Hmm, yes I can see how nesting them could throw it off. But it looks like you say it works as expected Jean, so thats good. I suppose an example is needed. I'll sure keep my eyes open for one. Chris PS I've had some great kite flying days already this year Jean, the weather is wonderful here in the San Francisco Bay area!

already a thread available

Hidden geometry will soon (and often) be your friend. I even have a shortcut for it.

There's a couple of good introductory videos on youtube which cover the basics well http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LcLPPz0fWM

context sensitive

If I'm making a model to be used in SU only or shared then I am weary about sizes and model using symmetry and groups, if I intend to export it to another app for compiling and render then I model as I please with no regard for size as no matter how I model in SU, most if not all 3rd party apps do not recognise SU groups or components so why waste time being conservative.

@putnik said: When an 'organised' script gets updated by its author, you have to go through all the steps again, which is a pain. I suggest you lobby the other authors to make their works Organizer-compatible. That would cut down on the headaches for users. @putnik said: All in all a better script manager is really needed. Unfortunately, a script manager relies on standards. If authors are unwilling to follow - or don't know about - the standards that allow the manager to function, things won't get any better.

@unknownuser said: And a little tut for use it [image: attachment.php?attachmentid=45676&stc=1&d=1224337660] Thank you MAN..

since I know soap skin, it was always under Tools.

@hfm said: Pretty good model [Star wars fan? ] Though I must say I find your taskbar a little disturbing: [attachment=0:3srsk6qx]<!-- ia0 -->Ho.jpg<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:3srsk6qx] You in the pimping business? looking for housing

I have and use this plugin http://www.alexschreyer.net/projects/plugin-loader-for-sketchup/. I use the following Plugin folder layouts. Plugin – This is where I store every plugin that I want to run automatically. Also I have plugin in this directory that I wish for the Plugin-loader to install and not be loaded automatically. These plugins, I remove the file type .rb, just leaving the file name as “GetLines” not “Getlines.rb.” This way, the plugin remains in the plugin folder, but will not be loaded autmatically. But will load with the plugin-loader, because "plugin-loader" adds the file extension, “.rb”. And the plugins that I wish to be loaded by the “plugin-loader” that I have chosen to remain in the plugin folder, I will remane by adding a number the front to the name, such as “1 – Getline.rb”. This will put the plugin at the top of the plugin in folder so I don’t have to hunt for it down in the directory. Other plugins I move to one of the following directories below, selecting it from the “plugin-loader“ when I wish to run the plugin. Works like a charm. Another thing I do, is I rename the plugin, i.e. Getline.rb may be renamed “To Get All Loose Lines– Getline.rb”. Note, I usually have the original name after the “-“ so I always know what the original plugin name was for future reference. I do this reference annotation renaming so I have some hint of exactly what the plugin does. I have not found a plugin that would not run from plugin-loader that I have rename by this method. My directory loayout, and I am thanking Didier Bur for the layout from his web page. 000 Steel Beams Angle 001 Animation – Scenes – Camera 002 Architecuture 003 Geometry – Drawing 004 Editing 005 Material – Colors – Rendering 006 Selection – Layers 007 Survey - Terrain Contour 008 Text 009 Files – Import – Export 010 Google Earth 011 Misc 012 Zip – Zar – Scripts 013 Script TXT Files 014 Data Files for Script Testing 015 Plugin exe Install files 016 Script Tutorials Hopes this helps. I know it cleaned up my drop drown plugins list. Ken

do a search for sketchup on youtube, there are some amazing instructional video's. you really can create anything, its all in knowing the different techniques.

if your aim is straight SketchUp export with edges switched on, it makes sense to keep the detail reasonably low (set yourself a limit of e.g. 5cm and never draw anything smaller than that, if possible). and then, as the others said, keep the same level of detail throughout the whole model. if you go for rendered images, as Gaieus said, the more detail the better, because you won't have any lines and therefore you won't have the problem of too many lines creating one dark mess in the distance. silver_shadow just mentioned his 2 million polygons model. I guess he referred to his 'eye candy 2' model. thats a perfect example, how high detail is beneficial for rendering

thanx guys. thanx hazza

heres a screen shot of how my model is going so far. its my left studio monitor which is a m-audio bx5 [image: bx5ep2.th.jpg]

hi Tekkybot, I think it really depends on what you prefer. I am definitely one who creates too many groups than sensible. as Alan said, you mainly use groups to seperate geometry (prevent it from sticking together) and for easier selection. I normally try to group geometry like in real life - if I have two pieces of wood, these will be two seperate groups. a nail keeping them together will be a seperate group again... of course grouping allways has it's atvantages and disadvantages. [image: groupinghe1.jpg] let me explain how I would proceed in a model with the above example: the house is a seperate group of course, like that I am not in danger of selecting any bits of it, when trying to highlight the table the table is a component (because it is likely that I will reuse the table in the model lateron...) the table top is a seperate group and the table legs are components (remember: repetition of the same element - components keep the file size down) the vase on the table is a component (again: I may want to reuse this one in the model) I put the table and the vase into a group. why? because if I now move it, the vase will stay on top of the table. this group is definitely arguable, because it is not too much effort to select vase + table manually and the model may become a bit confusing. with such a structured model it is very easy to select only the parts, that I really want to change. the danger of selecting geometry behind the object of interest is small. but what if I want to stretch the table a bit? first I have to enter the table/vase group. then I have to double-click the table component. then I can move the two table legs. and finally I have to enter the table top group to alter its proportions. if I hadn't put the table top in a seperate group, I could have selected and moved both desk top and legs at the same time. in such situations you have to choose, whether you want a extremely structured model of a more practical one. Alan's approach of reducing the number of groups will be more practical. my approach of seperating everything gives you peace of mind unfortunately a global selection function does not exist. I suggested it once, but not many people seem to share my wish for such a tool. so my advice. better greate one group more than necessary and explode it again later, when you are sure you don't need it.

Many of us have already "forgotten" what newbie problems used to be for us. It's always good to have someone "reviving" these questions also for the benefit of those shier newbies who only lurk the forums for answers to their questions (I remember doing this a lot in the old @Last forums when I was learning the program). We actually started the Newbie forum to encourage people like this to come out with questions about the seemingly most obvious answers so just go ahead asking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP2i_2VkLpQ this video just explained a lot

ok, im exhausted! i had the day off today, so i spent from 9:30 am to 8:00 pm watching aidan chopra videos, i must have watched twenty videos or more! but now i think im ready to try my hand at some more modeling

Or simply thre Follow me tool?