described as the 'Integrated Design Process', is as much more about a different way of thinking and doing architectural design than it is about software. While the goal of a more seamless process, and more integrated building are the goal, both the tool and the process have been very hard to implement. Revit as a tool is not intuitive, there are many menus and schedules to drill through. It requires heavy front end loading. It is very data driven. It is challenging for visual thinking, intuitive designers to adopt to this kind of tool. I have modeled projects, using with SketchUp alone, that have been very integrated in terms of the design process and how Sketchup was used on the project. We used the model for design purposes, we did take offs, we did analysis, we coordinated building systems to some degree, we even exported views of the model into AutoCAD line work for CD's, and we used the model to help the contractor understand and building during construction. BIM does not equal Revit. My hope is the Sketchup / Trimble team come up with something very different than Revit, that builds on Sketchup's strengths, and that approaches the process of BIM much more intuitive, way. A good first step would be to make the going from Sketchup to Revit and vice versa much more seemless. That would allow Sketchup models developed in early design to have more of a payoff through out the process.

I know this is a fairly old thread, but could someone explain the time zone offset? I get the need for an offset, is it based off of GMT? What constitutes positive and negative?

Can someone please post version 3.8 here?

This is a extremely annoying. our office has a 2 seat license. Every time I crash and come back in I am told I exceed the number of licenses it another user was using Sketchup when I crash. In the past, at this point, it would kick me into the free version. No more. I am locked out completely until the other person exits Sketchup so I can get in. I am wondering what ways Trimble is going to tinker with licensing, and the ease of use.

I am a podium user and have love it. But looking at these I have to say I prefer the Vray render. The lighting and detail seem much crisper and warmer.

@alan fraser said:

Professional or hobbyist, it seems a bit premature to be seeking out alternatives to SU...

I completely agree. Regarding BIMers comments, none of us can pass judgement without knowing all the background. Some companies that are bought are purchased because they are well managed and have huge upside potential. Others, while having an upside, are purchase because they have been poorly managed and as a result undervalued. They ladder group of companies, often have to go through some tough measures in a take-over. That Trimble is concerned about running a tight ship and is in a position to make aquisitions should be encouraging to some degree. I think the secret truth is Autodesk is scared of Sketchup. As a one who also uses Revit, I have had to sit through hours of Autodesk University sessions. I have been struck by 2 things. In sessions about Rendering and creating graphics that pop, it come out that improvements in the graphics within Revit, were the direct result of Sketchup's popularity Architects saying they preferred the interface & grapic quality of Sketchup. I am also struck with how AU speakers really go out of there way to not talk about Sketchup or try to speak negatively about it. I don't think you will ever see an AU session 'Integrating Revit with Sketchup (or Rhino) in you project workflow'. I find Sketchup to be a great companion to Revit. Sketchup's greatest strength is it's popularity and user base. Is it safe to say it is the Facebook of the 3d world. Google has tried to compete with an alternative to Facebook, but has largely been unsuccessful because of Facebook's popularity. In the same way, Autodesk has attempted many alternatives to compete with Sketchup; Vasari, Impression etc. None seem to me to have been very successful.

The potential of Sketchup integrating with BIM software like Archicad and Revit is enormous. Tekla is an example of a trimble company that has been sucessful at this. I am not suggesting that Sketchup becomes another BIM software, but that the workflow and translation would become seemless. Certainly Sketchup could become more BIM like, but to try to make it another BIM software would be a mistake in my opinion. As one who spends a lot of time using both Revit and Sketchup, I am glad Sketchp is not Revit. Likewise I am glad Sketchup is not Revit. Sketchup is much faster, intuitive, and iterative when it comes to the schematic design process. When it comes to visualization, for most Architects, time and and budgets are crucial on a project. Most owners don't have lots of $$$ to spend and most Architects are reluctant to blow fees on $$$ renderings. SU with a good rendering plugin delivers within those constraints more effectively.

I recently had to develop 8 design iterations of a school project that was being documented in Revit. I kicked the Revit model into Sketchup and rendered the options with Podium in a fraction of the time it would have taken me in Revit. The benefits of SU decrease the further you move away from the schematic design stage. I know some have tried to produce CD's using layout but that is nothing close to how Revit documents - Revit is bi-directional, Skethup is not. For Sketchup to become Bi-directional I think it would take considerable effort.

The strengths of Revit / BIM are in its ability for coordination across disciplines over the course of a project, provide clash detection, the speed of documentation during the Design Development and Construction Document phases, with bi-directional associativity in Revit is huge. Information richness is also a huge benefit when it comes to pricing and analysis. Revit's benefits increase the further you go into the design process and are probably least in the initial Schematic Design phase. One of the greatest strength of Sketchup is Revit's Achilles' heel: It's ease of use. The learning curve and the change implications of Revit / BIM can be almost insurmountable for a many firms. The other Achilles' heel of Revit is its price and it's lack of 3rd party API development. As others have said Sketchup's greatest strength may well be it's price and it's plug-n-play plugin platform and the community that drives it.

If this buy-out could take the best strengths of Sketchup and combine them with some of the strengths of true BIM, increasing Sketchup's effectiveness further into the design process, at a cost architects, engineers, and professionals in smaller firms, working on smaller projects, could afford - that would be amazing. As someone from an Architectural background that would be my wish. I think there is a lot of reason to be hopeful. Somoe of the 'BIM like' ruby scripts and things that Turner construction is doing with Sketchup are very encouraging.

Our firm specializes in master planning and design for large continuing care retirement facilities (CCRC). Typical animations are exterior fly-throughs of campuses with mid-rise apartment buildings, single family cottages etc. We also have done interior animations of typical apartment units. This is one we did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-02TDAzWPc. It took 7-10 days to render in Kerkythea at lower settings in order to get frames to render at 5 min. each at 25-30 fps. I think most of the animations though are exteriors. No animated / moving objects. Pretty straight forward.

Hello All,

Does anyone know of, or could anyone reccomend a good animator for photo-real, HQ, animations? We are specifically looking for an animator who will work with geometry generated in SU by the Architect. What we have found is most animators use people at the production level who do not have much, if any Architectural background. The animators we have worked with do not like taking geometry generated be the Architect, or geometry generated from Sketchup, mostly because of workflow and interoperability issues. Thus everything is modeled at least 2x. Because their modelers have less Architectural background we are constantly going back and forth with corrections.Like most Architects we are often designing and refining through the process. We would produce the animations ourselves but we do not have the computing / renderfarm horsepower to do it efficiently or to the quality we want. My conclusion is we need to find a quality animator who at the very least will work with the geometry we generate. Can anyone reccomend an animator? Has anyone found themselves in the situation I just described?

I believe wife could also be described as a Sketchup widdow. I too have become a Sketchup Geek. Worse yet, my employers are aware of it. Needless to say I am modeling 24/7. Maybe we should start a support group for wives stuck in this difficult position.

Similar issues relating to end use agreements have come up a lot lately where individuals have tried to bundle Ruby scripts together.I understand the concern and objections on the part of those who write and produce the scripts - especially when people are re-packaging them and selling them for profit. Clearly this is illegal and CRIMINAL unless agreements have been worked out and script writers are being compensated. From the end-user side, we all love these amazing scripts and would love to see them more graphically grouped, organized, and bundled. Is it unreasonable for developers to change the terms to allow for what SCF toools and others are attempting provided: 1.) Ruby Scripts are not sold or re-distributed for profit. 2.) Scripts arenot re-sold. 3.) Script writers are given full credit. 4.) and perhaps, the actual scripts are not re-written or changed in any way. Perhaps the ruby script 'gurus' need to get together and brainstorm possibilities. There seems to be a growing desire for an organized graphic interface for rubies.

Our office has been using Sketchup for some time. Recently we have explored the Sketchup to BIM relationship as part of the LEED energy modeling process. I have experimented with importing Sketchup into both Revit and Archicad. We successfully converted a Sketchup model into an Archicad, BIM model. From Archicad the model was exported to Green Building Studio and then to Bequest for our consultants to run energy simulations. Between Archicad and Revit I found that Archicad works more seamlessly than Revit. In Archicad Door & Window Components convert to user specified doors and windows in Archicad. On importing you can specify wall floor and roof assemblies. There are some bugs. I found that that if a window component in Sketchup had an origin at the center of the window only half the window imported. Triangles in gable roofs also required some editing. In Revit the Sketchup model is imported as a mass. You have to manually go around and 'paint' surfaces according to their assembly. You will find there is an ongoing debate over which is better Revit or Archicad. Everything I hear is that Revit is better and it is becoming the industry standard. On the energy modeling front, Autodesk is buying everything up to presumably make proprietary with Revit. That said, I found Archicad's interface much more intuitive and user friendly, especially for someone who has been using cad for years and is new to BIM. Archicad definitely works better with Sketchup.