Hi Valve90210, hi folks.
There are no differences between the Pro and the Free version to do what you want.
Before using unnecessary tools and/or plugins, try using basic tools and learn how to master these.
Click in sequence on the scenes tabs of this SketchUp file for ideas:
Bonjour.
@gilles said:
@daredevil said:
Encore une autre méthode pour faire ce polyèdre-étoilé-qui-doit-bien-avoir-un-petit-nom-plus-sympa-que-pomme-diamant, ...
Il s'agirait d'un dodécaèdre rhombique étoilé.
Exact.
En Anglais: Stellated Rhombic Dodecahedron.
Voir cette page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compound_of_three_octahedra
Je n'ai pas trouvé son équivalent en Français.
Aussi appelé Polyèdre d'Escher. Voir cette page:
http://www.math.ens.fr/culturemath/video/Dupas-polyedres/herbier/rhombique.htm
Ou Cascade d'Escher. Voir cette page:
http://www.sculpteo.com/fr/design/dodecaedre-rhombique-etoile-2/38VCiXfW
En effet, c'est le polyèdre qu'on retrouve à la partie supérieure des deux tours dans cette oeuvre bien connue de Escher.
Et, finalement, la façon la plus rapide d'obtenir cette figure est d'insérer le composant nommé 36 sided polyhedrondu Bonus Pack "Shapes" que Google SketchUp proposait sur sa page de téléchargement pour SketchUp 6. Vous allez le retrouver sur l'entrepôt 3D (3D Warehouse) si vous tapez exactement 36 sided polyhedron.
Salutations.
Bonjour.
Sans avoir le modèle sous la main, je vais essayer quelques diagnostics au hasard:
1 - Le cercle servant de chemin n'est pas centré avec le cercle servant de face à faire suivre.
2 - Tes cercles sont trop petits et les faces résultantes de l'extrusion possèdent des segments plus courts que ce que la limite de SketchUp peut supporter pour fermer automatiquement une face.
Si cela ne répond pas à ton problème, S.V.P. attache ton modèle à un prochain message.
Salutations.
Hi folks.
Why not assign these locked objects to a layer.
Then, hide this layer before selecting to assure that these locked object are not visible, thus not selectable.
Make the layer visible once done.
Just ideas.
Hi Frascati, hi folks.
Don't compare Paint program with SketchUp (SU).
These programs manipulates pixels in 2D and, once they are placed, you cannot remove or modify them unless you spend a lot of time painting over with another color.
SU is a 3D sketching program. It is not made for 2D painting. However, you can do that with SU if you want.
Just ideas.
Bonjour.
Ouvrir la fenêtre des styles, sélectionner un style pour l'éditer. La cinquième icône, celle à l'extrême droite, permet de choisir la couleur de la sélection.
Personnellement, je l'ai mis en jaune, comme les anciennes versions de SketchUp pour éviter toute confusion avec les arêtes parallèles à l'axe bleu lorsque j'utilise cette possibilité d'affichage.
De toute façon, comme il est possible d'avoir plusieurs styles dans un même modèle, il ne faut pas se priver de choisir plus d'un réglage, si requis.
Une fois cela effectué, pourquoi ne pas sauvegarder sous forme de Modèle type (Template en Anglais).
Salutations.
Hi Frascati, hi folks.
SketchUp (SU) was never presented as a CAD program by its creators. It was presented as a 3D sketching program, period. A good one by the way.
However, since its capabilities are beyong a simple sketching program and are quite close to a CAD program, it is understandable that people are using it more and more for really serious CAD design. I am one of these.
And, like you, I would like to see improvements with the text anotation and the dimensionning capabilities of SU.
However, I also want this program to remain simple to use and don't want it to become another complex program with a ton of buttons and functions and see its efficiency go away and its price increase too much.
I don't need another AutoCAD or another Catia.
Just ideas.
Hi Jerico, hi folks.
Normally, with SketchUp (SU), you model everything in real size.
If a building is 100 meters tall, you model it using this height.
Zoom out to be able to see the whole building and zoom in to see details.
With a large and detailed model, I often create two scenes, one that I call Workand the other Render.
In the Work scene, I set the rendering parameter to the bare minimum, just to show enough of the model to be able to work on it. For example, I use no shadows, no profiles, no fancy edges renderind, shaded mode instead of shaded with texture (in some extreme cases I may use monochrome or hidden line or even wireframe) and I also put as much objcts as possible on hidden layers.
In the Render scenes, I set all parameters to get the best result.
For each scene, I tell SU not to memorize the camera position so that I don't lose a carefully obited, panned and zoomed view.
Once that is done, all I have to do is to click on the Work scene tabto have a model that is light on the video card and that allows me to fluidly pan, orbit and zoom to add and/or modify objects. I just click on the other scene tab to see the model in full glory. Of course, I may have to wait a little for SU to render the view.
Just ideas.
Hi xxyyzz, hi folks.
Click in sequence on the scenes tabs of this SU file for ideas.
Hi Peter, hi folks.
@pbacot said:
you don't need to draw all radii to the segments of a circle. just draw a diameter that is broken by a vertex at the center. Move up the center point while pressing the up arrow.
I have difficulties with this. I know the method with two radii or one diameter divided in two (rigth click then choose divide in the context menu) but I cannot see how to draw a diameter that can be broken by a vertex at its center if I don't draw something else to break the diameter.
@pbacot said:
But tell me why: for the second edge you need to shift- erase to keep the cone smooth.
SHIFT-Erase hide an edge.
CTRL-Erase smooth an edge.
So, for a cone made by pulling and endpoint at the junction of 2 radii, these 2 edges must be smoothed.
Smoothing is not the same as hiding. Hiding an edge still shows the angle between the two faces separated by this edge while smoothing softens this angle and blends the two faces into one that gives the appearance of one continuously curved surface.
Just ideas.
Bonjour.
Pilou, je t'ai simplifié le début et j'ai exécuté les rotations des copies d'une autre façon.
Voir le fichier SU suivant:
Pomme diamant 3.skp
En fait, il y a probablement autant de façon de faire qu'il y a de participants à ce forum, sinon plus.
Un petit défi (challenge) pourrait être de trouver la méthode qui demande le moins d'opérations pour réaliser cette forme.
Salutations.
Hi sfto1, hi folks.
OOOOPS, by the time it took me to write this, TIG beat me.
Anyway, here it is:
Select the Section Plane. It becomes highlited
Select the Move tool.
Place the cursor on the highlited perimeter of the section plane untill you see a pop-up message stating On section.
Slide it untill you get a snap with any usefull geoemetry (endpoint, midpoint, edge).
After experimenting I found that endpoints on arcs and circles and polygons and also guide point don't provide snapps to place a Section Plane.
However, if you press and hold the SHIFT key, you will then get snaps from just about anything except faces, centers, guide points and guide lines.
Just ideas.
Hi folks.
If hidden entities are inside groups and components, using Unhide Alloutside these context will not reveal these objects.
Don't forget to use View Menu --> Hidden geometryto reveal what might be hidden. All entities, even nested in groups and componenst, will show.
Just ideas.
Hi folks.
Be carefull with the triple click.
If an object is enclosed inside another but doesn't touch it, a double click on the outer object will not select the inner one.
The safest way is to use X-Ray mode to ascertain that all that you want to select has really be selected. In such cases, using a selection window is safer.
Another trick I learned is that in some situations, with a really crowded model, it is nearly impossible, even with careful pan, zoom and orbit, to select exactly what you want. Some unwanted geometry always gets selected when you don't want it. The trick is not to loose time trying to beat the system. Select as well as you can and then deselect the few items that may have been accidently selected. Many times, it turned up to be the fastest way.
Just ideas.
I folks.
Another idea, similar to the one proposed by Dave.
Click in sequence on the scenes tabs of this SU file (in V6).
Bonjour.
Une autre méthode (en V6) qui, là aussi, laisse un solide bien propre, sans arêtes ni faces internes à effacer.
Pomme diamant 2.skp
Salutations.
Bonjour.
Pour éviter les faces intérieures parasites, il est possible d'utiliser un plan de coupe pour accéder à l'intérieur.
Il est aussi possible de cacher une ou plusieurs faces.
Un autre truc est illustré dans le fichier SU suivant:
Éviter des faces internes inutiles.skp
Salutations.
Bonjour.
Il est bien sûr possible de réaliser cette forme à partir d'un cube auquel on ajoute plusieurs arêtes qui génèrent des faces intérieures, suivi d'une intersection et d'un grand nettoyage d'arêtes et de faces inutiles. Il est aussi possible de positionner 3 octaèdres puis de les intersecter et encore là de faire un grand nettoyage. Dans ces deux cas, il faudra faire attention à supprimer les faces internes qui, autrement pourraient poser des problèmes de rendu. J'aborde ce sujet dans le fil de discussion intitulé Trucs, astuces et idées.
La question Ă se poser est Ă savoir s'il y a moyen de produire cette forme sans devoir effacer quoi que ce soit et donc sauver pas mal de temps.
La réponse se trouve dans ce fichier SU (en V6).
Pomme diamant.skp
Salutations.
Hi Steve, hi folks.
Maybe you can try using an image as a background.
Have you envisonned something like a Watermark?
However, this watermark image will remain still when orbitting so it may look unnatural.
Another possibility is to have an image applied to a spherical face behind the model. Try using the smallest sphere possible. As per your description of a 1.1 km spaceship, it means that it has a half length of 550 m. MAybe a sphere with a radius of 600 or 700 m will do.
I tried something with a radius of 1 km. See this SU file where I put a sphere with a radius of 550 m inside one with a radius of 1000 m. I also put an octaedron of 200 mm at their center. I can zoom in but there is a limit. I will let you experience with it.
Huge model of spaceship.skp
I also tested this concept with a smaller outer sphere with a radius of 750 m but the difference was negligible (I could not really zoom in much closer).
I think that this is a limitation of OpenGL where the relative size of 2 objects overshoot some threshold value.
What is possible is that you make your animation in parts.
Part 1 would be done with the full model (spaceship and external surroundings) and would include the external approach and the entry inside the spaceship.
Part 2 would be done with a subset of the model (only the spaceship without any surroundings) and would include the walkthrough inside the spaceship.
Part 3 would be done with a smaller subset of the model (only the relevant parts of the spaceship) and would include the walk inside the relevant rooms. Being smaller, it would allow zooming in more on details as small as you would like.
Just ideas.
Bonjour.
Pur ceux et celles qui ne se rappelleraient pas de leur cours de trigonométrie:
Voir aussi:
Salutations.
