Topics created by Jim

While you are collecting them I prefer Directory Opus. I you can view folders and their contents in the same window - but it's not technically a folder tree as you can't selectively close folders. On the other hand the view and find capabilities are exceptional and you may not need to do that.

Bob

Thanks TIG, that was pretty easy! Now I know a little more about Sketchup.

Bob

You're welcome. There is at least one list of these send_action numbers. I found one on the Google Pro Group.

For switching on and off things you can create a togglebutton with Sketchup-Ruby (also possible for menu items).

Doubleclickable buttons are not the common way (usability aspects). Please do not confuse the users 😄

azuby

I passed it 😄 right the first time.
Guys, your internet connection is too fast.
With my jaggy edge connection i had enough time to see everything 😒 ...

But the bear fails in doing the moonwalk.

I'm getting back to thinking about a single AppObserver that everyone can (hopefully) agree on and use. I want to focus on how to use this observer over how it is implemented, i.e. its interface. In that vein, what about a simple interface as follows?

require 'sketchup' require 'sk/app_observer' module SelectToolAtStartup def self.selectSelectTool Sketchup.send_action "selectSelectionTool;" end end Sk;;AppObserver.instance.register(;onNewModel) { SelectToolAtStartup.selectSelectTool } Sk;;AppObserver.instance.register(;onOpenModel) { Sketchup.send_action "selectSelectionTool;" }

There would be one and only one AppObserver. The Observer transparently attaches itself when a method is registered, and removes itself when all methods have been unregistered.

So any plugin which needs an AppObserver only need require it, and register a method.

This same type of interface could be used for all the other "single instance" observers available in SketchUp. I'd like to go ahead and code them all up so plugin devs can start using observers, instead of everyone implementing them individually. I think a library of standard observers would greatly enhance a lot of current plugins, and make writing new plugins with advanced features easier and quicker. But being an amateur, I'd like to hear from more experienced devs on the matter.

on jim's website upon clicking the plugin download link i'm getting this 😞

Page not found
We're sorry, but we were unable to locate the page you requested.

Thanks guys, Courier New looks good (size 10.) The default was Terminal (ack.)

I also am trying out color schemes. The image I posted is a little washed-out compared to the real thing, for some reason?

http://bp3.blogger.com/_ogonR-k5OoM/R9Wlwmq-pPI/AAAAAAAAHS0/R-KjBbVdtHk/s1600/ss.jpg

@trocket said:

Lewis,

Sorry you feel I stole the idea from you. In truth I didn't, and I'm sure there are many people who realized you could use the blur filter with fog to simulate the effect when Adobe released the blur filter, I think in CS2. That's when the idea came to me anyway.

You should get full credit though for sharing the idea here first though, so many props to you.

It's a fun effect, hopefully we'll be putting out more videos on creating effects in PS. Cheers!

Tyson
Google SketchUp

Oh, don't worry about it, Tyson...I have no right to be peeved, and I think I must have just been having a wretched day when I wrote that post. I'm sorry for the tone. I sure didn't patent the idea or have any desire to...and I did find, just recently, an obsolete tutorial on another forum where the old Ruby fog script for SU5 was combined with some other scripts to generate a "depth mask" output automatically, which was about the same "SketchUp" era when the idea occurred to me (I'd post some images, but the project belongs to the firm where I was working at the time and I have no right to display the renderings).

Anyone familiar with post-processing output from the dinosaur modelers like 3DS Max or Form-Z probably saw the possibility. I was doing this with Max output, z-depth alphas, and the Photoshop Gausian blur filter (and masked adjustment layers to create desaturation) in PS 6...just as I had been taught when I worked for one of the big render houses! All I needed was a gradient to depth to recreate it with SketchUp.

Incidentally, the makers of Rhino (who are really insecure about SketchUp, it seems) recently updated their faux-SketchUp "Penguin" rendering package to automatically include a depth mask output! I think a lot of people have independently noticed or realized the value of depth mask creation in the context of NPR renderings.

I regularly run mozbackup and advice everyone to do so. Firefox once scrambled my bookmarks, lost them on another occasion and lost my stored passwords one day as well.

I'm becoming very impressed with this whole Google Docs package system, including this spreadsheet application. If only I could be one of the few who could currently work on my "Docs" off-line.

http://docs.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=92781&topic=13769

When it does work, that means I will have a decent office package through my browser...available on any computer I use, even my subnotebook Eee where storage space is so precious.

One of my students a few semesters ago was a Google employee, and she did all of her presentation work for her final project through the Google Docs presentation application...it was at least as effective as what the other students did with Powerpoint or Layout, without the inevitable problems of either...

Wouldn't it be really nice if there was a CAD-type program (a web-based version of SketchUp, perhaps) that worked like this?

@unknownuser said:

no. the JS is hard to modify. I would go with this one

TBD, looks good, too - let's go with it.

Here are the specifications that the image exporter will need:

@unknownuser said:

The image file names/paths must be carefully prepared to work with the rotation. The names must match the pattern:

imgPrefix_α_βimgExt

Where α is the rotation step, and β is the tilt angle. You will need combinations of every rotation step and tilt angle that you are using. If you want to use panning, you must make sure that you number the images in the correct direction. Tilt angles assume that 1 is the view from the top (or the highest viewing perspective), and rotation steps assume that progressing from 1 to 2 is motion in a clockwise direction, etc. It is assumed that the rotation steps make a complete circle around the subject.

@unknownuser said:

You will need numRot x numtilt images in total. My demonstration here use 6 x 3 = 18 images - around 117 KB. For 30 rotation steps, and 15 tilt angles (for a very fluid effect), you would need 450 images (so let's hope you have a good relationship with your camera)

450 images? Ouch, but I would also estimate that is correct.

Here is a try combining the Web Exporter with a fly through path.
i am working on it still but I guess you can see the intention already

http://www.cad-addict.com/2009/01/sketchup-adding-camera-control-to-web.html

Just a pity DE costs an arm and a leg, 2 kidneys and one cornea.

Very cool, hopefully he will join us at SJF

The thing with a Bounding Box is - it's virtual. You don't have to have any geometry to create and populate a bounding box.

@dan rathbun said:

So this is obsolete for SketchUp ver 8+ ??

No, it still works. I like it better than the built-in installer because it keeps a list of installed files - which lets me see exactly what was installed and where in case I want to delete it.

It's here:

https://sites.google.com/site/jimfoltz/plugins-lab/installer

But I could put it on dvcs, if interested.