This is a very interesting discussion as I am contemplating purchasing Onyx trees which my research leads me to believe are of excellent quality. Unfortunately I do not thoroughly understand some of the descriptions of techniques that I am reading in this post.

Solo, you mention that you create bitmaps from your trees and you extract the alpha to make a billboard.I have been trying to do the same thing in Photoshop for export to SU for a while and I just cannot get it to work the way it should.I seem to be missing some important piece of information.If you could describe the procedure in a bit more detail I would very much appreciate it.For example, how exactly do you "extract the alpha"...? Is this done after you have imported the tree into SU and what type of file is used to make this procedure possible?

Also, Richard mentions that he "can do a good job job straight out of Onyx...where the image map is exported with alpha and dxf panel sized correctly as well"...
Please excuse my ignorance but does this mean that I once I purchase Onyx trees I will not have to bother with Photoshop to produce these types of trees...I get confused by the terminology too.Could someone please explain the difference between "image map", "clipmaps",and "clipping paths" (as in Photoshop).It would seem that they could all be the same thing but I don't want to assume that, I'd like to know for sure.There may be clear or subtle distinctions between them for all I know.

I am new to these types of techniques but as always my enjoyment is derived from learning and developing my skills to produce better quality renditions.

Thanks to everyone participating in this type of discussion, you make this process even more entertaining and I am intrigued by the wealth of in-depth information that is so generously shared between strangers on a site such as this....
Limey

I have been playing a little with my image and I discovered that it is possible to partially mitigate the problem by going into styles and selecting "face", then clicking on the "nicer" option for the transparency quality setting.The background images occasionally jump through the foreground image depending on the viewing angle but not nearly as much and generally the overall effect is improved quite a bit.....I am much happier with the result than I was.

Limey

Susan
I would like to post it but I think I should ask my client if he has any objection to that first.This is a private creative venture still in the incipient stages.....If for any reason there is an objection I will post just a small portion of it which should be enough to work with.

Thanks for the information though, it does sound like the same kind of problem you described....I'd like to think there is a solution though because there are parts that actually do work quite well.

Limey

I have a problem with overlapping transparent images.....
I am constructing a tent configuration using translucent images as the entire fabric of the tent which is mounted on a frame...I have placed all the images, which are photographs,in reality they are printed on silk by the way,so that the entire tent is now covered with images.....In order to achieve a level of authenticity I have reduced the opacity of each image to 95%.In most cases this creates a very satisfactory representation of the real effect with the background images ghosting through the foreground images from just about any angle they are viewed from.
However....in some cases the background images do not ghost out and actually seem to jump out visually in front of the image placed before it thereby ruining the effect.If I change the transparency to 96% there is no transparency at all and nothing shows through the foreground image ghostly or otherwise.....No matter how much I play with the transparencies I cannot seem to resolve the issue.I thought that having the transparencies consistent for all images would be all I needed to do, apparently not. All images are introduced as textures and all images are the same resolution.

Am I missing something here or am I trying to create something that SketchUp just can't produce....?
Any advise would be appreciated...
Thanks
Limey

I have a weird problem....
I am trying to add a few more Ruby Scripts ....I am using a Mac. When I go to library/application support/SketchUp all I get is Autosave. No sign of a Plugin folder or anything else..... I know there must be one somewhere because previously installed Ruby scripts are working just fine in SketchUp...
I have done numerous Spotlight searches and still can't find my plugins folder.....
I have even done a reinstall for SketchUp....still nothing.....Question is, where the heck did that plugins folder go....?

OK problem solved.... in case anyone else has something similar going on I'll describe what my solution was.... I was diligently searching for a Sketchup plugins folder somewhere on my computer.....It did not reveal itself.Using "Spotlight" I tried searching for an "application support folder" instead. I found one in a place not defined by the accompanying information as there was no path to it.It just "existed" somewhere on my hard drive.....? This had a second Sketchup folder in it where I discovered the plugins folder I was looking for.....How that strange transmogrification occurred I'll never know....
Oh well....back to work finally....whew.....
Limey