Thanks for the ideas. I'll look into all of them and see if there is a tweak or two I need to make.

Thank you, Gaieus! That must be what I am missing. I looked at online help for this but I didn't see that. After using SU8 for a while I would have stumbled over it eventually, I guess.

Actually about a week after you wrote that I left IMSI (because of an offer I couldn't refuse) and have moved to Palo Alto after 4 years in Sonoma! But I'll keep coming back up... it's such a great place. I'm sure the guys working on DoubleCAD would love hear what you're doing and any feedback on construction drawings from SketchUp. -- William

@thomthom said: What threes is that in the background? From Google Warehouse? Yes . By Darrell Smith, I believe, 2.5D as you can probably tell. I think it was called big oak tree. Will check when I get back to the computer next week and let you know if wrong .

SUp's inferencing can be like magic sometimes - it can be annoying at others BUT with use you know how to fool it into, for example, not locking the snap to the red axis when you are trying to pick a point just off it [tip orbit arouns so that the direction you are moving the cursor is not parallel to the sides of the screen - the red inference is less like to predominate - or still your cursor and wait a second and it'll suggest another inference]

Well, these projects are the ones one never finishes - maximum does not work any longer on them. There will be an exhibition opening next month where some of my older (Medieval) works will serve as "illustration" and this one is actually only the beginning of a large, Antique project.

Thank you, Miguel. That's the one I ended up using. Thanks for the link to Tomasz' site, too. I've never looked at it before. Pretty cool.

Beautiful landscape photos, but IMO it's getting a little ridiculous how much HDRI dominates landscape photography. There are good arguments for it: that it requires some fakery to attempt to represent the stunningness of the real world in a 2D LDR image (and after all, all photography is "fake"), but I've gone off landscape images which are too obviously heavily tone mapped/Photoshopped HDRI composites. I wonder if it's here to stay or if it'll look dated in a few years? I like the shopping trolley/Aberdeen Harbour one best, the photographer really managed to make an otherwise dubious subject absolutely beautiful. It reminds me (the subject, not the talent!) of one I took many years ago with my second-hand Sigma 35mm SLR. [image: yfvJ_trolleysmall.jpg]

Thomas, Looking at FredoScale I think it may do the job, with the tool called "Stretch". Those tools are fantastic, but not being a big ruby user I get daunted by where to begin. This looks like one to have. Thanks! Peter

Come over here, Dave, and you'll see wonders! Ther whole area (although only about an hour and a half walking distance from my home) is part of the National Park for its natural beauties as well as full of historic monuments. Just at the foot of the hill, there's a little village with a 13th century, little church (see the Placemark with the images also attached): [image: tn_1img042.jpg] [image: tn_1img043.jpg] and it's full of beautiful frescos: [image: tn_1img039.jpg] [image: tn_1img038.jpg] [image: tn_1img035.jpg] [image: tn_1img041.jpg] [image: tn_1img036.jpg] [image: tn_1img033_1.jpg] Cserkut.kmz

possibly. theres nothing hugely complicated in there and if they used pre-modelled stuff you could cut down on the modelling time. I highly doubt it was done on the fly, though. I reckon there was quite a lot of thought and planning that went in to the scene before they started modelling properly.

"3dFace" is the autocad (and others) name for the entity described below. If you are talking about "3d" and "faces" in general, then the below is too specific. In my experience, a dxf 3d face (3-4 sides) is a closed polyline that imports as a SU surface. I think that even in the case when the 3d face's polyline is not closed, SU's import function will close it. Every 3d face consist of a polyline, but polylines are not necessarily 3d faces.

Yes, for some clients interactive 3D is like a dark art or something like that, they're just amazed when they see something orbiting.

The "going rate" for a colored front elevation rendering seemed to be around $500 around Denver. Basically it was competing against the watercolor artists that permeate the back of most Denver area real estate magazines. For some strange reason the real estate sector in the Denver area is obsessed with these watercolor renderings some of which border on being naive art. The problem however when basing this rate with a Sketch-Up model is that it goes beyond a mere “flat” rendering of an architectural structure. The tendency is to work the model on all four sides including site development to a certain extent and development of details well beyond the ability of traditional rendering “artists.” Additionally, the client will also have a tendency to request a multitude of color and material changes. Thus you also become a “color consultant” of sorts in addition to a 3D modeler and renderer. In the end I believe it takes about 3 working days (24 hours) to create a 3D model and rendering. This includes the above mentioned color and material changes. $500 is the minimum for a good competent rendering. In my experience the price range is anywhere from $500 to $1,500 so essentially the proposal should read: “For an amount not to exceed one-thousand five-hundred dollars and zero cents ($1,500.00).” “Billing to be based on an hourly rate of ______ /hr.” If you think 1,500 is too high just adjust the above quote. It could be lower if you get a bulk contract with numerous renderings. If you are not familiar with the client also include a requirement of a retainer of around ten-percent (10%) of the maximum cost. Emphasize the final cost for the client as opposed to an hourly rate especially if you’re thinking of a range of $75-100/hour which will scare off most people in this current economic environment.

...er, that about does it! I searched but I didn't see that one. Thanks! Peter

TIG, I tried yours and it seems to work great for what I was doing (rather than duplicating planes and intersecting "by hand"). Also gives the lines as a separate group, instead of making them part of the mesh, which I like. Taff, I think your ruby will do the same thing once I fix the header. I am not sure the paint faces ruby works for the effect I was looking for, as it does not give a graduated texture, nor colors by contour. It might be useful if the model is used in analysis. I only got one color, though I picked other ones. It has an interesting look, like an iceberg. Just for your info (not complaining) where you put in a number (default 10) is is not clear what the number is and that there is a limit, seems to be about 46). The lower numbers give a very subtle effect. If you go too hight the colors repeat, starting with the dark color. Your terrain models are very helpful (wish SU were faster in flying over).It would be neat to do the model of a place you are going to visit and hike in. And I like the effect you got with the lake surface. Thank you both for the help. Peter