Posts made by masterpaul

@sketch3d.de said:

@masterpaul said:

Is there something that is essentially stopping us from developing our own opensource SketchUp "clone"?

lightyears of knowledge in highly complex development of a 3D kernel as well as an accelerated OpenGL display output, glueing a programming API and last but not least connecting/developing vector-based 2D/3D data exchange interfaces for multiple platforms... just to name the most difficult stuff.

I think I would rather pay developers to create an opensource alternative than to pay that yearly for pro every year that brings nothing new to the table.

Edit:

There's a destructive push pull in development:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beZau_wpR-U
https://blenderartists.org/t/destructive-extrude-beta/678275

It seemingly has components like in SketchUp that can be edited all at once. It's lacking the UI, and perhaps with the upcoming blender, it will be possible to clone SketchUp's UI layout to help out with people wanting to migrate. Perhaps that could be done with a separate install exe so that beginners don't have to mess around with preferences or anything. I'm not sure how much more work would be needed to get everything sorted. I never used blender before. So I don't know what else would have to be done/coded in.

@juju said:

@masterpaul said:

Is there something that is essentially stopping us from developing our own opensource SketchUp "clone"? Except for time and money?

copyrights and patent infringements

What is copyrighted? Don't software patents expire after a while? Copyright doesn't really apply as we wouldn't be calling to SketchUp! All icons would be different too. LibreOffice doesn't get sued into oblivion, gimp exists too.
The style of SketchUp UI has been around since paint, so I think we could have a very similar UI too.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6628279 The only thing that is tricky is the push-pull, but I've seen other software try and attempt that and plugins on other programs (I think).

If it's possible we could actually get a lot of things built in from the start, a built-in curviloft feature, features like fredoscale a built skatter like feature for exporting images and rendering etc. So we would have the standard toolbar which would have a very similar feature set as the large toolbar as in Sketchup and an advance toolbar with all those more "complicated" commands. Eventually, a simple to use built-in render and most important actual, support for large heavy models.

Is there something that is essentially stopping us from developing our own opensource SketchUp "clone"? Except for time and money?

@kimi kimi said:

I'm waiting for a few developers to join together and make an alternative to SketchUp. I'll pay filthy money for it. Just do it. Make yourself rich. You know what it needs to be.

Like Shape? I dunno how its gonna turn out, it's not out yet.

http://aecmag.com/technology-mainmenu-35/1456-bricsys-introduces-sketchup-like-shape-for-aec-conceptual-design

and there's also

http://www.formz.com/products/formzfree.html

but I never used it.

@jql said:

@deadtaco said:

There were so many things requested in the 2018 wish list forum post on the Sketchup forums. Did they even look at it?

I'm lead to believe they couldn't as Make was standing in the way.

LOL

Now seriously. Sketchup 8 is still free to use commercially. Make 2017 will be free to use for several years for hobbyists (though it's used by pros too, and that's the reality). Sketchup Free will keep being around and developed. Eventually it will get extensions too.

Let the focus be on Pro.

I'm an architect by the way. Layout is a main part of what I do. It's getting better by the year.

I also see better plugins every year and most of them solve most things being said here. These happen, I believe, due to a lot of work on the API side.

Sketchup free will take more resources away from the offline PRO. It is a completely different beast, most likely runs on a different code (html5). Not to mention that if they add extensions to Free, they will most likely be incompatible with the offline PRO. It would split developers between two bases.
Make was just pro with layout, style builder and a few features locked behind a paywall; that barely took any resources away.

@pbacot said:

As a business, I suppose they don't have any other reason to make moves other than business moves. I think the free version was good for business, but I suppose they've done more homework than simply "I think...."

There been quite a few cases were businesses got it completely wrong with dire consequences.

They are trying to force people to eventually buy the pro version. Sketchup Make will eventually become obsolete and inefficient compared to the newer versions. Eventually, newer plugins will become incompatible with the old SketchUp make.

Let's not kid ourselfs. Sketchup free is NOT a replacement for make (at least in its current state). They completely misunderstood what made SketchUp so attractive in the first place; it was its ease of use and how powerful it was thanks to its plugins. Without these extensions, sketchup would have been forgotten in obscurity and it would have never achieved the acceptance it has today. Only simple models would have been possible and it would have been too inefficient for anything more complex. These extensions were easy to use and fit into SketchUp's philosophy well.

Sketchup free is a purely business move. It has been completely gimped in order to force people into pro subscriptions. They took away features under the excuse of making it easier and more accessible to use. While truthfully they made complex models even harder to create. Even an advert supported Sketchup make 2018 (advert on startup) would have been a better idea then the online free version.

The current trajectory will most likely lead to a reduction of hobby users which would eventually reduce the number of extensions in development. Which will lead to a decline in pro users. Even kids will move on from FREE as they eventually will want to create more complex creations (when I was 14, it was only a week before I downloaded my first plugin).

And even if someday they add extensions to SketchUp Free, it's online only.

Yep its busted.

I wish they released the program as opensource.

C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/Extensions/IRExtension2015x64.so>
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/RubyStdLib/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb;54;in `require'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/RubyStdLib/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb;54;in `require'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_initialize.rbs;67;in `<module;ImgTecVis>'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_initialize.rbs;10;in `<main>'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;5;in `eval'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;5;in `require'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;5;in `<top (required)>'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/extensions.rb;197;in `require'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/extensions.rb;197;in `load'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;25;in `register_extension'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;25;in `<module;ImgTecVis>'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;14;in `<top (required)>'
Error; #<NoMethodError; undefined method `get_imgtec_rnd_api' for nil;NilClass>
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_initialize.rbs;23;in `irapi'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menu_commands.rbs;26;in `<module;ImgTecVis>'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menu_commands.rbs;10;in `<main>'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menus.rbs;9;in `eval'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menus.rbs;9;in `require'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menus.rbs;9;in `<main>'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;6;in `eval'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;6;in `require'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;6;in `<top (required)>'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/extensions.rb;197;in `require'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/extensions.rb;197;in `load'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;25;in `register_extension'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;25;in `<module;ImgTecVis>'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;14;in `<top (required)>'
Error; #<NoMethodError; undefined method `enable_statistics' for nil;NilClass>
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menus.rbs;93;in `<module;ImgTecVis>'
c;/programdata/sketchup/sketchup 2017/sketchup/plugins/imaginationvisualizer/iv_menus.rbs;12;in `<main>'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;6;in `eval'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;6;in `require'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer/iv_loader.rb;6;in `<top (required)>'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/extensions.rb;197;in `require'
C;/Program Files/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/Tools/extensions.rb;197;in `load'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;25;in `register_extension'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;25;in `<module;ImgTecVis>'
C;/ProgramData/SketchUp/SketchUp 2017/SketchUp/Plugins/ImaginationVisualizer.rb;14;in `<top (required)>'

Hi,
I've been searching for a plugin that would automatically 2d export in the background every *set period" of time from a specific scene at a specific file format and resolution.

So far I've been unsuccessful but It would help a lot with trying to explain your concepts and decisions and showcase how the project evolved.

I don't think this works on 2016, Unfortunately. I really like the defaults from this.

@willanie said:

Hi pilou,

Im pretty sure the original request was related to layering with an alpha channel but until the person chimes back it remains a mystery.

Your diagram is very neat. What software do you use to make such illustrations ... sketchup?

Also the cast shadow toggle is an interesting hidden gem in Visualizer which can be used to emit light from geometry in a limited fashion. It can take quite a while to render a noise free image. Here is a test image.

Woah I never knew that.

Ok I tested it out. Deselecting "Cast shadow" does nothing. However if you deselect "Receive Shadows" then that component starts to emit light.

@pbacot said:

@masterpaul said:

Can I use this to scale a component without scaling any inner components/geometry (just increasing and decreasing the space between objects)?

I.E there are 20 sub components in the the component and I would like the components to remain the same size while scale, and only the size between the components to shrink and expand proportionally.

From your description I don't think so. I have not seen any sort of setting that would allow that. You can do that sort of thing sequentially in one direction with "stretching" controlling the "divider" location, and performing a stretch for each space, but it wouldn't be possible in all directions.

Yeah unfortunately; however I found another method:

If someone has access to sketchup pro and dynamic components he can permanently set the dimensions of each component (for example in the size attributes click lenx, type "=40",press enter and repeat for lenY and LenZ) and it's really simple to do. Then no mater how many components he has selected and scales them all at ones they will always remain the original size, increasing or decreasing the space between them. Saves a lot of time when doing seating on stadiums for example.

Regular Sketchup users will have to do it the old fashion way until someone creates a plugin for this.

Can I use this to scale a component without scaling any inner components/geometry (just increasing and decreasing the space between objects)?

I.E there are 20 sub components in the the component and I would like the components to remain the same size while scale, and only the size between the components to shrink and expand proportionally.

Yeah I tried it cant really get hang of it; tried bloom unit; It didn't support the 120mb file (which I guess kinda makes it pointless?).

Hi in a few days I have to send my uni project, as I have no time I cant really render it the usual rendering which takes a good few hours just for one.

Does any one know a a render that renders in on a external render farm and that requires minimal texture work? (E.g podium or visualiser but cloud based)

Best Regards

They get compressed even with textures smaller then 2048. I'm using a simple texture that's basically a smooth gradient from grey to white; that's why perhaps all the artefacts show so much.

Is there away I could stop SketchUp from saving it as jpeg?

The built in make unique texture is terrible; compresses the images, makes them smaller and saves them in jpeg even if the original was png or another format.

I tried using make unique texture ++ however it does not work in the newest version of sketchup (Error #<NoMethodError:undefined method `+' for nil:NilClass.>)

My whole texturing and modelling process revolves around making textures unique and adding detail to them by hand in photoshop/gimp. However the quality is shredded by sketch-ups default make unique function. This is not a problem on smaller textures or textures that are rough in nature however if you start playing around with larger textures or smoother textures; then you will start noticing horrible artifacts.

@pbacot said:

Is that the gallery up top? Usually art galleries would not have direct light, especially from above. What don't you like about the front? Is this a programmatic requirement? If you wanted "boxy overhang", you have it. Maybe how it relates to the openings and the rest of the building needs definition and that is what bothers you. Also are there any graphics that would go on it? that streaky pattern is not bad.

Indeed usually galleries do have natural light comming from the top. The box is a programmatic requirment, with the cafeteria which also is located on the 2nd floor (beats my logic too). There two sculptural spaces one is the box while the other is on the other side. All the paintings are located on the ground floor. So all the natural light would have to go in through the side.

Yeah the lack of its definition killed the boxy overhang, I did a quick test and made the longer side all glass and painted everything with the streaky texture. Looks way better. On the other hand it will get a lot of direct southern light, doesn't change a lot though as the triangular roof all ready had to be transparent.

Are 4m bi-folding doors possible?

So this is it, A simple gallery space containing:

1. Two outside spaces (one is slightly covered)
2. Cafe.
3. Lecture room
   4)Indoor exhibition space.
4. Painting storage

However I am extremely unhappy with the the front facade. What makes it more complicated is the requirement of the upper outside gallery to overhang.

[3dwh:la26e620]u846455df-3f4a-46c0-9911-0859cb300f0a[/3dwh:la26e620]

https://3dwarehouse.sketchup.com/model.html?id=u846455df-3f4a-46c0-9911-0859cb300f0a

Ill all up listen to critic etc. (A lot of the detail is hidden by the layers). How would you fix the front façade?