In my Landscape Design class we are being taught to first draw a 2D plan of our model, call it ‘2D plan’ and then draw a 3d model on top of it by copying and pasting in place the different shapes from the 2D model, then grouping and tagging those different parts of the model and go on with 3D modeling.
Now, this process has tripped me up to no end as I think I’ve misunderstood the basics of it - we were taught to leave the 2D plan ungrouped, but I work a lot with overlapping shapes and curves, and leaving the 2D plan ungrouped has created a complete mess further down the line when I want to start 3D modelling and adding textures to the 3D model. I’m probably doing something wrong, and my question is - is anyone familiar with this process of creating a 2D plan under the 3D plan used in landscape design from the getgo? And if so, what are the actual, specific steps that lead to a successful outcome?
PS. When I first learned SketchUp I wasn’t taught to have a 2D plan underneath, and so it doesn’t make sense to me why I would need that. I also have read the tips on just choosing top view and parallel projection for getting a 2D plan after the fact, but we’re required to do it this other way and I’m looking to understand how to actually do it without creating a mess of hidden geometry and broken lines.
This would be a problem if you copy a portion of the ungroupped geometry and paste in place because it would merge with the original. I expect that’s the mess you are seeing. Seems to me that grouping the 2D plan geometry first and then copying the geometry out of the group would result in a cleaner modeling process.
I’m not familiar with that specific tutorial but it does sound like unneeded work.
My opinion is that you were taught a better way. You can make the 2D plan view(s) from your 3D model without doing what sounds like double the work.
If I were doing the course I would change it up so it makes sense.
Hi Dave, thank you so much for responding so helpfully - I have suspected that their method isn’t the most effective use of time or energy, especially considering how many problems it opens up to if you make any grouping mistake (like the one you describe) along the way. There just doesn’t seem to be a lot of value in it when you can easily achieve a 2D plan after the fact. I will refrain from doing it in the future as it’s kept me from progressing with models and even completing assignments. Thank you! This will save a lot of time and pain
Just to clarify if I do end up needing to do this again - would you group the entire 2D plan geometry as one big group, or would you group the different shapes separately in 2D, to then copy those grouped shapes out of the group and into what will become the 3D layer?
This may be preaching to the choir but a here are a few things to keep in mind that should keep your work efficient.
ALL edges and faces created and remain untagged.
Only groups and components get tags.
Use tag folders where you can to avoid or at least reduce nesting of groups and components.
Purge unused content regularly.
Make sure your textures are reasonable in size. No point in having high res textures for leaves, stems, tree trunks, etc. In many cases you can probably manage with simple solid colors and skip textures.
It kind of depends. If you were to make groups or the individual shapes you could simply copy the entire group, paste it in place, and edit it to make it 3D. Does that seem reasonable?
Thank you! That’s very good to know. I think you probably already have a pretty good idea of how to use SketchUp. It’s a good thing that you are discerning and are thinking through to process in a way that is efficent and clean. When you get to doing the real work for your business this is going to pay dividends.
