Yup Gai thats exactly what I was thinking. Does this method solve the rendering issue SchreiberBike brought up?

And my fantasy involved an automated ruby that would to through every group/component and regroup based on symmetry. Or you could select specific groups/components. I would probably only do the whole model before sending it to LayOut, to someone via email, or posting it on a cool message board with file size limitations . I would keep a copy of the unmodified version as well.

Disclaimer: I have no knowledge of Ruby scripting or what its capabilities are. But I had an idea that I thought I would share in case someone with more talent than myself was interested in kicking the idea around a little.

Like many SU users I mostly model houses and other "built" structures. I make use of groups and components extensively. I do this for organization and to reduce file size.

I noticed that many of my components or groups have some type of symmetry and could therefore be made up of multiple subcomponents rotated or mirrored about an axis or plane.

Some of the Google components demonstrate this idea:

But I immagine that for most people, including myself, it is unintuitive to model a quarter of a table and then rotate it. I model the table and then I move on. I don't take time to explode the table, make a component of 1/4 of it, then rotate it around and regroup.

What about a ruby that would go into groups and components look for symmetry. If found it would create a component out of 1/4 (or whatever), rotate it around and delete the rest. A cylinder with 100 sides could be one poly rotated around the center point.

Here is a link I found that has a nice flow chart for determining symmetry:
http://www.artlandia.com/products/SymmetryWorks/tutorials/classification.html

It seems like there would be alot of polygons that could be eliminated. Would this help with reducing animation times as well?

So what do you ruby guys think, is this possible to do?

Charlie, I did check your model when you posted it and sorry for not acknowledging it then. I appreciate your effort in this.

As you and GreyHead discovered there are some lines in the model that are very slightly off. I'm now trying to figure out how this originated, but I'm not sure its possible to determine this.

Gata- thats a pretty interesting case and sounds somewhat similar. But since the moral of that story is also that sometimes SU gets thrown off a little I guess I'm just going to keep checking my color by axis view every now and again.

I'm assuming you mean the original box that has the error.

Not too far, but the origin has moved a couple of times. It's a large model with topo terrain and many lines and faces (hundreds of thousands). I could give you a more specific distance if you think it would help.

the windows were modified versions of a window from the component library.

Wo3Dan
So I realize how the dimension lines became non-associated. I took the component out of my model and put in a skippy of its own so it would be small enough to share. I made some dimensions and then grouped them so I could hide them all at once. This must break their association.

As far as its origin, it was definitely made in SU 6 Pro (latest patch). There are a few pieces of furniture in my model that are from the warehouse but this block was made in the walls, well away from any furniture. All the groups that had this error were native to SU. I will double check the source of my windows, I think I made them.

I had a bunch of components that had this problem. However I bet the problem had one single origin. Since the components were all framing members for window openings in a strawbale wall I would use one as a reference for the next. So if the first one had an error it would be replicated over and over again.

Thanks for looking at it.

Ah good one SchreiberBike, I was just staring at it for too long I suppose. So it does seem like a rounding error after all.

Its so good to have this forum, you all keep me sane (somewhat).
Thanks guys

that must be it GreyHead. The color by axis feature must be a hair more accurate than the line and face engine.

Thanks for the help GreyHead. I think you have successfully proved that the line is off axis but there is something that still troubles me:

How is it possible to have a box with 10 lines on axis (90 deg from eachother) and 2 lines that are off but have only 6 faces that connect them?

The first pic shows the faulty box and its statistics. The second is an exaggerated box that has 10 "on-axis" lines and 2 off. You can see that this needs more lines and faces to close the shape.

And Anssi yes the model this came out of is pretty big (over 300,000 faces).

well the box was made with push/pull so its unlikely. If it were off by a little it should say something like ~5 1/2". Plus the model is shown in wire frame with color by axis on. When you turn on faces all the faces appear.

If you purge the model and check for errors it is fine. When you look at the geometry there are 12 lines and 6 faces so there are no little lines throwing things off.

Its really wierd. Thanks for looking at it.

We all know what happens if you have lines that are almost on axis, but not quite. I took this component out of a model for you all to look at. This seems like a paradox: 10 of 12 lines of a box are on axis. The lines are all of equal length.

Have I just been looking at this for too long? Is the answer sitting in plain view?

PLEASE, THIS IS DRIVING ME CRAZY!!

faulty box.skp

Here is the other pic and the style

Draft Blue lines.style

So I needed to make a document for the bank's assessors and wanted the clients to have something nice to show their freinds while they wait for its construction.

The first and second pic are what I used for the plan with perspective on.

The third and fourth pics are what was used for the plan with dimensions. Settings as follows:

Perspective off
In Style Window:
enable transparancy
transparancy quality = nicer
textures on
x ray on

One of the nice features of this style is that with transparancy on you can see openings in walls and textures are present but somewhat muted (IMHO).

enjoy

Nice one Guite. I have added it to my collection. Thanks for sharing. It's nice to have a variety handy to suit the particular feel you want to create.

ok, thanks Gai, I will just assume this is true unless I hear otherwise. Thanks for the response

Very creative and useful. Well done! My clients were just saying yesterday that they wanted to see the model populated with trees.

Keep up the amazing work.

Surely someone knows the answer to this question. I know there are some really talented style creators out there. It will help me share a style I created if someone knows the answer to this question. Thanks all.

Yup, I got a lot of the above fonts at those two sites. It's kind of insane how many fonts are out there.

So I spent a while on free font sites looking for some new fonts for a project. I found some nice ones seen in the screen shots below. Most of what you see in the pics below are free. A couple came with my copy of word perfect. If anyone is interested in these please look for the name of the font after the sample. You will have to do a search for them because I can't remember where any of them came from.

Hope it helps someone.

Its 7:04 now and I'm also spending the night with my family. A couple of friends will stop by for a champagne coctail (3-5 dashes Agnostora bitters on a sugar cube, shot of brandy, top up with champagne and add a twist of orange.) Damn they are good, but they are a cruel mistress if you have to many. I learned that last year.

Happy New Year Friends!