@alan fraser said:

Soviet-style socialism is dead and discredited; outperformed and undermined by western capitalism to the point where it simply imploded.

How true!
Mr S, what is your fear?
My (here in Europe) only fear is that we are too dependent on Russia’s gas and oil resources.
It’s system is as dead as an almost dead horse. The difference between Europe and the USA is that
the USA wants to keep its leading position in the world as a superpower. Unfortunately for the USA not for long. The “threat” does not come from Russia. It will most likely come from big countries like China and India, countries that have just begun to endorse the benefits of capitalism. Already we can see the ever increasing influence of China on the financial market.

Wo3Dan

Congratulations to Obama, to all who supported him in his long campaign, to all who voted for him and to the USA.
I enjoyed this campaign more, especially because there was much less ‘mud throwing’. (not talking about Palin). You could see that both candidates didn’t really like to be dragged into this kind of ugly campaigning. I have no doubt that McCain’s congratulations were honest. An admirable man who took his defeat with dignity.
Let’s hope the younger Obama will face USA’s and world problems with more wisdom than his predecessor Bush. (not difficult for the bright person he is).
Let’s hope his charisma ‘pays off’ in a way that he / the administration makes sound decisions, not only for the USA but also in respect to the rest of the world. In another thread the superpower issue was mentioned. This might be by history. But the USA may have a hard time to cope with the fact that in the next decade(s) we will see that there are other participants in the world-scene who may no longer accept this and who will be able to dictate whatever goes on in the world and how conflicts/problems should be resolved. Not the USA nor Europe nor Russia. All three together represent only about 14 percent of the world population. And they’re separate participants!
( As I wrote before: ….and hopefully it will bring the US back to what it is. Just a big country (not that many people) as part of a world that belongs to all of us.)
Let’s hope Obama will not exclude the republicans from his strategy. I wish him well in facing an immense task to put the USA back on track. I think he can do it.

I do hope and congratulations from

Wo3Dan

@tomsdesk said:

Rather controversial title of a Newsweek article...addressing some of the ideas that have been sloshing around in my head since the Berlin speech: http://www.newsweek.com/id/166910

Love to know from the world out there, as represented here, if this is at all accurate and/or represents similar ideas you have, thanks?

Tom,
Just my thoughts: wondering how I would convert my thoughts into words on paper/internet my eye fell on one of the posted comments.
It just about sums it up for me.

Comment: Of course "the world has never watched any vote, in any nation, so
closely"! Do you actually realize the incredible incompetence with which the US
have managed problems (which the US often created on their own!) in the past 8
years? Geez, please open your eyes and stop this unfounded narcissistic crap!

I have never come to understand how you (not personal) could have elected a president so dumb and arrogant, not only once but twice in a row!!! Also a liar in many occasions, surrounded by some notorious liars. It wouldn’t even be that bad if not so many lifes were/are at stake. And that “only” for power and money.

Personally I hope the next US president will be Obama. Not that he will be our/my president. But it could be the change many people all over the world are looking for and hopefully it will bring the US back to what it is. Just a big country (not that many people) as part of a world that belongs to all of us.

Mind you, the US is a nice country with a lot of bright and friendly people. But what a mess you make out of politics and on where you should stand in the entire worldscene. And this country wants to ‘export’ democracy? What a laugh!
And let’s hope this time they’re able to count all votes right, without cheating!

Wo3Dan

@brechtix said:

.......
I have two almost identical models, one at 5MB and a newer at 19MB.
...........but still cannot get the file under 12MB. ......?
Regards,
B.

Odd question: have you tried 'Purge Unused'?
Window => Model Info => Statistics => Purge Unused.

Wo3Dan

@formalyknownasmartin said:

.....Gruppen (bestehen immer aus mindestens 2 Elementen)........
.................

Man kan ja auch eine einzelne Linie gruppieren.
(selektiere eine Linie => Edit_menu => Gruppiere)
Aber das Problem mit SU6 ist das es keinen „Rotier/snap“ Eigenschaft vorhanden ist. Nicht so wie wenn mann etwas verschiebt im richtung einer Linie, Endepunkt, Mittelpunkt oder Hilfslinie. Einen genauen Dreieck konstruieren nur durch das rotieren drei einzelne gegeben Linien (gruppiert oder micht) ist in SU leider (noch?) nicht möglich!

Wo3Dan

Additional information about the Archimedes project:
http://www.csposi.org/archimedes/archimedes.html

Wo3Dan

@voder vocoder said:

Consider: the rotate feature of the Move tool displays a protractor that is .....
...
...
Read the angle from the VCB.

Once you know the rotation of your line of sight from east, you can rotate a section plane to that same angle.
~Voder

Voder,

Although your explanation of (an approximation of) the rotation angle about Blue is a correct it is still just one rotation angle. You forgot the tilt. The section plane generally needs two rotations to align it to the screen. In some cases I can get a fairly correct section plane by first drawing a few lines, creating a face that is visible as a single line (i.e. viewpoint and target in that particular face).
Tough question!

Wo3Dan

@al hart said:

I would like to add a section plane perpendicular to the current view.

I think this is not precisely possible in a perspective view, but it still might come close.
Does anyone know how to do this?
and/or how to add geometry or constructions lines perpendicular to the current view
(which could then be used to create the section in another view)

Tough question.

The way I see this question is:
There is a certain view needed (for whatever reason), let's say just found by orbiting. But there is no geometry (face) aligned to the screen in that particular view. How to create a section plane aligned to the screen? So the answers given by Brodie and Jean fail.
I would also like to know the answer that Al Hart is after. For now I don't know.

Wo3Dan

Taff,

I have not looked into the mathematical correctness. No doubt that the parabolas are correct.
But what if you adjust (scale) the image (explode first) to fit the grouped parabola on the left. The parabolas are now equal but their focal points are not. There can only be one.
(Or could it just be a scaling issue where one needs to construct the focal point again?)

Wo3Dan

@gaieus said:

Once we ran a poll and about 25% of the members were on Mac.

And I'm sorry for this glitch - no-one has ever reported anything like this.

Gaieus,

Ofthen I face the same 'problem' where I just have to 'page back' to see SCF again, as described above.
(windows XP / IE)

Wo3Dan

Tonto,

Your question reminds me of this thread (jan2008):
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=6890&p=44775&hilit=+wo3dan#p44775

Maybe it will help you in any way.

Wo3Dan

@formalyknownasmartin said:

Mike Lucey´s link in first thread is broken. Please use this link:
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=394

Thanks for the fixed link, Martin.
Yes, I too should check the 'Deutchsprachige' forum more often. But there is so much to cover to keep track. Once in a while I do answer (in German) in other forums, re-addressing people to SCF (and/or SU Pro Help Group) for further help. Reading is the easy part for me. Writing is quite a different story.

Gruss,
Wo3Dan

pbacot,

How about applying the 'Eraser' tool in X-Ray mode? It wouldn't take that long, would it?

Wo3Dan

@kimberlylarae said:

That might explain it. I'm so totally new to this. In school we are told to do it, unfortunately not much is said about how to do it. Today I'm doing a secional sofa and learning groups and the arc tool. As usual, I'm lost. At first I thought it was because I've gone back to school at the age of 40. Now I'm certain I would be lost at any age.

kimberlylarae,
Looking at your uploaded .skp I have some suggestions.
Don't use screentext to point directly to your model. Whenever you orbit or pan it will only be confusing.
Avoid using 3D-text for it will increase your file size. 3D-text is just a bunch of edges in components.
Dimension important geometry in your model to keep track of changes in size and to stay in control.

I've made a sequence of how you could start creating a floor plan. It's just an example though.
See attached file:

W4A3-Kim-Floorplan.skp

@mirjman said:

surely there must be some rule that controls which side of the face will display? usually it has to do with the direction of the lines around the face (clockwise/counterclockwise) but I can't seem to force a consistent behavior from SU. Anyone know?

Here is a thread about the subject.
http://www.sketchucation.com/forums/scf/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=6018&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=wo3dan+simon&start=15
Somewhere halfway the second page you will find a post by Wo3Dan with an attachment called FaceOrient.skp
In here you'll find some sort of explanation on how SU decides to create either front or back as visible face. But more important: after checking out and understanding it better don't waste to much time on the subject. (I did!) It's easier to repair (reverse) then remembering the details.
(b.t.w clockwise/counter clockwise has nothing to do with how a face is created)

Wo3Dan

@spence said:

Thats good information Wo3Dan. Now how did you get the 1.66667 number?

Spence,

You are pulling my legg aren't you?

Anyway. Your input (in the copier) is 1:500. The output needs to be 1:300 which is a larger scale.
So you need ?:500 to equal 1:300. What more can I say? (500/300):500 = (1.66666667):500 = 1:300

b.t.w. don't underestimate the SU scale tool features whenever you encounter such a thing in SU.

success,
Wo3Dan

@spence said:

First, this is not a Sketchup scale question but I have to ask Sketchup people because they are the best and nicest.
I have printed out a google earth image to the scale of 1:300 and for some crazy reason I drew a plan over that image at 1:500 scale. Now I need to find out what percentile I copy my 1:500 drawing to be at 1:300?

Spence,

Since this is not a Sketchup issue you need to scale up your drawing 1.66667:1 which means enlarge it.
Only then it will match the GE image that is 1:300 (Remus is right)

In SU you could either use the scale tool or the tape measure tool to correct things.
With the scale tool you can (at least I can) add decimal comma in a factor or add a unit.
The unit means: skip factor but aply measure, grip to grip. Tricky but it works to correct things.

Wo3Dan

@ilay7k said:

what do you think about this http://tapthehive.com/discuss/This_Post_Not_Made_In_Chrome_Google_s_EULA_Sucks ?

Thanks for sharing. Makes me wonder whether they couldn't put it any better. Why should we sell our souls and all our creativity to any (virtual) company? What comes next?

Wo3Dan

@alan fraser said:

You can solve such problems In Model by exploding the group then immediately r-clicking and grouping again while all the geometry is still selected.

Yes Alan, you can but there are major disadvantages.
Texture as well as layers are inherited by unpainted entities resp. layer0-entities (default settings) in a group (or component) when exploding that group (or C).
As for texture, you might get a lot of unwanted changes that you need to fix later. [all faces (both sides) AND edges one level down are now painted!!!]
As for geometry, it is against Googles advise to have primary entities in another layer than layer0. But that is exactly what happens when you explode and regroup. (ungrouped entities in different layer(s) other than layer0)

%(#0000FF)[The remedy is:
for groups: right click > select “Make Component” > right click > select “Scale Definition”
for components: right click > select “Make Unique” > right click > select “Scale Definition”

Now only the texture scale has changed back to normal in both cases.]

Wo3Dan

@gaieus said:

Ha, Wodan!

Long time no see!

Just in the right time!
I didn't even think of the group scale - just the material.

Hi Gaieus,
Enjoying 5 weeks vacation in France (Dordogne and mostly in Brittany). Avoiding large cities.
In lots of villages it's like being in an open museum. Also good to be back though. Save some for next year! Beautiful country / nice people.
You should try Brittany one day.

To go back on topic and nail down the "problem":
a scaled down component will also scale down the texture applied to it, (on group and faces!)
You can't see this in the entity info which makes it a bit weird.

Wo3Dan