I really liked the first Artisan and this second version looks 10 times better! Can’t wait to get my hands on it… Good job I am really excited about this new release!
I bought artisan a couple years ago, it’s been a great tool for organic modeling and sculpting inside sketchup, the new version looks awesome but I don’t really like that it’s subscription only, mindsight studios hasn’t done this with other plug-ins, they even gave a discount for updating from profile builder 2 to 3, and now the subscription is more expensive than the previous perpetual licensed version, I understand that some softwares that receive constant updates and upgrades adopt this business method, but artisan 1 hasn’t been updated or upgraded since I bought it. I really hope they don’t do the same with their other plug-ins like quantifier pro 2 and profile builder 4.
Cool - the topographical modelling tools look great for Architecture Engineering and landscape design - we’re really missing a few key tools that will supercharge SketchUp’s role in the site/landscape/earthworks design. Our team will definitely be giving this a try.
It solves a gap in the workflow where a lot of site shaping is actually happening these days within Twinmotion. Artisan 2 will mean we can shape large sites quickly within SketchUp…a much better solution all around.
Any chance you could add a function to shape a surface to a desired slope gradient? IE, the brush has an Angle as well as a size?
A bit like how flatten makes it flat, but what if we don’t want it to be flattened, we want it to preserve a maximum of a 10% gradient?
Shading by Gradient (slope angle) would also be awesome (not sure if it Artisan 2 has this…will check)
Hi Mike, I notice that you just joined the forum to express your frustrations here. Your profile says you are a 2017 Make user. Your Artisan 1 license will keep working forever with that version. No one is forcing you to upgrade to version 2. If you don’t see the value in paying for professional software that you can use for commercial work, then best to stick to using version 1 on SketchUp Make.
Although the price for v2 is a significant jump from version 1, we feel it is in line with other extensions of similar quality and reflects the value it can bring to professional users.
I actually think that the price would be fair if it was a perpetual license, subD and vertex tools cost $40 each, and are capable of doing the same things as artisan except for the sculpting, but the licenses for those plug-ins are perpetual. I don’t know if Mindsight will change their mind on these, and really hope this isn’t the beginning of changing all the licenses of mindsight plug-ins to subscription only.
When it comes to software it makes sense it is a subscription because the developers constantly work on the code and customer support. It is NOT fair for developers to dedicate many years working for us to only pay just $30 to $40 bucks.
What normally happens with the “Perpetual” license is that at the end of the year, the extension releases a new version. For example, we went from Vertex Tools to Vertex Tools 2. So if you look at it that way subscription is not that different.
$8.25 a month for Artisan is less than what you spend on food each day. That is like 25 cents a day!!!
The REAL problem I see is that developers would STOP developing SketchUp extensions because of a lack of resources and support from users not wanting to spend money on their work. I have seen this before on an Animation Plugin named ‘SimFonIA Animation Tools’ which was great but the developers had to stop because of lack of resources I suspect.
I myself have had to stop developing plugins full-time because I was not able to make enough money selling them. Instead, I have to use my time to work on jobs not related to SketchUp so I can support myself. Now I dedicate less time to developing my tools which are going to be available as a subscription as well by the way.
If you look at other software then you will see almost all of them are moving to subscription. Else they will go extinct, that is why I was more than ok for SketchUp itself to move to the subscription model. Why because if not I was afraid it would stop being developed.
Anyways, I really hope this tool is a monetary success for the devs because I want it to be further developed in the future and not have to stop because of a lack of resources.
One last thing… Without Extensions like Artisan, Vertex Tools, SubD, etc I personally would not be using SketchUp. So if Plugins like this Stopped existing I would use another 3D software like Blender perhaps.
I suspect that many here NEVER use SketchUp Online because it doesn’t support extensions and only uses the desktop version…Right?!?
With that said please support independent extension developers because without our support SketchUp will NOT be the same.
But there is a BIG difference - You have a choice to upgrade or not! And that subscriptions is a guarantee for a constant improvements - there are many opposite cases - SketchUp included! You try to make software some unique case - but in every field you have to make constant improvements to sell!
I don’t think subscription as only alternative for a plugin is a good business method for a plugin like artisan, most of my work on sketchup is related with architecture and I could do almost everything without plug-ins, what plug-ins do is make faster and efficiently, but artisan isn’t part of the plug-ins that I use on my everyday, subD and vertex tools are plug-ins that I use more frequently, what I like from artisan is the sculpting capabilities that adds to skp I use it every now and then for hobby models I do on my free time, but sketchup can’t handle the same amount of polygons that blender or zbrush do, I’m sure that someone who does a lot of sculpting isn’t even using sketchup, it’s not even possible to sculpt something with a lot of polygons without having to deal with lag on the viewport. Also the price of the subscription would be more reasonable if it was cheaper, sketchup yearly subscription is $300 but you also get Layout and a lot of useful tools to get the job done and you get actualizaciones at least every year, artisan2 is $100, but it doesn’t have one third of the tools sketchup does and it won’t get updates or upgrades in a lot of time, like artisan1. Profile builder and quantifier pro are way more useful tools and are cheaper with perpetual licenses, it’s not worth it for me to get this plugin anymore, and I’m sure that a lot of people who use the tool for hobby proposes won’t find it worthy and people doing this kind of things professionally are using other softwares.
I have the original artisan paid plugin and a bunch of Mind.sight plugins but i cant justify the price nor it now being a subscription model for the small amount of time i need an organic tool for architecture uses.
I’m of a similar mind, though I don’t own an Artisan1 license. I have licenses for several other mind.sight extensions (PB3 / QP / Double-Cut) and I also let a couple of try-out subscriptions lapse for SketchPlus and Skimp.
I am intrigued by the upgraded capabilities of Artisan2 and would have considered a $100 permanent license — even though that would make it my 2nd most expensive plugin (after Medeek) — but a subscription at that price for a non-essential (for me) plugin is a no-go.
Just a “shout out” to the to the narrator of the Mindsight" tutorial video’s … she is the clearest, most sucinct, efficient and pleasant voice I have heard in all my many years of watching online tutorials… Aaron is pretty good too though !
The subscription works for sorfware that us updated daily or weekly. These titles (not speaking to artisan but moreso sletchup) are just cashing in on the subscription trend.
I pay subscriptions for plugins and other software that are updated in real time. Sketchup does not do this and artisan did not. If they are going to release weekly/monthly updates and improvments, add ons, the subscription is fine. But you should be able to stop when you choose to stop and keep what youve paid for not pay in perpetuity.
If your extensions development didnt deem itself profitable you were either investing too much time in an extension that didnt command that investment or you were looking at extension development as a career in sketchup alone which i would think would be.a very difficult approach.
Seems most extention developers were/are avid users and fluent in ruby so building came easy and sharing was the initial then paid beyond.
Subscriptions are there for highly dynamic packages that implement and release extremely frequent aggresive updates and improvments. It makes far more sense to cut people off with a pay-for-upgrade which will make them pay for a single small advance implemented in their work flow when the remainder of the upgrade is of no use to them. When you see an upgrade for $100 bucks and only a single small feature of that upgrade is of use to you, youll pay it, along with past upgrades to get to that current feature.
The subscription model breed resentment towards the developer if they are not updating regularly
