Thanks again

Thank you Pilou. It is a complex shape and to get the curves and presures you need to divide it up. maybe I should invest in Sub/smooth.

The details of some of those photos are on the Cloud Appreciation Society's site. http://cloudappreciationsociety.org/name-that-cloud/

And I even know why.

... and here's a shop to match on the main shopping street of one of Edinburgh's nicer districts. [image: 7kvq_weeshop.jpg] 40"(1016mm) wide at the front, tapers to 18" (457mm) wide at the back and 4'6" (1370mm) deep (but the cellar's HUGE lol). The photo looks ancient, but it was only taken 24 years ago. It remained a coal supplier until just a few years ago- yes, someone actually sat in there taking orders- we always used to peek in when we passed to catch a glimpse of the poor (but obviously not claustrophobic) soul. Now, sadly it's just the novelty display window for an estate agents/realtor, but at least it still has a genuine function. http://www.corstorphine-trust.ukgo.com/CorstorphineTopics/TheWeeShop.html

thanks its a nice collection.....

Tom, That joke works on so many levels, at first I just burst out laughing, then I got thinking about it... it actually raises some excellent theological, philosophical and moral questions! Now I don't know whether to laugh or to ponder. A bit of both I think.

@ross macintosh said: Why walk, saunter, or stroll - when you can roll! I take the SketchUp-mobile as much as possible. I sit up top and my driver gets me where I need to go. Regards, Ross Oh my god.

Thanks Gai i think thats sorted it Edit: and Susan

yes. Those old versions, 2 and 3, are to be kept as remembrances of how SketchUp grew. @unknownuser said: Most confindent for me is number 4 for there there Is the ruby. The path gone from there on has lead us to our present confused situation. 5 and 6 lack of interest and are, much more the version 6, full of distractions. (my opinion)

Ah it all becomes clear. It was the joining dates that confused me.

Thanks Its hard to stay away from putting too much detail in.

Wow! What a quick response! Thanks guys. I will try the external method first and see if it works Thanks very much

Thanks, Toby.

I agree with Daniel on this, to a lot of more experienced modelers knocking up a bench could be a matter minutes, but to someone whos only recently started in 3D it could be a long and laborious process with often mediocre results at the end. I suppose this is all part of the learning experience though, so i suppose its just about striking a balance between modeling for free and helping people learn.

St Neots Cambs CIWM Article.pdf Here is the project finally published

@unknownuser said: Although its really pointless guessing im not sure Autodesk would have moved SU in such a bad way. They took on Revit and it looks to be in a pretty strong position now! Maybe they would have taken on SU and progressed it further and at the same time taken some of its ease of use and bolted that onto AutoCad. Thats how I feel when I look at AutoCAD Architecture (formely ADT) It is this cumbersome Autocad product that is very powerful, but not user friendly at all. It is a sort of hybrid of ACAD and Revit. What im getting at, we all seem to slag off Autodesk, but that does not mean they would have stood still or ruined SU. I agree completely. While I do feel that AutoDesk charges too much for it's software I see others do it as well. I do think that AutoDesk would have developed SU more to what "we" would like to see instead of simply a tool to populate Google Earth. I for one dreaded the day Google bought @Last.

Now let's talk to Craig (and the others here).

hehehe well i like instrumental and simphonical music