There is a PDF exporter available for free: http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?f=80&t=22821&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=simlab

But the whole issue of not publishing PMs goes back months. It was made clear then that you don't do it. Toxic has clearly done it again, he's been pulled up on it, and he's started this thread to cry about it.

@toxicvoxel said:

Marian, why are you posting this here?

Because he felt it was more diplomatic than telling you to put your dummy back in.

Will there be a vote on the models at the end?

@newone said:

Because GIMP doesn't have YET some important features that Photoshop have?

But how can that be, when Photoshop is the same as it was 20 years ago?

@unknownuser said:

Before 1996 there was not GIMP at all... just PS. So, you might be asking "Why vast majority of professional CG artist use Photoshop YET?"

So Gimp has had 13 years to make a progression into the pro-CG market and barely made a splash, but they are going to do it soon?

@unknownuser said:

Adobe has been paying close attention to their shareholders for the past 10 years, ignoring their employees and their users. There are websites out there dedicated to their demise. It is too late now. They have drawn themselves so thin (to pay dividends) there is no hope of ever seeing any improvment in their product offerings. PS is the same old lady she was 20 years ago. There is no need to pay 1500 dollars for their suite of bloated software anymore. The free and open source software business, that caters directly to the user/developer is crushing Adobe. After many years of being forced to use their products (cause production houses thought MAC was the answer in the 80's) many won't notice when they are gone.

If this is true, then why do the vast, vast majority of professional CG artists use Photoshop?

As for PS being the same lady she was 20 years ago, here is a screenshot of PS 1.0 in 1990. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AdobePS-107-System6.png

I think that your opinions of computer software have even less value than your opinions on vaccines.

@michaliszissiou said:

"This is a low poly model, you can use it in any interior scene, the original is about 20 cm H."
So if you don't like it, don't download it. Its an .skp isn't it?

Missed that. Just saw the pic, saw it was done with Blender and wondered why it would be in the gallery.

@michaliszissiou said:

I modeled and textured it in blender.

So why are you posting it on a Sketchup forum?

You're always going to get some distortion like that when projecting onto a curved surface. One solution is to make sure you have a copy of the projected surface seperate to the model. Make sure that View > Hidden Geometry is selected. Then rotate the copy parallel with each of the faces, sample, paint. Repeat that until done.

Solo is the main Deep Exploration user on Sketchucation.

As far as I can see, Deep Exploration is mainly used for converting 3D models, but it also has rendering (and other) capabilities built in.

Are the faces that you are trying to paint either a group or component? You need to open the groups/components first before painting them or you will get the behaviour you describe.

http://dragonfly.autodesk.com/

This works much better for very quick, very rough models, but there's still clearly a place for high quality models made with SU.

When I talk with people about my interests one of the first is making 3D buildings with Sketchup. Most people have no idea what Sketchup is and only a few people know what Google Earth is. If Google Earth is quickly populated with low quality Building Maker buildings, more people will get to know about GE and the spin-off products and use it. The increased visibilty of GE will mean an increased demand in higher quality models. That will mean higher demand for SU.

There's no way that Google will get rid of SU.

Think it's awesome myself. Just made a building with it. Took about 5 minutes. Using SU and GE you'd probably spend that much time getting the GE location.

The best tool to use is the Cubic Bezier Curve. It's one of the options on Fredo06's Bezier Spline plugin. It's so much better than the Freehand tool it is untrue.

I think everything about those images is awesome, except for the leads.

I like the images, but I think a modern car showroom/headquarters building for a manaufacturer like Ferrari would be flooded with natural light. The dark shadows throughout the building would be a definite no.

@unknownuser said:

@johnsenior1973 said:

I haven't any experience of riots at political events, but I have been around riots at soccer games. IMO if you don't want to be involved in the riot then you won't be. If you see a bad situation happening around you you just walk away in the oppositie direction.

... if you can. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heysel_Stadium_disaster

That was 1985. We're in 2009 now.

I haven't any experience of riots at political events, but I have been around riots at soccer games. IMO if you don't want to be involved in the riot then you won't be. If you see a bad situation happening around you you just walk away in the oppositie direction.

There will definitely be a massive security presence, and that will probably affect you when travelling, but I doubt very much that you have anything to worry about when it comes to violence.

http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=120729ebf26f7072b831795298672abf

http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=7f91a8f8815cca759e357fbe0c16d66c

The first image is a screenshot of one of my models, not accepted to the GE buildings layer because of Incomplete Texturing.

The second image is one submitted after mine, accepted as part of the GE Buildings layer.

When seeing decisions like that my response is to seriously question whether to bother modeling for GE ever again.

Is my own bias towards my model clouding my judgement? I can acknowledge that my model isn't "complete" in that there are fire doors and things like that not included in my model, but TBH integrating fire doors and the sub-level basement into GE isn't worth the bother.