Might this resource be something that would satisfy your BIM needs? IFC2SKP

I haven't personally used it, but from the website description, it sounds like it might be of use to you.

Regards,
Taff

ridix,

The file location referenced in your first post is your Internet Explorer 'cache' folder. You might try deleting all files in the cache, before you try the 'Share' from within SketchUp.

Open Internet Explorer, and select 'Tools > Internet Options... > Delete Files'. Then try your SketchUp 'Share'

(I'm uncertain that this is the cause of your problem, but it's a possibility.)

Regards,
Taff

@baz said:

Hey DH, could you upload bigger images?

I concur -- DH, your art often brings to (my) mind Marcel Duchamp's imagery:

"The Large Glass"
(Philadelphia Museum of Art)

"Good on you"

Regards,
Taff

If the previously-provided link doesn't work for you (it didn't for me,) try this one:

SketchUp and Photoshop - Lens Blur

...at the official YouTube home of...

Google SketchUp Video Tutorials

(Is that the tutorial you needed/intended?)

Taff

@watkins said:

I find the thread textures very useful for reminding which are tapped and which are clearance holes.

All too true. This is a common deficiency of many 'exploded' diagrams, distributed as instructions.

I've depicted such by copying the circle multiple times, at small intervals, to represent threads. I suspect no one will count them, nor measure the pitch, nor notice that it's not a helix.

I wonder which is less memory-intensive, 'image texture' threads, or multiple circles?

Taff

Regarding the models and images posted here, I consider the best tip I've seen depicted is the 'labeling' of the head of the bolt (with its designation.) This can be extended to include the radial 'bars' that designate the hardness of the metal.

With such designations, there can be no mistake what a designer intended, should the model be provided as true instructions for a machine. While users of the model may not be familiar with the graphic representation of different threads, the head label is something readily matched at the hardware store.

Good idea. Any construction diagrams I model in the future will definitely include these head 'stampings'

Taff

Eric,

I remember this from awhile back, and produced a model to demonstrate:
Texture Move - 3D Warehouse

Last summer, there was a discussion over at the SketchUp Help Group:
http://groups.google.com/group/SketchUp3d/browse_thread/thread/83b526b2bbf5641

Wo3Dan came up with the best resolution. Select the 'painted' face, and choose 'Texture > Position'. Don't actually make any changes. Just right-click and select 'Done'. The texture is now 'glued' to the face, at it's current position and rotational orientation. Why it works? Who knows -- but I now use the technique regularly. (You can try it on the model linked above.)

Taff

If you don't have it, the original @Last 'spin view' (animation.rb) can be downloaded from...
Ruby Library Depot

Incidentally, there are many other animation/camera utilities available, as well.

Tancredi,

You have three tasks to perform:
(1) Create your animation in SketchUp
(2) Use a screen capture utility to save the animation as a 'video'
(3) Convert the saved animation video to SWF

I've used the 'spin view' animation built-in to SketchUp, capturing the animation with the free utility, CamStudio. The animation is saved by CamStudio as an '.avi' file. CamStudio can then be used to convert the avi animation into a flash SWF file.

(There are surely many ways to achieve your goal. I used CamStudio because it's free.)

CamStudio is great for capturing the video, but not so good for editing it. For that I used 'Animation Shop' which comes with 'Paint Shop Pro.' There are other editors that will permit you to edit frames, timing, etc., as does Animation Shop.

Also, CamStudio isn't very efficient at producing the SWF. I've attached a single frame from my video. The avi file can be downloaded from: http://geodesichelp.googlegroups.com/web/WorkBee.avi While the avi is just over 4 MB, the produced SWF file was over 35 MB (Way too big!) I haven't yet searched for alternatives.

I'm sure there will be many more suggestions from SCF members. Be patient...

Regards,
Taff

Angelus,

Slow down, back up, and read Gaieus' suggestion again...

Go to 'Window > Model Info > Statistics' to find the 'Purge unused' button. It's not in the 'Materials' window.

Taff

@paul o said:

Now it gives me the message "application won't start because AVIFLI32.dll was not found..."

Are you sure it's not "AVIFIL32.dll" that's missing?

On my Windows XP installation (on PC) I have an "AVIFIL32.dll" but no "AVIFLI32.dll"

A Google search of each filename shows very few hits for your quoted filename, while "AVIFIL32.dll" results in MANY hits.

Taff

Jakob,

Your 'drop' demo model works great. I hadn't foreseen the option that this technique provides -- giving you the power to change the degree of detail (spacing.) This can be a great way to reduce the polygon-count for a complex terrain; producing larger mesh triangles.

Since the drop ruby finds intersections corresponding to lines AND planes, automatic interpolation is provided. A smaller grid spacing should, therefore, also produce useful results.

Thanks for the demos!
Taff

@unknownuser said:

Taff...I must say I love your terrains. Have you used them as a model platform within SU I am curious about your methods for managing such large files.

Actually, I haven't used them as you describe. I was curious about SketchUp's capability to model textured terrain, for such possible use in the future (but haven't yet had the need.)

I worked through different methods to produce the terrain models -- in fact, there is a chronological order to the sophistication of the models, improving as I learned. All of them, however, were still just experiments and capability demos.

A couple are tutorials. If you have further questions, I'd be glad discuss further.

(Are they really that large?)

When I have some time, I plan to test the 'drop' ruby, to see if Jakob's technique can be made a little easier/quicker (if he doesn't beat me to it, that is.)

Taff

Borat,

You don't mention whether you tried Buzzer1001's suggestion. Did you miss it (or discount it)? It really works quite well.

Taff

Interesting (and, yes, tedious!)

Might the 'drop' ruby provide a means of producing a regular red/green grid of line-entities, dropped to establish new blue coordinates? I haven't tried it, but from what I've read about 'drop,' isn't this what it was designed to do?

I'm a fan of terrain simplification, but have always done it outside of SketchUp (generally, using TerraGen.)
My 3D Warehouse terrain collection

Taff

@reflexion said:

Is it possible to rotate a bunch of objects independently?

By that I mean rotating 10 objects at the same time, but each objects rotating around their own center.

Or, is is possible to create instances in sketchup? (such as in 3ds max)

If your 10 objects are identical, make one component and nine copies of that component. When you edit one of these 10 components, the other nine will be automatically 'edited.' You can, therefore, enter the editing context of a component, rotating all entities within. Close the component, and you'll see that the other nine copies have their 'contents' rotated identically.

This sounds pretty much like 'instancing,' as you use the term. Could this be what you were looking for?

(Note that this doesn't work for 'groups,' but only for 'components.')

Regards,
Taff

@remus said:

...personally i think the marketing department at coca-cola (and quite a few other places) need a slap and a damm good talking to, maybe that would bring them back in to the real world.

I fear that THEY portend the emerging 'real world.' THEY think we're 'stuck in the past.' THEY hold politcal power. THEY are 'progressive' while we are 'regressive.'

And I'm certain that THEY would view your 'slap' reference as an indication that you are violent and a danger, and for the common good, you should be removed from society, where you can then attend court-ordered 'anger management' classes.

I'm just glad that Chilling Effects and EFF are on our side -- as is, apparently, Google. Can you imagine what this would do to the internet in general, and to Google specifically? 'Chilling Effects' is appropriately named.

@kwistenbiebel said:

These things mostly seem US inspired, as they have an agressive legal culture.
Unfortunately, some of that has crossbreed in Europe as well (medical claims, branding issues etc...)

Yes, you're right. In the US, we have several 'liberal' states. One of the most liberal is California (including Hollywood, where the DMCA started.) So, even in the US, it's a common phrase, "...as goes California, so goes America." Eventually, it will spread from California to the rest of the US, then possibly, the rest of the world.

I'm not afraid of posting models -- potentially being in violation. I'm irritated that my freedom to do so (using aforementioned 'common sense') is being hammered by politicians out to make a buck.

Surely, they know that I'll never be in a position to pay royalties. They won't make any money (I wasn't making money in the first place) and Google has to remove the model to satisfy a 'take down' order. No one gains. The model's gone. Thank you, politicians...

"Ridiculousness" never stops a lawyer/politician.

Indications are that manufacturers do, indeed, intend to pursue this course of action. Purportedly, you can't even model a Coke can - applying the Coca-Cola graphics/logo/texture to the surface. Just like you can't show a Coke can in a movie, without first paying royalties. (This is just the opposite of "product placement" - where the manufacturer pays the movie-maker to display their product in the movie.) What are these attorneys thinking!?

Railroad modelers can't apply an "Illinois Central" railroad sticker to a model railcar, unless the sticker was purchased from a licensed, authorized producer (i.e.; royalties have been paid.)

This all started with the music industry, wanting royalties whenever someone 'plays' their song. That means on the radio, in a bar or store, at a public event, 'elevator' music, etc. Ideally, they want you to pay each time you play their song, even if it's only you listening. (They haven't been able to figure out how to do that yet. I'm sure they're still working on that one.)

Sure it's nuts, but it's legal...

I think some of you might be missing something -- There's a larger context to the 'intellectual property' issue that you may not have considered.

I have two aircraft models posted in the 3D Warehouse, the North American Aviation X-15-1 and X-15A-2:

X-15-1 & X-15A-2

North American Aviation is now part of Boeing. If Boeing wanted to, they can require Google (3D Warehouse) to remove my models, because they alledgedly violate DMCA provisions:

Digital Millennium Copyright Act

This has happened already, at the 3D-digital-model site, TurboSquid:

WWII Bomber: "Trademark Infringement"

This is already entrenched in the plastic-model-kit industry. All model companies now have to pay royalties to produce models of the F-16, railroad cars, Ford Mustangs, etc. The royalties are so egregious (in some cases, $40 per kit,) that many kit manufacturers have severely cut-back their offerings. 3D digital models are being targeted next.

The reason Jody mentions that Google reports DMCA 'takedown' requests to Chilling Effects, is because they are on our side, trying to fight this trend.

Chilling Effects is a joint project, one of the the primary participants being the Electronic Freedom Foundation.

Carried to its extreme, many 3D digital models could disappear from the internet. Consider, for example. the many Star Wars models already in the 3D Warehouse (light sabers, included.) Perhaps, even architectural designs could be included. (Why not?)

Read-up on it. It (generally) pays to be forewarned....

Regards,
Taff