Since you ask for design advice, some design questions: You sure you want the bottom shelf to be transparent? And while I'm asking, why are any of the shelves clear? If they are covered with candy, you won't see through anyway, and if they aren't, then weight is not so much of an issue.

60" is pretty wide for unsupported shelves, generally they are no more than 36" in commercial units. And 24" is pretty deep for candy (candy boxes are around 12" deep, if memory serves, and individual bars would just get lost with the depth). Sometimes displays like this are used to showcase merchandise in front; work, sell or display on top; and have more shelves behind a false back for storage.

If you make all edges stiff, for light loads you shouldn't need to brace the middle of the shelf. It is usually prettier and easier to roll or fold the front of the shelf than to fabricate a box. Experiment first, 60" is untested territory.

Sides and backs can be grooved to hold the shelf if you don't like the look of cleats. A slender molding wrapping the side and back edges of the shelf would allow you to use shelf standards without getting into plastic fabrication, and could be very pretty.

I've laid out circles on a plane in SU, and am dimensioning them in Layout.

When dimensioning to the center of the circle, Layout measures the drawing, not the model (1/4" instead of 3")

When dimensioning an orthogonal view from a center to a corner Layout returns the diagonal distance in 3-space (x + y + z) from the corner to the center.

When measuring from center to center layout returns the drawing measurement.

When dimensioning circles from edge to edge layout gives the model measurement, which would be great, except that it is from a nearby vertex instead of from the true size of the circle that the polygon is representing. In SUit is possible to enlarge and select to work with this, but in Layout it's a matter of making many guesses/ rounding the dimension. Sometimes it works, often it doesn't, always it takes time.

Circles on a plane dimensioned in Layout

Mariocha—

Dimensioning in Sketchup, while convenient, does not work well.

Dimensions are fixed in space in SU. Shifting the perspective often puts them in awkward places.

Transferring the drawing to Layout then makes even more of a hash of it. First, there is no easy reference in SU to tell you how far away the dimension is in 3-space, and often measurements are at an inconsistent distance, or out of proportion to the drawing. With each edit, there is a risk of shifting perspective, then having to go back to SU, re-edit, re-save, refresh Layout, and check every view for conflicts.

Would that it were not so, dimensioning in Layout is a nightmare.

Jim

Sonder—

Thanks for the suggestion, but I already center the scene in SU. I set it up as best I can to show what I want, then save or update it and save the SU model.

Perhaps SO is centering the SU scene on the original LO window, before the window was resized. Since I no longer have the original size of the window, I can't tell. When I do what you say the image is no longer centered in the window. When I change the window size, then uncheck "preserve scale," the size is no longer the same. These are major difficulties.

I ask again, is this what happens to you when you follow the steps I listed?

Best,

Jim

Sonder—

I am sorry, I did not mention that I do indeed have render set to auto.

When I talk about preserving the scale of a perspective, I mean the image size. There is no assigned scale, technically I guess it's the amount of zoom.

I don't know what else I can say. I listed my workflow exactly as I did it, no steps left out. The size of the image jumps, often affecting the amount of image visible. The jumps are unwelcome. What results do you get when you try what I described?

As for your comment that this behavior lets you size drawings on the page, I can only assume that this is not what happens when you do what I listed. I say that precisely because it does NOT allow me to size drawings on the page, it radically alters the size of the drawings from what I specified.

Best,

Jim

Sonder—

I'm glad that works for you, that's how I feel Layout should work.

My experience is that when I switch from Raster to Vector, all of a sudden I can align them. Switching back to Raster, once the image is rendered I can bring them close but they are no longer automatically aligned, and the Snap function often pulls them away from alignment.

I tried it with a fresh drawing, not modifying the scenes. Same behavior.

Best,

Jim

With a fresh drawing, I make three objects.

Save Top, Front, Side, Perspective

Export to Layout

Set Scene to Perspective

Check Maintain Scale

Crop Viewport

Uncheck Maintain Scale

===>Image shrinks

Check Maintain Scale

===>Image remains the same size, does not revert to original size

Option-Click-Drag another Viewport

Set Scene to Top

Maintain Scale checked

Stretch Viewport

Uncheck Maintain Scale

===>Image of object enlarges

From this experiment, it seems that when you:
Check Maintain Scale
Change a Viewport's Size
Uncheck Maintain Scale
===>Image Size changes to correspond with the new Viewport size.

Note that the process is not reversible: if you re-check Maintain Scale, the Image does not go back to the original size. Note also that the Scenes are as listed on SU, that is, not modified.

This same sequence happens whether working to a specific scale or leaving the scale undefined

While I'm happy to have found the explanation, I still find this confusing. Is there a benefit to this behavior that I'm not seeing?

I often change scale and size of Viewport to fit items in a readable way onto small pages, while using as few scales as possible. It would be much easier for me if Layout updated its information of the relative size of the Viewport and the image it contains so the image size doesn't shift when Maintain Scale is changed.

Best,

Jim

Folks—

Okay, the discussion is split into two parts. This post is about Object Snap.

Okay, Sonder mentioned Rendering and I found my problem: my drawings were set up for Raster. When I set them up for Vector I can snap visual objects, not just Viewports. Problem Solved!

I'm on the fly, and will check back later to look at the other issue, Jumping Views.

Best,

Jim

I've noticed this also. It happens infrequently.

Sometimes I can't dimension in the scale of the model, but it measures the paper space, as you put it. It hasn't happened enough to notice if anything particular trips it, but I wonder if it's associated with changing scale.

Bst,

Jim

Actually, Dave, I do set up scenes in Sketchup. I use them for my Layout views.

You don't seem to get the issues. Did you compare the two Layouts to see the difference made by simply putting a viewport in Edit Mode? The scale jumps from the scale I specified and the view jumps from what was defined.

When I check and uncheck the Preserve Scale box, without editing the drawing, the view and scale shift radically. Typically, the scale is reduced by somewhere near 50% and the view moves enough that some or all of the image is cut off by the boundaries of the viewport.

In this example, I want to show both tops on one sheet of paper at 1":1' scale. I use two viewports, one with each top, rather than try to define an 8.5' x 11' plot in SU and place the tops inside that to set up a scene which I can move to Layout. There are reasons I draw them in their proper orientation in SU, and also reasons why I don't show them that way in LO. One way is for drafting, the other way is for presenting to a fabricator.

Yet when I change the viewport I get a jumping of scale and view. If you don't see this as a bug I don't understand why.

Please note: I do not change the SU drawing for this to happen. I am not using another program in between. This is just Layout. It does not change my SU file or the SU scene,, but it changes the LO viewport.

It's possible this is a question of semantics, so I'll put in terms of my expectations: I expect to be able to edit a viewport in LO and leave Edit Mode with those changes intact. Likewise, I expect to enter Edit Mode, and not have the act of entering Edit change the view. I can do this fifty times and it acts this way every time. Am I wrong to expect Edit to be predictable? Why is there an Edit Mode if it does not allow you to save your edits?

Best,

Jim

Okay, try this:

Draw something large in two parts and export a simple orthogonal view, say top view.

Open in Layout

Crop the view to a particular scale, fitting the page while you show part A.

Option-Click-Drag

Crop the view to show part B

Try to align A and B

===>When I do this, I find I can easily align the viewports with Object Snap. However, I cannot align the visible part, the actual object I am representing, with Object Snap. I often have to turn off Object Snap so I can align them freehand— sometimes the nudge keys (arrows) are not accurate enough.

If you call the viewports "Objects" in Layout, then yes, you can align them. I can see why a programmer would think in those terms. However, as a user, I am only concerned with aligning the visible parts. Object Snap does not work that way. I wish it did, it would make my drawings easier and neater.

Failing that, guidelines. Or the ability to place a "snap mark" on the visible object. Or some other workaround. I've tried drawing lines but they are too coarse. I settle for moving the objects near each other and doing it by eye.

Best,

Jim

That's not what I mean, Dave.

I have a Layout with a viewport. I double click on it to edit it, say to Orbit the view a little. When I go into edit mode, the viewport shifts radically— often the scale gets much smaller and the object moves with respect to the viewport, so some or all may be outside of the view from the viewport.

Dave—

Here's a workflow:

Go to page 2 of this Layout.

Double click on the viewport of the small top, as if you have to Orbit the view.

Image shrinks to about 1/2 size and displaces to the left, so about 1/8 of the top is cut off.

See the attached file.

Note that what I've listed above is ALL I have done— I did not orbit or scale the view, just double clicked.

This is on a fresh install of Layout 3.0.16845 on a new install of 10.7.2 on an iMac 2.93 GHz i7 with 16 MB of Ram, but it's been like this for he last two years at least on this computer, back to 10.6.8

Best,

Jim

Kitchen Counter.layout

Dave—

That almost works. I don't believe it is possible to isolate a top view of the small top, though it is possible to crop an end view down to show just the section of the counter.

Another of my frustrations with Layout is that there is no true Object Snap— it snaps viewports, but not the objects in them. I turned off Object Snap so it would be possible to align the objects in the viewports. Nudging viewports with the arrow keys left the objects misaligned by half a click.

It sounds like you set up your presentation views in SU scenes. I start that way, but often have to modify. In SU you can't see the page and how the views fit together because there is no reference to the size of the finished page and no absolute scale.

You are confusing cause and effect regarding modified scenes. They were modified precisely because of the issue I'm complaining about. When adjusting and cropping to fit on a presentation page, sometimes the view or frame needs to be altered, and when shifting it the scale shifts or the view jumps. Several times while making this Layout page, the act of double clicking on the viewport to orient the view jumped the whole image out of the viewport frame, so the object was no longer visible at all. Simultaneously it changes scale radically, from (in this case) 1" : 1' to more like 1:23.54 or some such.

I am not exaggerating when I say that I had to start over framing the images on page 2 8-10 times because of these shifts. This was a quick drawing because I only had the issue in two viewport. 2/3 of the time I spent on this document was in dealing with this issue.

Best,

Jim

In many ways I like Layout but this bug consistently drives me wild.

I made this drawing in SU, drawing the small countertop in line but displacing it vertically so I could show a section without making pieces invisible for the purpose of the view. In the perspective view on p. 2, I show the two counters. I'd prefer to have them in relationship, as it's easier to understand the concept, but I'm willing to settle.

Trying to place the small counter in approximate scale and similar attitude is pretty much impossible. I alternate between image edit mode and layout mode, and also between Preserve Scale on Resize and not.

When I edit the image, I can change the attitude in limited ways by orbiting. One part of the object is pinned and it rotates around that, but I can't change which part. Scrolling, I can change the field of view but not the size. I cannot position the camera so that the object is in the same attitude as the other counter: if I align the y axis, the z axis is out. So I settle for coming close.

Then I adjust the size. Image edit doesn't adjust the size, so I go to layout mode. Drag the frame to resize, the crop goes out of adjustment. Lock the resize and change the crop and the size goes out. Adjust the attitude again and the view and scale are way skewed. Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat, getting incrementally better until it's (barely) good enough.

I don't do these drawings to be good enough, I do them to give fabricators, installers, and clients a strong sense of what I want. This adjustment process takes a long time and gives poor results. It's hard to describe how frustrating it is when the scale, attitude and view jump radically every time you change modes, and it can take twenty minutes or more to get a decent view. And heaven help you if you have to edit the SU file, repositioning anything means you have to start over.

Jim

See p. 2, small counter

Thanks, Jeff. I guess I haven't been trying enough variations.

What's the distinction between Extrude and Loft? In my examples, Loft seems to twist things up.

Jim

Jeff—

When I use ExtrudeEdgesByRails, I get parallel curves, not radial like you did. Here's an example, where I used the starting curve as the melding profile also.Starting curve & finished surface from EEBR

Jim

The Follow Me Tool will wrap a profile around a curve. Extrude By Rails will pull a profile around a corner, following rails, and adjusting it. However the profile does not follow radially, but in one direction only. What's the name of the process that wraps an irregular profile, following two curves radially? What plugin do you use for that process?

Thanks,

Jim

@archturn said:

Really fantastic! You don't see a table like that everyday

And thank God I don't have to make one like that every day, either!

Jim

Actually, Archturn, our reference was a 17th century Brazilian antique. It was a table with ring turnings that followed the vase-like outline. At the same time, Spanish turners were doing worms without the taper but somehow with the same feeling. We combined the ideas. Thanks for the compliment.

The top & bottom plates were glued in layers from curly soft maple. The worm was plainsawn soft maple. Both were sap selected, then heavily selected for color. We tried for white, but didn't have enough, which was lucky— the grayish wood we used matched the Texas sandstone walls perfectly.

In order to maintain consistency of grain through the carving, the worm grain ran vertically. We glued it in quarters, one piece at a time, alternating 90° each time, paying attention to the cap-cup so that the rings would meet the circumference of the cylinder at as close to 90° as possible. This also helped to unify the color, as there is often a color shift from one side of a board to the other. There's an even bigger shift from the outside to the inside, but there was nothing we could do about that.

It took 1 1/2 days to glue each quarter. We could only glue two quarters together at a time, since with such a rigid block we wanted all the pressure we could get. On 19" long blocks we had about 30 clamps— we didn't have enough clamps to do two gluings at once. The last quarter was jointed as precisely as possible and glued in with even more prayers than clamps. I'm attaching a model of one quarter, with arcs to show the orientation of the endgrain rings.

I found modeling it in SU the most tedious of all. I used a Ruby which I believe was called Rotate Around Z Axis (sorry, it's no longer installed and I can't find the author's name) to make four separate helixes of a barley-type profile, which I patched together and edited extensively by hand. After about 200 hours I figured I'd done all I could do in SU and sought help from others. A friend finally made it in Rhino with maybe another 60 hours work. Several of us spent hours inspecting the best two versions before picking one.

With such a cumbersome workflow it was very difficult to test the number of loops, helical angle, taper in each section, size of gullet, and ratio of overall diameter to worm diameter. Oh, for a parametric Ruby with interactive sliders!

Best,

Jim

Sacred Heart Leg Glueup.skp